n 
 
 3 
 
 / 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Theological Seminary, 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 ^ BX 9946 -Mil 1825 
 
 ^''' McCalla, W. L. 1788-1859. 
 
 ^^, Discussion of universalism 
 
 Hoc 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2009 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/discussionofunivOOmcca 
 
DISCUSSION 
 
 OF 
 
 UNIVEKSALISM, 
 
 OR A 
 
 ^tftntt of <!lri|po9o|r^ 
 
 AGAINST THE HERESY OF UNIVERSALISM, 
 AS ADVOCATED BY MR. ABNER KNEELAND, 
 
 IN THE ITNIVERSALISr CHURCH, LOMBARD STREET, 
 JULY, 1824, 
 
 AND IN HIS VARIOUS PUBLICATIONS, 
 
 AS ALSO ZK THOSE OF MR. BAIfZiOU, AlTD OTKSR8. 
 
 rH£ PBOFITS 07 TBE IDtFBESSIOlT TO 00 TO THE fVITOS 07 THE TOXTSQ USS's DO- 
 KSSTIC MISSIOITART SOCIETY, COHFOSED OF OIFFEBSNT DENOUISATIORSt 
 
 BY W. £. M'CAXIA^ 
 
 rBtXADBWHIl ; PBIKTID BT JOHN TOTTNa, 34, 50BTH xniBD ^TBEET, 
 
 1823.* 
 
Eastern District of Pennsylvania, to wit : 
 
 Be it remembered, that on the twenty-fourth day of January-, in 
 the forty -hinih year of the fndepcndence of the United States of 
 America, A. D 1825, WILLIAM LATTA M'CALLA, of the 
 said District, hath deposited i« this Office the Title of a Book, the 
 right whereof he claims as Aothor, in the woi'ds following, 
 to wit : 
 
 " A Discussion of Universalism ; or a Defence of Orthodoxy, against the 
 " Heresy of Universalism, as advocated by Mr. Abner Kneeland, in the Debate in 
 " the Universalist Church ia Lombard-street, July, 1824, and in his various pnblica* 
 *' tions, as also, in those of Mr. Ballou and others. The profits of the impression 
 "to go to the Funds of the Young, Men's Domestic Missionary Society, composed 
 *' of different denominations. By W. L. M'Calla." 
 
 In conformity to the Act of the Congress of the United States, entitled, " An 
 Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by securing the Copies of Maps, 
 Charts, and Books to the Authors and Proprietors of such Copies, during the 
 times therein mentioned ;" — And also to the Act, entitled, " An Act for the 
 Encouragement of Learning, bj securing the Capies of Maps, Charts, and Books 
 to the AuUiors and Proprietors of such Copies during the times therein mention- 
 ed," and extending the Benefits thereof to the Arts of designing, engraving, and 
 etching historical and other prints." 
 
 D. CALDWELL, 
 Clerk of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 SHORTLY after my arrival in this place, last May, intor- 
 mation was received from various (juarters, tiiat Mr. Kneeland 
 had long been in the habit of defying the armies of the living 
 God, and of glorying in their silence as the eftect of consci »us 
 guilt and error. Aware of my own weakness, but confiding in 
 the Great Head of the Church, it was impossible to conceal my 
 desire that he would challenge we. A mutual friend gave hiiu 
 an intimation of my willingness to accept a personal invitation, 
 but without effect. His general challenge was then made the 
 ground of a correspondence wliich terminated in a public con- 
 ference. This was not, by any means, intended to supercede 
 the necessity of a printed defence, but to excite the public at- 
 tention to such a work, and to make it more worthy oi their pa- 
 tronage^ as well as to silence the audacious boasting of this enemy 
 of God and man. He soon betrayed a great anxiety to terminate 
 the debate. After several unsuccessful efforts, he cut it short by 
 virtually closing the door of his (?esAupon me. Sickness and the 
 heat of the city soon obliged me to retire to the country. This was 
 called a retreat^ and it was boldly and publicly denied that the 
 doors of the church were shut upon me. To settle these points, 
 an offer was made to resume the discussion, which offer he was 
 very far from accepting. To retrieve their loss, a Universalist 
 preacher, a pretended stenographer, was employed to write the de- 
 bate in such a way as to transfer the victory from one side to the 
 other. Although he at first promised verbal accuracy, he at last 
 professed io ^\\q the argument only: but this was as far be- 
 yond his capacity as it was contrary to his wish. The performance 
 of his enterprise v/ith fidelity and ability, would have been much 
 more gratifying to me and my friends than to him and his. Yet 
 every one conversant with such matters, knows that in such dis- 
 cussions, an argument is more diluted than it should be when 
 committed to paper; and that it is not necessary to record repeated 
 refutations of the same error, which were made necessary in 
 debate, in order to meet the extemporaneous and reiterated effu- 
 sions of heretical sophistry. Although the employed stenogra- 
 pher professed to do justice to my argument, he has been guilty of 
 such omissions and interpolations, transpositions and alterations, 
 as were calculated to destroy it. While, for the sake of perspi- 
 
IV 
 
 cuity and precision, I take the liberty of arranging and condens- 
 ing the matter of the discussion, in such a manner as is suitable 
 to written composition, the hearer will see that real justice i« 
 done to the argument on both sides. As my opponent has had a 
 full opportunity of speaking for himself, so, in revising and 
 correcting the work of his employed Reporter, he has had a full 
 opportunity of writing for himself. To copy all that he has pub- 
 lished, through his stenographer, for himself and for me, is not 
 my design. Any one who has read those drowsy pages will 
 readily excuse me, and any one who has not, may see a fair 
 specimen in the piece signed Long-hand^ published in the De- 
 mocratic Press, of Sept. 22nd, and copied in No. 21, of the In- 
 troductory Documents in this work. This is one of the least 
 important of many newspaper publications connected with this 
 controversy, with which it is thought proper to occupy the first 
 part of this volume. For reasons explained in the intro- 
 ductory documents, its bulk will also be increased by additional 
 matter both in confirmation and refutation; and the latter of 
 these shall now take the precedency, as the arguments of my 
 opponent are all before me, in what he calls "as faithful a xt^ 
 port as ever waa made." 
 
INTRODUCTORY DOCUMENTS. 
 
 No. 1. 
 THE CHALLENGE. 
 
 In the Philadelphia edition of Buck's Theological Dic- 
 tionary, by Edwin T. Scott, 1823, Mr. Kneeland, under 
 the article IJniversalists, boasts that several works wiitten 
 by himself and Mr. Ballou, " have never been answered." 
 He was also in the habit of giving challenges from the pul- 
 pit, and he and his followers were in the practice of boasting 
 that they were not accepted. In a note attached to his 8th 
 Lecture, he says, *• at each publication, the learned clergy 
 have been respectfully called upon to shew wherein these 
 statements are incorrect. They have not seen fit to do it ; 
 and it is believed, for this good reason, because they know 
 the statements are true. As, therefore, the most important 
 facts contained in this Lecture have been more than thirteen 
 years before the public, and yet remain uncontroverted,they 
 now come foith w ith this additional evidence of their truth. 
 Because it is fair to presume (the facts here stated being so 
 important in themselves to the cause of religion) that if they 
 could have been contradicted, with any colour of evidence, 
 they would have been before this time.'* The following are 
 extracts from the preface to his Lectures, viz. " The work 
 has had an opportunity to be fully tested by public opinion; 
 and notwithstanding the substance of the eighth Lecture 
 (which is the most important of any in point of doctrine,) 
 has been before the public nearly twenty years, and it is 
 now more than five years since this work was first publish- 
 ed, yet no one has attempted to point out a single error, in 
 relation to the facts as herein stated, or to shew that any of 
 the arguments are either unfounded or inconclusive. This 
 is considered as a silent acknowledgement, that in the 
 opinion of the clergy generally, the work is unanswerable : 
 otherwise, being so often and so respectfully called up(m to 
 consider the doctrine and arguments here advanced, and 
 point out the errors, if there be any, it is difficult to account 
 
VI 
 
 for their silence on this suhject." " He therefore once more 
 respectfully invites SkuA intreats the clergy of other denomi- 
 nations, or some one of them, the more learned the better, 
 to discuss this important subject with him, and to p*.int out 
 to him and the public, the supposed errors of the following 
 work." 
 
 ^o. 2. 
 
 THE ^CCEFT^NCE. 
 
 Mr. Kneeland, 
 
 It is said that the Universalists have two Churches in the 
 city, and there is a report in circulation that permission has 
 been asked and obtained for me to preach in one of them. 
 If I ever gave leave to any of my friends to make this re- 
 quest for me, (whicli is quite probable,) it was done inad- 
 vertently. But as it was granted, I take this opportunity 
 of acknowledging the favour, and of informing you. or your 
 friends through you, that for the present, the acceptance of 
 it is declined. This is done, not from a belief that it is un- 
 lawful to preach our distinguishing doctrines in such a place, 
 butb ecause I prefer coming in contact with you, in a man- 
 ner which has hitherto been more agreeable to your own 
 wishes. I am informed that you have discussed the most 
 prominent question in your creed with several laymen, and 
 that you have, privately and publicly, given verbal and writ- 
 ten invitations to the clergy in general, to defend their faith 
 in public debate. This general invitation was published, 
 perhaps, in the first edition of your " Lectures on the doc- 
 trine of Universal Benevolence," in 1819. You tell us that 
 this w as not noticed. In the preface of your 2d edition, in 
 the present year, you inform us, that " this is considered as 
 a silent acknowledgment that, in the opinion of the clergy 
 generally, the work is unanswerable : otherwise, being so 
 often and so respectfully called upon to consider the doc- 
 trine and arguments here advanced, and point out the er- 
 rors, if there be any, it is difficult to account for their silence 
 on this subject." Subsequently, in page 198, you inform 
 us in a note, that your principles were published in New 
 Hampshire, in 1805, and New- York, 1816. " And at each 
 publication the learned clergy have been respectfully called 
 upon to^shew wherein these statements are incorrect. They 
 
VII 
 
 have not seen ht to do it, and it is believed, for this good 
 reason. because they know the statements are true." Ac- 
 cordingly, in the prefareof this 2d edition, "The author,*' 
 "once more, respectfully invites and entreats the clergy of 
 other denominations, or some one of them, the more learned 
 the better, to discuss this important subject with him ; and 
 to point out to him and the public, the supposed errors of 
 the following work." 
 
 When your friends witness your great anxiety to submit 
 your sentiments to unlimited investigation by word or 
 writing, in private or in public, they admire and praise your 
 candour and magnanimity, in proportion as they condemn 
 our reluctance to encountei- you. It is to be hoped that we 
 shall not now change sides, and that a willingness on our 
 part shall not cool your ardour for the contest. If God 
 spare my life, it appears pr(»bable that I shall labour for some 
 time in the city Without any clainjs to superior learning, 
 I do, after prayer and mature deliberation, feel disposed to 
 comply with your reasonable requisition, and to gratify 
 your repeated and urgent entreaties for a public discussion. 
 That this may be prosecuted to advantage, it should be done 
 in an orderly manner, according to a plan previously ar- 
 ranged. If you agree to such a measure, 1 should be glad, 
 if, in your answer to this letter, you would give me the pre- 
 cise point which you inean to defend, in opposition to the 
 absolute eternity of the sinners future punishment. Do you 
 plead for the annihilation of the wicked, as the Destruction- 
 ists do t Do you believe in their restoration to heaven after 
 being punished in hell ? And if so, do you believe this pun- 
 ishment to be gratuitous, disciplinary, penitentiary, or sa- 
 tisfactory? 0*" do you believe that they are all, without going 
 to hell, saved at death, or at the general resurrection, after 
 receiving condign punishment on earth, or after receiving, 
 not a condign, but a gratuitous, a penitentiary, or a disci- 
 plinary punishment ? It is hoped that your answer, as soon 
 as convenient, will prepare the way for a speedy meeting. 
 
 W. L. M'CALLA. 
 Philadelphia, 69, North Third-street. July 2, 1824. 
 
 Mr. Abner Rneeland. 
 
 No. 3. 
 Mr. M*Calla, 
 
 Your letter of July 2d was received during my absence. 
 I returned from New York last evening, and embrace the 
 
vm 
 
 first opportunity this morning to reply. You arc under an 
 entire mistake, sir, in supposing that I have • privately and 
 publicly given verbal and written invitations to the clergy 
 in general to defend their faith in public debate." I have 
 never solicited a public debate with any man, either clergy- 
 man or layman, unless what 1 have written in the preface to 
 the second edition to my lectures can be so construed. And 
 even there the discussion is limited to the supposed errors of 
 that work ; at the same time nothing is said about a public 
 debate. My ideas are before the public, in print, and if any 
 important errors are contained in them, I expect they will 
 be pointed out to me and the public in the same way ; namely, 
 from the press. That 1 have discussed some important doc- 
 trinal points with laymen, in a society instituted for that 
 purpose, is true ; and I wish to have it distinctly understood, 
 that while I have never solicited a public debate with any 
 man, I have never declined one, and should I now come in 
 "contact" with a clergyman, in this way, it would not be 
 the first time. What I have solicited, is to have the suppos- 
 ed errors of my Lectures pointed out : If that is to be the 
 subject, the discussion must be limited to what is there 
 written. 
 
 Should the subject of the Lectures be waived, (to which I 
 have no objection,) I should come to the main question at 
 once, namely, Does the law of God require that sin, com- 
 mitted here in time, and in this state of mortality, should be 
 punished in eternity, or beyond death, meaning to be under- 
 stood by that term, a dissolution of this mortal existence I 
 I shall deny the existence of any such law, and consequent- 
 ly of any such punishment Hence we should have no occasi- 
 on to discuss either the nature or the duration of punishment, 
 imless X\\t fact can first be proved. 1 shall contend, how- 
 ever, that no punishment, as comingfrom God will be incom- 
 patible with infinite and divine love to the individual that is 
 punished. A. KNEELAND. 
 
 Philadelphia^ 31 South Second st. July 7, 1824. 
 
 Mr. W. L. M'Calla. 
 
 No. 4. 
 Mr. Kneeland, 
 
 Yours of yesterday has been duly re/ceived. You inform 
 me that you have " never solicited a public debate with any 
 man," though you *' have never declined one ;" and that yow 
 
m 
 
 have, before now, come in contact, in this way, both with the 
 laity and the clergy. As vt>u proless a williugne-ss to do the 
 same again, we will leave the community to judge whether all 
 that you have said and done, and written aud published^ 
 will amount to an invitation or not. 
 
 As we have soon agreed to meet, the preliminary regula- 
 tions need not occasion much deUy. 1 would propose the 
 following. 
 
 Hules of conference adopted and signed this day of 
 
 1824, in the city of Philadelphia^ by Ahner Kne%' 
 land and W. L. M^Calla. Duplicates given to the parties, 
 
 1. The proposition for* discussion shall be as follows, viz. 
 Is the future punishment of the wicked absolutely eternal ? 
 or is it only a temporal punishment in this world, for their 
 good, and to be succeeded by eternal happiness after death ? 
 
 2. Each speaker shall be entitled to an alternate address 
 of thirty minutes, and no longer, unless the other party waive 
 his right. 
 
 3. The discussion shall be moderated by three men, each 
 of the parties choosing one, and these two a third, who sijall 
 be considered the President of the Bench. 
 
 4. The discussion shall (God willing,) commence on the 
 
 inst. at the Church, at halt" past 9 oVlock, A. 
 
 M- and continue, if necessary uiml jkx n. It shall, if neces- 
 sary, be resumed at 4, and continuen imtil half alter (i, and so 
 ©n from day to day until both parties are satisded. 
 
 5. The debate shall be opened and closed by one party in 
 the forenoon and anoiber in the afternoon And in case of 
 a continuance, the party who relinqui.shed thi!» privilege oa 
 the morning of the first da\, shall, if requiring it, eujoy it oa 
 the morning of the second ; and so on. 
 
 The only difficulty likely to occur in the consideration of 
 the above rules is in the tirst of them, which settles the sub- 
 ject of discussion. In your letter you propose a question 
 for debate, without which you say " we should have no occa- 
 sion to discuss either the nature or the duration of punish- 
 ment.*' To this 1 answer that the duration of punishnu nt is 
 the very point in question between us, aud the only one on 
 
 B 
 
which 1 am wiUinj!^ to meet vou : and of course I should not 
 wish to turn my attention to one which would exclude it. 
 This is the very feature which distinguishes the Universalists 
 from other sects. And remember. Sir, that you are called a 
 Universalist preacher, your book is on universal benevolence, 
 and it was addressed to the Universalist church. The fact 
 that this book treats principally on the duration of punish- 
 ment, was the reason of its invitation being- accepted. If it 
 should now be postponed for another, you may afterward in- 
 troduce another and another without end. Some would sus- 
 pect this to be a plan of procuring an indefinite postpone- 
 ment of a question which you profess a great willingness to 
 discuss. 
 
 But let us see whether you have not done injustice to your 
 own question. Without its accompanying explanation it 
 reads as follows; viz. " Does the law of God require that sin 
 committed here in time, and in this state of mortality should 
 be punished in eternitv or beyond death?" This is a question 
 about eternal punishment; and how you could investigate it, 
 and at the same time " have no occasion to discuss either the 
 nature or the duration of punishment," I am at a loss to know. 
 The duration of punishment is the very jet of the question, 
 and I would freely undertake to discuss it, were it not for the 
 very reason which (as some would suspect) induced you to 
 propose it' That reason is, that this question is an attempt 
 to preclude me from the benefit of all but one argument, and 
 that thought to be the weakest one of many arguments by 
 which our opinion is supported. You would not permit m© 
 to confine you to one argument any more than to one text, 
 and a persevering attempt to do either would be easily un- 
 derstood by those friends who have so long admired your po- 
 lemical prowess. 
 
 The question as stated in the above rules does justice to 
 you and myself. It trammels neither, but leaves each at li- 
 berty to manage his cause in his own way. it is hoped, there- 
 fore, that there will be no farther difficulty about the investi- 
 gation of questions confessedly irrelevant to the subject ; es- 
 pecially as the discussion of such questions was never made a 
 pre-requisite to your former debates with either laymen or 
 clergymen. 
 
 As the young men*s Missionary Society have sent me an 
 appointment which may soon be accepted, it is but right to 
 inform you that this correspondence was undertaken on my 
 
XI. 
 
 i>wn motion, after asking counsel of God, and of course, is 
 nut to be considered as attaching any responsibility to the 
 Missionary Society or to the Clergy of the city. 
 
 W. L MCALLA. 
 Philadelphia^ 69 North Third-st. July 8, 1824, 
 Mr. Abner Kneeland. 
 
 No. 5. 
 Mr. Calla, 
 
 Yours of this morning, proposing a conference, or public 
 debate, has been received, and now lays before me. I hereby 
 accept your proposals, and agree to the arrangement, with the 
 exception of a single word in the first proposition, a word en- 
 tirely unnecessary on your pan, and which involves a main 
 question with me. I mean the word " future" in connection 
 with punishment. The reason why I wish to exclude this 
 word from the proposition, may be obvious: the terms " future 
 punishment" are so generally understood to mean a punish- 
 ment in another world; it would seem that I had admitted the 
 fact of the existence of such punishment, by agreeing to dis- 
 cuss its duration, a doctrine which but few Universalists be- 
 lieve, and which is not contained (but proofs to the contrary 
 are contained) in my Lectures. You must be sensible, sir, 
 that it will be altogether nugatory to talk about the duration 
 of punishment in another world, until we have good evidence 
 that such punishment either does, or will, at some future pe- 
 riod, exist. I do not deny you the use of any evidence, or any 
 arguments which go to establish this fact; but unless, sir, you 
 are prepared to prove this, namely, the certainty of punish- 
 ment in another world, that is, in another state of existence, 
 you must, I think, be sensible that you cannot prove that pun- 
 ishment is '* absolutely eternal." 
 
 In order to fix on time and place, and make such other ar- 
 rangements as may be n»?cessary, have the goodness to call on 
 me this afternoon at 5 o'clock, or as soon as convenient. 
 
 A. KNEELAND. 
 
 Thursday, 3 o^dock, P. M. 
 
 No. 6. 
 The Rules of Conference adopted and signed by the parties 
 may be seen in No. If), where they are introduced by a Uni- 
 versalist preamble, which, though written over my name, was 
 no more my own production than the speeches which Mr. 
 Jennings has attributed to me. 
 
%ii 
 
 No. 7. 
 
 PROM THE DKMOCR\TIC PRESS OF JULY 20; 1824. 
 
 We had not intended to have taken any notice of the late 
 Theological Controversy which took place in this city, but a 
 friend having taken the trouble to prepare the following M'e do 
 not feel at liberty to set it aside, whatever may be our unwilling- 
 ness or reluc'ance to publish any thing which may savour of 
 religious disputatiion or sectional prejudices. 
 
 Fon THX DEMOCBATIC PHES&. 
 
 M'CALLA vs. KNEELAND. 
 
 " If I am light, thy grace impart. 
 
 Still in the right to stay ; 
 If I am wrong, < > teach my heart. 
 
 To find that better way." 
 
 Mr. Editor.— 
 
 The dispute between the above named gentlemen which con- 
 tinued for four days, which was concluded this evening, Friday; I 
 presume is no news to you. To give some account of this strange 
 controversy, or I should more properly call it this novel mode of 
 conducting a religious controversy, I devoted a few minutes af- 
 ter retiring from the scene of action, (the Universalist Church 
 in Lombard street) hoping that it may be agreeable to your read- 
 ers botii in " town and country" to know something about this 
 spirit >tirring affair which has brought both ends of our town to- 
 gether, day after day, since the discussion commenced. 
 
 The subject of debate between the Rev. Mr. M'Calla of the 
 Presbyterian persuasion, from Kentucky, and the Rev Mr. 
 Kneeland, Universalist, of this city, was whether there is, or is 
 not, a " State of Future and Eternal Punishment,'^ 
 
 The mode of dividing the time between the speakers had been 
 previously agreed on; each was to have half an hour alteriiately, 
 until the disputants or subject was exhausted. The debate be- 
 gan, and was continued, with all the earnestness, learning and 
 zeal of the opponents. Every text, or perhaps nearly every 
 text, was cited for or against, which is to be found in the inspir- 
 ed volume, and commented on in some shape or other. I think 
 it proper not to say fully discussed, for it was declared this 
 morning that the Church would be closed after to-day, and Mr. 
 M'Calla had not, nor could not, get through his argument as he 
 had originally intended to pursue it He however abridged his 
 eoinnients in order to finish in the required time. In the course 
 of this long debate there certainly was a handsome display of 
 Biblical erudition on both sides, as well as good logical argu- 
 ment; but in the early part of the dispute there was one illiberal 
 taunt against the *' raw backwoods Kentuckiau to undertake to 
 
XIU 
 
 fi^acli theology in Pluladelpnia" which caused considerate as- 
 pciitv in replV, and was not forgotten through the whole deba'^e. 
 The Kentuckian not only proved himself a zealous servant of 
 his Master, a good theologian and an able debater, but also a 
 qood Greek, Hebrew and Latin scholar, and well read in the 
 fathers of the Church. 
 
 At half past six o'clock on Friday evening the contest closed. 
 Mr. ICneeland reiterated many of his favourite texts, made a 
 last and powerful appeal for the reason, plausibility and mercy 
 of his doctrine, and concluded by insisting that his construction 
 of Divine Law was the true and catholic gospel of Christ. Mr. 
 M'-Calla had ttie last half hour, and concluded the debate by a 
 concise recapitulation of some of his strongest proofs in support 
 of his opinions. His peroration was really excellent, solemn 
 and impressive; his reasoning was sound and irrefutable. A 
 description I cannot attempt; the whole will be printed I pre- 
 sume, but the reader will nor, nay, I had almost said, cannot, 
 have an adequate idea of the intense zeal and fervour of the 
 speaker, to instill into every mind the blessed truth. 
 
 The disputants shook hands and separated with perfect good 
 will towards each other as men, though as widely differing as 
 Christians as when they first met. The immense crowd of spec- 
 tators also separated in a very peaceable quiet manner. 
 
 No. 8. 
 
 Panl was answered by a Vestryman who denied that I 
 had bcpn excluded from the church. In the Democratic 
 Press of July 24th, he replies; after which Mr. Rneeland, 
 in the same paper, of the 27th, confirms the account of the 
 Vestryman. 
 
 FROM THE DEMOCRATIC PRESS, JULY 24. 
 
 M'CALLA AND KNEELAND ONCE MORE. 
 
 Mr. Editor — You will confer a favour by inserting the follow- 
 ing brief reply to " A Member of the Vestry," and you may rest 
 assured that I shall not trouble you again on this subject. 
 
 The following sentence which I still aver to be substantially 
 true, is roundly pronounced /a/se by the vestry man; — '-It was 
 declared this morning [meaning Friday morning,] that the 
 church would be closed after to-day, and Mr. M'Callahad not, 
 nor could not, get through his argument, as he had originally in- 
 tended to pursue it." Now I say words were never plainer 
 spoken than these were by Mr. Kneeland, that "this house 
 (meaning the Universalist Church,) could not be promised after 
 
XIV 
 
 to-day, (Friday last) lor the purpose ot" continuing this debate.'-' 
 Yet it is said no such declaration was made ! and still it is ad- 
 mitted, Mr. M'Calla " tried to insinuate that such had been the 
 fact.^^ Those who heard this controversy know full well that Mr. 
 M'Calla did not indulge in insinuation in this instance, but plain- 
 ly regretted that his time had been, contrary to agreement, 
 prescribed. It is true when Mr. Kneeland replied to the re- 
 grets of his opponent, he did say, for ought he knew the church 
 could be obtained for a month, if required so long: '■^ but that it 
 did not belong to him, he had no control over it,^^ and it did 
 not suit a " A member of the Vestry," at that time to say any 
 thing about it, therefore it must be closed as before stated, and 
 it was closed accordingly. 
 
 No person will, I presume, have hardihood enough to deny 
 that Abner Kneeland had not the same control over the church 
 he had when the Bules of Conference were adopted and signed 
 by him and his opponent. For the sake of illustrating the good 
 faith of Mr. M'Calla's opponent I just copy the 4th and 6th ar- 
 ticles of conference, viz: 
 
 4th The Discussion shall, God willing commence on the IStii 
 inst. at half past 9 o'clock A. M. and continue if necessary, un- 
 until noon. It shall be resumed if necessary at 4 o'clock, and 
 continue until half past 6, P. M. and continue from day to day 
 until both parties shall be satisfied. 
 
 6th The conference to be held at the Universalist Church in- 
 Lombard-st. and adjourned by mutual consent to some other suit- 
 able place. 
 
 1 hus we perceive instead of an adjournment by mutual con- 
 sent, the adjournment take place no/enst;o/ens, without any con- 
 sultation about it. After this it is to be hoped those " Challen- 
 ges for disputation to the learned clergy, the more learned the 
 better, of more than 20 years standing," will be withdrawn. 
 
 The vestry man says, " No declaration, therefore was made on 
 either side, except what was made by Mr. Kneeland and Mr. 
 M'Calla." No one ever said there was. Mr. Kneeland and 
 Mr. M'Calla are the only persons the public know any thing 
 about, they have said all, and done all that has been said or done, 
 in this affair; so he, very unwittingly concedes all he had just 
 been stoutly denying. In his N. B. he requests that public 
 opinion mav be suspended on the merits of the discussion. The 
 merits of the discussion are to prove or disprove a state of future 
 and eternal punishment^ and in my humble opinion to those who 
 read their Bibles, and have or even have not heard the debate 
 cannot be thought to judge prematurely on a matter so plain to 
 all but those who are detertimed to pvt off the law of god. 
 
 PAUL. 
 
XV 
 
 No. 9. 
 
 The following Letters passed between Mr. M'-Calla and Mr. 
 Kneeland after the close of the foregoing Discussion: 
 
 Mr. Kneeland, 
 
 In the *' Democratic Press" I observe a dispute between 
 " Paul" on one side, and you and " A Vestryman" on the 
 other side, whether or not I was brought to a premature close, in 
 the discussion in Lombard -street Church. Your arguments and 
 statements I deem incorrect. Yet one feature of your publica- 
 tion gives me pleasure. It is an indication of a willingness on 
 your part to hear me until I am satisfied. You have, now, at 
 least, given me " to understand, that in all probability, the house 
 might be abtained as long as it shtnild be wanted." Another 
 meeting would give you an opportunity of answering that new 
 matter to which you made no reply, and it would show whether 
 my materials were exhausted or not. This would be suitable on 
 another account: your challange which was accepted in my let- 
 ter of the 2d inst. "invites and intreats the clergy" *' to dis- 
 cuss'' not only one error, but '-the supposed errors''^ of your 
 Lectures. During the debate I showed that they erred on the 
 Divinity of Christ, and intimated a willingness to meet you at a 
 convenient season on that point. That intimation is now re- 
 newed. If you still entertain the desire manifested in your re- 
 peated challenges, it can now (God willing) be gratified at the 
 same place, with the same rules, and under the same moderation; 
 
 Your speedy answer will be a gratification to 
 
 W. L. MCALLA. 
 Philadelphia, July 31, 1824. 
 
 No. 69 North Third Street. 
 
 Mr. M'Calla, 
 
 As our former letters are published in the " Gazetteer,'^ 
 and the subsequent discussion is now in the Press, I shall pub- 
 lish, through the same medium, yours of the 31st ult together 
 with this my reply. 
 
 You say that you deem my " arguments and statements" to 
 be "incorrect;" but you have not informed me to what argu- 
 ments you allude, nor wherein my statements have been incor- 
 rect. This is reprehensible. No man ought to be charged 
 with having made incorrect statements, without being informed, 
 at the same time, wherein. 
 
 Although I had pledged myself, and was determined to hear 
 you through at that time, yet I have given no pledge to meet you. 
 again in the same way; and whether I do, must depend on cir- 
 
xvi 
 
 cumstances which are first to be considered. — As the Cliurch iit 
 Lombard street, in which we held our late discusson, ijas been 
 since, (at considerable expense,) both cleaned and repaired, I am 
 not able to say whether it could be so soon obtained again for a 
 similar purpose. 
 
 As to the new matter to which I had not an opportunity to re- 
 ply, (Ps. ix. 5.) since it makes nothing in your favour, nor 
 against any of my arguments, a bare note of a very few lines, will 
 be all the reply I shall need. 
 
 Whether your materials were all exhausted or not, is a mat- 
 ter of no consequence; for if you could s\>end four days without 
 the least attempt to reply to either my tirst or second argument, 
 both of which were presented in my iiist speech, (to neither of 
 which did you attenipt any reply,) you probably might continue 
 a month in the same way; and, after all, lo no purpose. 
 
 If you wish to discuss the '• supposed errors" of my Lectures, 
 you must do it in the way the challenge (as you call it) was given, 
 namely, through the medium of the press; for, as those Lectures 
 have been so long before the public, I shall discuss that subject 
 in no other way: nor, unless you are able to point out errors 
 which are material and important in point of doctrine or fact, do 
 I pledge myself to reply. You have said that there were errors 
 in my l^ectures, but you have not yet shown any. I did not 
 think proper to contradict what you was pleased to say about 
 them during the discussion, (except when you tried to pervert a 
 single sentence,) and it was for this plain reason, — because they 
 were not mentioned in the proposition for discussion. 
 
 Now , sir, I wish you distinctly to understand, notwithstand- 
 ing whatever you may say about challenges, that before I will con- 
 sent to debate with a man on any religious subject whatever, at 
 any time or place, who has not only refused to unite with me in 
 religious woiship., but wiio has refused to give me his hand when 
 mine was extended to him in token ot friendship, in my own desk, 
 he must give me satisfactory evidence that the clergy with whoia 
 he is connected, and with whom he professes to be in fellowship, 
 however much they may disapprove of his conduct in this parti- 
 cular, nevertheless consider him as a brother in the faith, and 
 approve of his mode of arguing on religious subjects. This, 
 with me, is a sine qua non^ and unless it be complied with, it. 
 will be useless to urge any thing further on the subject. 
 
 If 1 meet a man to discuss religious subjects before the pub- 
 lic, I must meet him on the level; — !»e is not to have the privilege 
 of assuming that he is a christian, and that his antagonist is an 
 infidel, until he has proved, both from theory and practice , that 
 such is the fact. — 1 ask, in this case, no more than what I am 
 willing to give, should it be required. — Or, let your friends 
 open the dgors of one of their Churches, to accommodate the au- 
 
XVll 
 
 dience, as mine have done, and I will consider it a satisfactory 
 evidence that they are with you in this debate. 
 
 These preliminaries being settled, the first thing in order to 
 be attended to, is, what has been already proposed. 
 
 1. You must show the law of God which requires '* absolutely 
 eternal punishment," or else acknowledge that no such law has 
 been given to man. 
 
 2. You must show that God has threatened man, through the 
 medium of his prophets, with a punishment which is *' absolute- 
 ly eternal," or else acknowledge that you cannot. 
 
 3. You must prove, from the New Testament, that there will 
 be the wicked^ (Ps. xxxvii. 10,) and, of course, a punishment 
 for the wicked, after this mortal shall have put on immortality, 
 or after that death is swallowed up of life, or acknowledge that 
 you cannot. 
 
 4. No evidence will be admitted as a proof of a punishment 
 between death and the resurrection, that is, in what is called an 
 intermediate state, unless you can first prove that the soul or 
 spirit of man (whatever you may understand by those terms) is 
 susceptible of consciousness, and of course, of happiness or mis- 
 ery, independent of the organs of sense, or seperate from a body. 
 
 5. I, on my part, will prove the latter part of our former 
 proposition true, and that all mankind will ultimately be saved 
 from sin, and consequently from punishment, or else acknow- 
 ledge that I cannot. 
 
 6. It shall be mutually agreed, that the moment either wan- 
 ders from the point in debate, in the opinion of either two of the 
 moderators, he shall be stopped; and unless he will confine 
 himself to the subject, in proper and decorous language, he 
 shall not be allowed to proceed. 
 
 7. The moderators to be the same as on the last day of our 
 former discussion, or such as may be mutually agreed upon. 
 
 With these regulations, and as many of the former as are not 
 inconsistent with these, I should have no objection to continue 
 the discussion till every point is fully settled, if practicable. 
 
 A. KNEELAND. 
 
 No. 31, South Second Street, 
 August 2. 1824. 
 
3tVllI 
 
 No. 11. 
 In the Franklin Gazette of \.ug. 23d, the following fet- 
 ter appeared, which was afterward copied into the Demo- 
 cratic Press of September 2d. 
 
 DEBATE ON UNIVERSALISM. 
 
 FOR THE FRANKLIN GAZETTE. 
 
 TO MR. ABNER KNEELAND. 
 
 Sir;— In my letter of the Slst ultimo, published in the Ga- 
 zette of Monday, a plan was proposed for bringing the dispute 
 between you and Paul, a writer in the Democratic Press, to a 
 speedy settlement; — for giving you an opportunity of answering 
 my new matter; — for securing to me the stipulated privi- 
 lege of speaking until satisfied; — and of discussing with you, 
 (if you thought proper,) the doctrine of Christ's divinity, 
 on which subject your lectures afford another of those errors, 
 for the discussion of which you have challenged the clerical 
 world. 
 
 In your answer of the 2d instant, published also by you on 
 yesterday, you intimate that it is unimportant whether I spoke 
 until satisfied or not; — unimportant that you should answer the 
 new matter; — and inadmissable that we should hold an ore tenis 
 investigation of the divinity of Christ. Although your printed 
 challenge is still standing, and your pulpit challenges are still 
 uttered, you decline another meeting. Since the debate, you 
 have altered your course. Whether this has arisen from a 
 change in your views of policy or of propriety, the public must 
 judge. Let it be however distinctly understood, that it is not 
 the orthodox clergy, but Mr. Kneeland, the man of challenging 
 memory, who retires from investigation. Whether your stenogra- 
 phical squire, the ostensible Editor of the pretended "Minutes" 
 of the discussion, will, with your assistance, succeed better 
 from the press than you have done from the rostrum, is proble- 
 matical. 
 
 To a second meeting you object the expense of cleaning the 
 house. It was never before graced with a greater proportion of 
 females and respectable characters. 
 
 But you say that the house has been since repaired, and, there- 
 fore, although you were willing to continue the former debate, 
 you think a second interview impracticable. Strange, that in a 
 state of repair, a house cannot hold an overwhelming congre- 
 gation, as w§ll as when it has be";un to give way ! Until after 
 the debate was closed, I did not know that the building, though 
 pi'opped on the last day, was ready to fall in ruins on the audi- 
 ence. Notwithstanding this, you have intimated to the public, 
 that it might then have been obtained longer. Yet as it has since 
 
XIX 
 
 been repaired, and there is little reason to expect that it will 
 fall, we cannot have it again but must procure another church. 
 Your insisting that I should finish from the press a discussion 
 which was begun in conference, shows that, you are learning by 
 experience. With the help of God, you shall be satisfied here 
 
 also. 
 
 As you are unwilling to have your flight from the controversy 
 viewed in its real character, you propose new terms of confer- 
 ence. Three of your requisitions are, that I shall prove eter- 
 nal punishment from the law, the prophets, and the New Testa- 
 ment. Without by any means, admitting that this is impracti- 
 cable, it may be correctly observeil that no man who believes m 
 the inspiration of Scripture will reject any doctrine or precept, 
 merely because it is not revealed by every inspired writer. A- 
 bundant testimony from the Old and New Testament was ad- 
 vanced in the debate. Yet, as you arrogate to yourself, though 
 a party, the sole right of judging of my evidence; and as you 
 have already decided that the Old Testament gives no intimation 
 even of a future state, this demand for proof from that quarter 
 was only intended as an insurmountable obstacle to another 
 
 meeting;. 
 
 The same general features characterize your fourth demand, 
 requiring proof that the soul can exist separate from the body, 
 before you will admit even the testimony of Moses and the pro- 
 phets and the apostles, that it does so exist; as if infallible proof 
 of the fad itself did not at once establish the jpossibility of the 
 fact. You might as well say, that before you will admit scriptu- 
 ral testimony of the existence of God, this must first be proved 
 from reason, independently of revelation. Although sound rea- 
 son is entirely consistent with revelation, none but an infidel 
 will give it paramount authority. 
 
 Our relative standing in this businness may be plainly shown 
 by the following supposed case: A Kentucky duellist, a char- 
 acter far too common, publishes a general challenge, and repeats 
 it often. Suppose that the last edition reads as follows: "He 
 once more respectfully invites and entreats the gentlemen of 
 other states, or some one of them, the more expert the better, 
 to exchange a few shots with him." Suppose that an eastern 
 merchant, not scrupulous about the sixth commandment, is in 
 Lexington on business, and meets him on his own premises. Af- 
 ter four rounds, the Kentuckian, faint for the loss of blood, 
 gives a hint to his antagonist, that they cannot probably occupy 
 the ground any longer. They part, but after the invitation is 
 again repeated and accepted, the Kentuckian demurs to the for- 
 mer regulations, and insists upon many new conditions, among 
 which the following are four: 1. The lock of his antagonist's 
 weapon must come from Europe. 2. The stock must come from 
 
Asia. S. The barrel must come from Africa. 4. No fire- 
 arms will be admitted in this contest, unless you can first prove 
 to my satisfaction that a man may be killed at the distance of 
 ten steps, by the use of the ramrod alone, independently of 
 powder and lead, and separate from the pistol. On hearing 
 these demands, would not the eastern gentleman conclude that 
 the backwoodsman was not yet recovered from his wounds? He 
 would ask, why were not these conditions considered necessary 
 to the first encounter? Of what importance is it where the weap- 
 on was manufactured, or how it is compounded, provided it is a 
 lawful one? And why should it then be laid aside for something 
 else? 
 
 Where jou obtained a right to choose weapons for your anta- 
 gonist as well as yourself, I cannot conceive. If it belong 
 to either party, it is rather to the one who has accepted, than to 
 the one who gave the challenge. Although analogy would de- 
 cide that you have forfeited your claim in my favor, I thank 
 God that 1 neither desire nor need exclusive privileges. They 
 cannot be secured to you nor to me, by the principles of propriety, 
 nor by the usages of theological polemics. You are at per- 
 fect liberty to choose your own position, and your own manner 
 of defending it. If you choose, you may again ride into the 
 field on the shoulders of Dr. Priestly, clothed in all the beau- 
 ties of the improved versi<m, covered from head to foot with 
 such arms and accoutrements as your many Latin versions and 
 Hutter's Polyglott. You may again tell the people how many 
 languages you can read, and how many you cannot read, (alas!) 
 for the want of Lexicons and grammars. While you set your- 
 self off to the best advantage, you shall be at perfect liberty 
 again to ridicule my country, my talents, and my pronunciation . 
 You may also laugh again at my poor little unbound book of 
 li(»tes; while you smilingly shew to the assembly your miniature 
 7 estament with its new coat! You may as before, wander from 
 the point whenever you please; and have great latitude, in re- 
 petitions, absurdities and sarcasms. You may again try every 
 Eossible artifice to drive or to decoy me from the question in de- 
 ate, and when you have failed, you may (as before) spend the 
 other half of your time in complaining that I have never yet 
 come to the point These things should convince you that 1 am 
 willing to accept your invitation on liberal principles, while you 
 are afraid to prosecute your own challenge without very unfair 
 advantages. 
 
 Your letter informs me moreover that we cannot again meet 
 unless we are on the level; — unless I prove my Christianity; — 
 unless I am virtually re-ordained;— and unless I give you the 
 rigiit hand of fellowship. 
 
 Since our debate the duties on orthodoxy appear to be rising. 
 
XXI 
 
 As this policy is intended to exclude that article from the mar- 
 ket, the distinguishing features of your new polemical tarift' de- 
 serve particular attention. 
 
 1. You say, "If I meet a man to discuss religious subjects 
 before the public, I must meet him on the levels Many are at 
 a loss for your meaning. Do you mean that you would more 
 easily find your level among the unfledged disputants of your 
 little debating societies; or among heretical teachers, whom the 
 christian church has never acknowledged in any age? If so, 
 your prudence maybe commended, though not your piety. The 
 words immediately following the above quotation seem rather to 
 contradict than explain it. They are the following: "and he is 
 not to have the privilege of assuming that he is a christian, and 
 that his antagonist is an infidel, until he has proved both from 
 theory and practice that such is the fact." To place us upon a 
 levels then, in your view, I must prove myself a christian and 
 3'ou an infidel! This absurdity is not surprising in a man who 
 has labored hard, as you have, to prove that Lazarus in Abra- 
 ham's bosom, and the rich man in torment, were on a level. 
 
 2, Whether you meant the words last quoted as an illustra- 
 tion of the immediately preceding context or not, they require 
 me to produce proof of my Christianity in doctrine and practice. 
 But who is to be the judge in this matter.? As you are not satis- 
 fied with the decisions of many congregations and judicatories 
 of the church, you would probably like, previous to meeting me 
 again, to sit in judgment yourself upon my character. As you 
 have, in common with other infidels, a great esteem for Dr. Priest- 
 ly's "learning and piety;" and as you have, in your lectures, de- 
 cidedly expressed this sentiment, and earnestly recommended 
 his "History of the Corruptions of Christianity" to your read- 
 ers; it is easy to see that you would pronounce me an impious 
 idolater, and no christian. For this we need go no farther than a 
 sermon preached by him, in the year 1796, in the church where 
 our debate took place. For the proof of its doctrines he refers 
 to tl\e history mentioned above. In it he would persuade us that 
 Christ is a mere creature, like Moses, or even the idol Baal, And 
 he expressly declares, that "it is no less idolatry and impiety to 
 worship him," than to worship them I In speaking of the cor- 
 ruptions that were left untouched at the reformation, he declares 
 "that the first and the greatest of these corruptions is the idola- 
 trous worship of Jesus Christ, as God equal to the Father." The 
 Father he declares to be "the sole object of religious worship, and 
 not Christ, any more than Moses, or any other person or being 
 whatever." 
 
 It is not surprising that such a man should deny the inspira- 
 tion of the Scriptures. In his History of the Corruptions of 
 Christianity, which you have " earnestly" recommended to 
 
XXll 
 
 your readers, he says, (and you virtually say with him,) that 
 Paul wrote " without any particular inspiration," and that '' the 
 Scriptures were written without any particular inspiration." To 
 be approved as a christianin theory, by such men as you and Dr. 
 Priestly, it is necessary, then, that 1 should deny the divinity 
 and atonement of Christ, and the inspiration of the Scriptures. 
 From such theory it is easy to tell what sort of practice you 
 would demand. This subject may receive some illustration here- 
 after, from your publications and those of your universalist co- 
 adjutor, concerning our debate. As, during that contest, 1 per- 
 sisted in quoting your lectures, although you were thoroughly 
 ashamed of them, you must excuse me if I now insist upon your 
 connexion with a stenographer of whom you are as much asham- 
 ed. That you have reason to be so shall hereafter be fully prov- 
 ed, if Providence permit. 
 
 3. Yfiu appear to demand that I shall be ordained by the bo- 
 dy of the Presbyterian clergy to the special work of contending 
 with you, or I shall not enjoy this enviable privilege again. You 
 require satisfactory evidence tl at they consider me as a broth- 
 er in the faith, and approve of my mode of arguing on religious 
 subjects. As the demand was made only to cover your retreat, 
 the best evidence would not be satisfactory to you . That I had 
 the approbation and the prayers of all the orthodox of all deno- 
 minations who were present, is well known to yourself: And 
 you well know from my being a member of the last general as- 
 sembly, that the Presbyterians consider me a brother in the faith. 
 Can you give the evidence which you here demand of me ? Do 
 you not know that some universalists of the Winchester stamp 
 discard you as an infidel ? Did you not know that others of 
 your own sentiments lamented that you made so lame a defence, 
 and wished that Mr. Mitchell of New York, (except for his ir- 
 ritability,) or Mr. Ballou of Boston, had occupied your place in 
 the controversy ? If I w ere afraid, here is a sine qua non of 
 your own invention, under which to take shelter. 
 
 On a former occasion, you made pathetic complaints of a pre- 
 tended combination of the clergy against you. In your debate, 
 you made what you could of my standing alone; telling the au- 
 dience that I could not find a ministerial second in the city. 
 Failing in this, you resort now to the old plan, and determine 
 on not moving a step farther in the business until such a combi- 
 nation is formed, in order to increase your importance!, and add 
 pungency to your complaints. Whenever you will show satis- 
 factory evidence that you have been appointed as an approved 
 advocate of unitarianism or infidelity, by the University of Cam- 
 bridge, or Transylvania, or the College of South Carolina, then 
 may you demand of an antagonist, special Presbyterial or synod- 
 ical credentials, and then shall you nave them. But do not ex- 
 
XXlll 
 
 pect that our ecclesiastical ocean is going to rise in its majesty 
 *•' to waft a feather or to drown a fly." 
 
 4. You object to meeting a man who has refused to join with you 
 in religious worship ; and who has refused to give you his hand 
 in your own desk. During the debate, we were informed by 
 yourself that it was your own desk; which, of course, induced 
 me to close reluctantly when you told us that the house could 
 not probably be procured another day. Yet this was not done 
 without repeated declarations that I could not complete my de- 
 fence in the time allowed me. I am glad, however, that you 
 have publicly complained of my refusing you my hand in this 
 famous desk of yours, since it has been incorrectly reported by 
 one or more of your followers that I afterwards repented of this 
 act. Immediately after the debate, you requested me to give 
 you my hand as a man, since I could not do it as a christian. 
 As this was only an emphatical way of rejecting your claims to 
 Christianity, I complied; and in doing so made an express and 
 repeated denial of your Christianity. For refusing to give you 
 my hand, the Apostle John is my precedent, and his disciple, 
 Polycarp, for my subsequent compliance with your request. 
 John rejected your unitatarian ancestor Cerinthus, as "the ene- 
 my of God ;" and Polycarp acknowledged your relative Mar- 
 cion, as " the first born of the devil." 
 
 But why should the unqualified eulogist of Dr. Priestly be so 
 anxious to join in worship with trinitarians .'* This very man, 
 " whose learning and piety" you so much admire, and whose 
 writings you so ^^ earnestly recommend" to your I'eaders, has 
 declared in your own desk that " no unitarian can conscientious- 
 ly join in worship with trinitarians, since they have not the 
 same object of worship." He declares "that they cannot con- 
 scientiously join in the devotions of others, who, believing both 
 Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit to be, each of them, possessed 
 of all divine attributes, as well as the Father, make them, (as 
 to be consistent with themselves they ought to do,) equally the 
 objects of their worship. This unitarians necessarily consider 
 as idolatry, as much as the worship of the Virgin Mary, or any 
 other saints in the Popish calender." Why should you wish to 
 worship with trinitarians, when, with your oracle, the charitable 
 Mr. Ballou, you think that you " find them causing their sons 
 and their daughters to pass through the fire to a God which is the 
 vanity of their imaginations?" And recollect, sir, that notwith- 
 standing your evasions during the debate, those lectures of 
 yours, which you are so anxious to preserve from another castiga- 
 tion, will ever fix upon you the same sentiments. 
 
 Great as your pretentions are to liberality and chatholicism, 
 you there represent us as the antichristian votaries of a God, 
 with whose character you say that we " associate all the charac- 
 
XXIV 
 
 ter of the ferocious Beast^^ of the Apocalypse. To such persons 
 you pretend that you are doing " the greatest possible kindness, 
 by pointing out to them the cruelty of their god and the 
 ABOMINATION OF ALL SUCH WORSHIP." 'I hcse, sir, are your own 
 words concerning the right worship of the true God by his faith- 
 ful people. And yet, after this licentious traduction of their 
 character, you pretend great solicitude to join with such a peo- 
 ple in such a worship to such a God ! 
 
 W. L. M*CALLA. 
 Philadelphia, August 22, 1824. 
 
 IS'o. 12. 
 
 The above letter received the following notice in the two 
 papers, of August 27th, and September 4th. 
 
 FOR THK FRANKLIN GAZETTE. 
 
 Mr. Norvell: — I notice in your paper of the 23d istant, a 
 long letter addressed to me, and signed ' ' W. L, M 'Calla, " which 
 he probably expects me to answer; but as Mr. M 'Calla has not 
 complied with any of the terms on which it was proposed to him 
 that the discussion between us might be renewed, I have no oc- 
 casion to answer his long letter ; being, as I am, perfectly wil- 
 ling to submit to the reasonableness ot my propositions, and the 
 candor of his rejoinder, to a discerning and judicious public. 
 
 A. KNEELAND. 
 Philadelphia, August 27", 1824. 
 
 [^COMMUNICATION.] 
 
 Mr. BiNNs: — I noticed in your paper of Thursday a commu- 
 nication from Mr. W.L. M 'Calla, which had previously appeared 
 in the Franklin Gazette; in answer to it, I have only to refer you 
 to the letters that passed between Mr. M'C. and myself, that 
 were published in tnat Gazette of the 25d ultimo, and afterwards 
 in your own paper; in which it will be perceived, that I have of- 
 fered to meet Mr. M'C. again (or in other words, have accepted 
 his challenge) on condition that his friends will open one of their 
 churches to accommodate the audience (as proof that they ap- 
 prove of his manner of conducting an argument) together with 
 some other conditions therein named, not one of which has he 
 complied with. Until therefore he shall comply with those con- 
 ditions, or others equally fair, I have nothing more to say to him 
 on the subject. 
 
 Respectfully, A. KNEELAND. 
 
 Philadelphia, Sept. 3, 1824. 
 
No. 18. 
 The Universalist Maajazine. of August 28, sent to me 
 from Boston contained the fuMowing : 
 
 FOR THE UNIVERSALIST MAGAZINE. 
 
 THE REV. MR. M'CALLA. 
 
 The public attention has, for some time, been excited by the 
 movements of this gentleman, in Philadelphia. We have seen 
 an account of his challenging the Rev. Mr. Kneeland to a pub- 
 lic debate on the question whether the doctrine of endless mise- 
 ry be true; of Mr. K.neeland's acceptance; of the debate which 
 was continued from day to day, until discontinued by mutual 
 consent. We are further certified by what Mr. Kneeland has 
 since published, that neither he nor his friends were in any de- 
 gree convinced that the doctrine of endless misery is a doctrine 
 of divine revelation ; but contrary to this, we understand that 
 it is their opinion that the challenger was never able to substan- 
 tiate anything which is essential to his doctrine, nor refute a sin- 
 gle proposition which is necessarily connected with the doctrine 
 of Universal Salvation. As much as the foregoing is well under- 
 stood by many. 
 
 When I was at Hartford, Conn, last week, to attend the de- 
 dication of a new universalist meeting house in that City, and 
 the installation of the Rev. Mr. Bisbe, I had the pleasure of 
 seeing, among other faithful brethren, the Rev. Mr. Mitchell, 
 from the City of New York. He showed me a letter which he 
 had recently received, from the Rev. Mr. M'Calla, of Philadel- 
 phia, which informed Mr. Mitchell, that Mr. M-Calla had beat* 
 en Mr. Kneeland off from the strong delusion of universalism, 
 and that he wished to wait on Mr. Mitchell in New York for the 
 purpose of publickly refuting him, and of convincing his con- 
 gregation. When this letter was read in Hartford, I told Mr. 
 Mitchell that, it confirmed me in the opinion to which I was in- 
 clined on reading this clergyman's challenges, which were ad- 
 dressed to Mr. Kneeland in Philadelphia; which was, that from 
 some cause, the man was not exactly in his right mind. I think 
 Mr. Mitchell and others, of good judgment, agreed with me on 
 this subject. 
 
 The evening that I arrived in Boston, I received the follow- 
 ing letter, which sufficiently corroborates the opinion which J 
 had before formed, of Mr. M'Calla's misfortune. 
 
 LETTER. 
 
 Philaddphia^ jlugust 13, 1824, 
 Rev. Sir, 
 
 I have recently had a debate in public with Rev. Abner 
 Kneeland, and as the public generally have concluded, have, 
 completely beaten my opponent. I am now desirous, sir, of hrea;|c*- 
 
XXVI 
 
 iiig a lance with jou upon some other tenet of the Universal- 
 ists, such as may mutually be agreed upon, and should like to 
 commence the same in some public place in your City, either 
 your house of worship or some City hall as soon as possible. — 
 Will you, sir, favor me with an early reply to this, directed to 
 No. 69, North Third street. For my character as a man of 
 learning, I refer you to Rev Dr. Wilson, and Rev. Dr. Ely, 
 whose sanction in the present challenge has been obtained in 
 writing. W. L. M 'CALL A. 
 
 REMARKS. 
 
 The reason why I publish this letter and give the foregoing iu- 
 formation is, by no means, to injure Mr. M'Calla, but to pre- 
 vent, what I am very confident would be attempted, if this pub- 
 lic notice was not given; viz. insinuations that Mr. Mitchell of 
 New York, and Mr. Ballou of Boston, have neither of them con- 
 fidence or courage to meet this man in public debate, respecting 
 the doctrine of universal salvation. 
 
 If Mr. M'Calla was perfectly sane, he would know, that if 
 he had beaten Mr. Kneeland, ia such a way as to do any good, 
 Mr. Kneeland or his friends, or both, would acknowledge it; for 
 what good does it do to refute one in error, unless he, by some 
 means, can find it out ? But, if he really believes that he hai 
 convinced the Universalists of Philadelphia, that the doctrine of 
 endless punishment is a doctrine of divine revelation; if he had 
 his reason, would he not know that there is no need of any furth- 
 er public dispute, but that to publish these convincing argu- 
 ments, which hiive settled the gieat question in Philadelphia, 
 would silence universalism where ever they should be read £ 
 But he wishes to dispute with me on some other tenet of univer- 
 salism ', as if after he had disproved the doctrine in the gross, it 
 becomes necessary to refute it by taking its items in detail I 
 
 But after all, if I have not judged correctly, and Mr. M'Cal- 
 la is just what he tliinks he is; and if the Rev. Doctors, to whorai 
 he refers are in earnest and acting understandingly in this mat- 
 ter, then I would say, let them accompany their champion te 
 Boston and stand by him while he shall publicly refute the doc- 
 trine of God's universal, impartial goodness, and prove that the 
 God of all grace is unmercifully cruel, and I will engage, when 
 all this is done, to ^ive up my hope in divine mercy, and join 
 these Rev. divines in the doctrine of despair. But before this, 
 I promise to use my feeble powers to the utmost in defence of 
 the gospel. HOSEA BALLOU. 
 
xxvii 
 
 No. 14. 
 September the 1 st, Mr. Kneeland published the following. 
 
 FROM THE FRANKLIN GAZETTE. 
 
 TO MR. HOSEA BALLOU, OF BOSTON. 
 
 Sir. — I have just seen a publication in "the Universalist Ma-- 
 gazine" of your city, for August 38, 1824, over jour name, in 
 which you give a letter, purporting to be from the Rev. W. L. 
 M'Calla. That letter makes Mr. M'Calla say, " for my cha- 
 racter as a man of learniHg, I refer you to the Rev. Dr. Wilson 
 and the Rev Dr Ely, whose sanction in the present challenge 
 has been obtained in writing." I have no question but that you 
 received from somebody the letter which you have published; but 
 I am fully convinced that Mr. M'Calla is a man of sound mind 
 and unblemished integrity, and that he never wrote, indited, or 
 addressed one line on any subject to you, or to Mr. Mitchell of 
 New York, in his life. One thing I can positively affirm, that he 
 never consulted me about challenging any man, to any sort of 
 contest, nor did I ever give any sanction, by writing or other- 
 wise, to his challenging any one. Some person has put into the 
 pretended letter of Mr. M'Calla an absolute and infamous lie. 
 
 EZRA STILES ELY. 
 
 Philadelphia, August 30, 1824. 
 
 I suspected that the letters above alluded to might be a for- 
 gery, on my first seeing the one to Mr. B. though I am not fully 
 convinced that they are so. What created my suspicion was 
 the respectful appellation " Reverend," prefixed to the names 
 of Mr. Ballon and myself. I should be able, however, to detect 
 the forgery, if it be one, could I but see the original letters. In 
 all his correspondence with me, Mr. M'C. never wrote any 
 thin^ more than his name, which is very peculiar, and I think I 
 should know it among five hundred. He told me, in the presence 
 of several others, that he was so nervous he could not write. 
 Dr. Ely says, " I am fully convinced that Mr. M'Calla is a man 
 of sound mind and unblemished integrity." How could a man 
 of sound mind denounce a discussion as being altogether spuri- 
 ous, to which the testimony of hundreds could be obtained (if it 
 were necessary) of its being as faithful a report as ever was 
 made; so faithful that no one has yet been able to point out a sin- 
 gle error affecting the arguments on either side ? If he were of 
 a sound mind, how could he say that he was denied the privi- 
 lege of the house any longer, when Dr. E. knows himself to the 
 contrary .="— or, how could he say that I had sent him the first 
 number of the discussion, and requested him to point out the er- 
 rors, if there were any, when I had neither done the one nor the 
 other ? and when the very number contained on its cover a let- 
 
 
txvivL 
 
 ter from Mr. Jennings, the Stenographer and publisher of the 
 work, addressed tobjth liim and nie, (as well as to Dr. Ely and 
 the other Moderators,) requesting the same thing which was im- 
 puted to me ? If Dr. Ely can reconcile all this with the gentle- 
 man of a sound mind, so be it. — Then to what motive will he im* 
 pute these facts, which must stare him in the face ? 
 
 A. KNEEL AND. 
 
 No. 15. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA. 
 
 WEDNESDAY EVENING, Sept. 8, 18Q4. 
 
 TO EZRA STILES ELY, D. D. 
 
 Pet^erend Sir, 
 
 You are hereby respectfully requested to furnish the public 
 ^ith t' e evidence by which you were " fully convinced that Mr. 
 M'Callais a manof sound mind and unblemished integrity, and 
 that he never tvrote, indited, or addressed one line on any sub' 
 ject to [Mr. Ballou, of Boston,] or to Mr. Mitchell, of New 
 York, Ih his life." We sometimes ^reswwie without any other 
 evidence than that which the nature of the case affords : but to 
 presume is one thing, and to he convinced is another, and a very 
 diiferent ihing. You might presume it, because, as you say, the 
 letter to Mr. Ballou contains "an absolute and infamous lie !" 
 but by what evidence were you " convinced" that Mr. M'C. did 
 not sign the letter which contains it } He has not disavowed it 
 as yet, as I can learn, and if he had not ''addressed" such a let- 
 ter, would he not have been as prompt in disavowing it, as Dr. E. 
 has been in disavowing the lie it contains. Presuming^ there- 
 fore, that you possess the evidence which "fully convinced" you 
 of the truth of the statement contained in your letter to Mr. . 
 Ballou of the SOth ultimo, in justice to Mr. M'Calla, as well as 
 all concerned, I repeat the request that this evidence should be 
 given to the public. 
 
 Your's, respectfully, 
 
 ABNER KNEELAND. 
 
 Philadelphia^ Sept. 8,1824. 
 
 To the Rev. EDWARD MITCHELL, of New York, and the 
 Rev. HOSEA BALLOU, of Boston. 
 Reverend Gentlemen^ 
 
 As the Rev. Dr. Ely "is fully convinced that Mr. M'Cal- 
 la never wrote, or addressed" either of you, "on any subject," 
 (and of course considers the letters which you have received 
 [^bearing his name] a /briery,) if you should be convinced, from 
 the statement in the last number of the Gazetteer, that those 
 
 • 
 
XXIX 
 
 were not signed by the person whoS6 name they bear, please to 
 publish the evidence by which you are thus convinced, in the 
 Gospel Herald, and Universalist Magaz,ine. respec*^ively; but if 
 the fact should be otherwise, and you still suspect that tliey were 
 signed by Mr. M'Calla, be so good as to send the original letters, 
 enclosed by mail, to the Editor of the Gazetteer, that the fact 
 concerning them may be known. A. K. 
 
 No. 16. 
 
 FROM THE FRANKLIN GAZETTE, OF SePT. 9tH. 
 
 DEBATE ON UNIVERSALISM. 
 
 The Universalist Magazine of August 28, was lately sent to 
 ine from Boston, by some one who rightly supposed that such a 
 favor would be a gratification. It contains a publication of Mr. 
 Hosea Ballou concerning certain letters, purporting to have been 
 written by me to him, and to Mr. Mitchell of New York. Of the 
 form, r he has given us a copy, and the latter appears to have been 
 " read in Hartford," Connecticut, for the edification of the 
 " faithful brethren," then encamped in that memorable city. As 
 it was a challenge to a polemical encounter, they seem, from Mr. 
 Ballou's account, to have called a council of war, composed of 
 iiimself, "Mr. Mitchell, and others of good judgment" in such 
 matters. The subject of deliberation was momentous, and much 
 depended upon the course which they might adopt. To fight, or 
 not to fight; that was the question. Mr. Ballou was not so pre- 
 sumptuous as to attempt doing perfect justice to the talents dis- 
 played in this illustrious conclave. This work should belono-to 
 none but that genius, who has celebrated, in imperishable lines, 
 the grand Universalist Council which met before the fall of 
 Adam. None but Milton should attempt to say or sing the wis- 
 dom displayed on this important occasion, by thefait/^ul breth- 
 ren, Mr. Ballou, "Mr. Mitchell, and others of good judgment," 
 in this Universalist Hartford convention ! 
 
 For these faiUifuls to resist the daring assault of this infidel 
 invader, required much greater resources than Patrick Henry 
 believed necessary to a successful revolt of the colonies. No 
 wonder, then, that these choice spirits did not, like the Virginia 
 senate, unfurl the banners of war. The lion of their forest had 
 been bearded in his own den; or, to speak more plainly, their 
 controversial champion had been publicly refuted in his " own 
 desk." After having lived by challenging for many years, he 
 was at last met so successfully that he showed his antagonist the 
 door before his argument was closed, and has ever since refused 
 to meet him again. When the man of Gath has fallen, who can 
 censure his faithful brethren of Askelon for turning their backs.?^ 
 
XXXL 
 
 Notwithstanding; my indulgent disposition, the council have, 
 through their spokessnan, expressed an apprehension that I would 
 
 Publish uncharitable ^^insinuations that Mr. Mitchell uf New 
 '^ork, and Mr. Ballou of Boston, have neither of them confidence 
 or courage to meet this man in public debate respecting^ the doc- 
 trine of universal salvation. " Without, therefore, recurring to 
 the trite excuse of Hudibras for their flight, they exerted all their 
 powers in manufacturing a feasible apology. The challenge of 
 this monster gave him, in their eyes, a distracted and hostile 
 aspect, much more unequivocal than that of the great wooden 
 horse before the walls of Troy. This did not prove that he had 
 come from the moon; but, in their opinion, such enmity to Uni- 
 versalism proved that his understanding was under the influence 
 of that planet. 
 
 Christians fight with spiritual weapons. As Unitarians, Uni- 
 versalists, and false professors do not covet spiritual gifts, they 
 have generally, and in some cases successfully, adopted the plan 
 of impeaching the intellectual character of those who stand in 
 their way. This is usually accompanied with professions of 
 disinterestedness, and often with compliments to the moral ex- 
 cellence of the intended victim. Mr. Ballou says, *' the reason 
 why I publish this letter, and give the foregoing information, is 
 by no means to injure Mr. M'Calla." Messrs. Ballou and 
 Kneeland endeavour to deceive their neighbours by insinuations 
 against my character, and yet would be thought to do me no in- 
 jury. " As a madman who casteth firebrands, arrows and death, 
 so IS the man that deceiveth his neighbour, and saith, am I not 
 in sport.*^" When Solomon's madmen are reputed for integrity 
 and worth, their firebrands and arrows are calculated to produce 
 death. The reason why they are often harmless, when coming 
 from such men as that brace of writers who have assailed me in 
 Boston and Philadelphia, is, that in their case such insinuations 
 are well known to be the dernier resort of disappointed ambition, 
 error and imbecility. 
 
 Although the public were correctly informed on the 31st ul- 
 timo, that I " never wrote, indited or addressed one line on any 
 subject" to Mr. Ballou of Boston, or to Mr. Mitchell of New 
 York, in my life, Mr. Kneeland, with this declaration before 
 him, republished Mr. Ballou's communication the next day, and 
 accompanied it with approbatory remarks of his own. He con- 
 descends to acknowledge some internal evidence of forgery; but, 
 under a pretence of great uncertainty, expresses a feeble wish 
 to " see the original letters. " As they have never yet saluted 
 my eyes, I can join him in the wish. There is at present strong 
 proof that their author is the same person to whom many similar 
 epistles have been lately traced in this city. Let it be distinct- 
 ly understood that this person is claimed by the Universal ists. 
 
Let Messrs. Ballou and Mitchell send his letters in company 
 with a request for his name. Some of his letters were signed 
 with the names of departed saints and sinners, male and female, 
 and others with the names of living citizens of Philadelphia. 
 The following brief specimen is inserted, omitting nothing but 
 the address : 
 
 " Dear Sir : The following is the best way to get a name to 
 live according to the doctrine and Christian behavour of M'Cal- 
 la, the fire and brimstone chaplain of bloody Jackson. 
 
 Learn three mile prayers and half mile graces, 
 With well spread hands and long wry faces ; 
 Grunt up a solemn lengthea'd groan. 
 And damn all parties but t;ow o-w7i. 
 I'll warrant theu y'e're no deceiver, 
 A steady, sturdu, staunch believer. 
 
 CALVIN, 1824." 
 This universal letter writer was probably among those who 
 thought that these eastern favorites would make a better defence 
 of their cause than Mr. Kneeland had done, and therefore adopt- 
 ed a plan to which he was accustomed for bringing us together- 
 He has only elicited from them an uncalled-for refusal to meet 
 me. So true is it that " the wicked fleeth when no man pursu- 
 eth." Although when Providence calls, I am willing, in his 
 strength, to encounter a ranging bear or a ravening wolf, I am not 
 so fond of knight eDraiotry as to go in search of such adventures. 
 If these Hartford worthies or any one of them had published in 
 my neighbourhood, as Mr. Kneeland did, that "he therefore, 
 once more respectfully invites and entreats the clergy of othec 
 denominations, or some one of them, the more learned the better, 
 to discuss this important subject with him," I should have been 
 as willing to accept their challenge as his. It would have sa- 
 voured more of a sound mind if Mr. Ballou had postponed his 
 publication until he could ascertain that I had really sent him a 
 private invitation, or until 1 had issued some general challenge 
 like that of Mr. Kneeland. But if 1 had been madman enough to 
 blow such a trumpet of defiance as he has done, 1 hope tnat I 
 should not, like him, be so unsound as to deny it afterwards. 
 
 In the paper in Avhich Mr. Kneeland has copied Mr. Ballou's 
 communication, he has also devoted more than one whole page 
 to a publication of Mr. Morse, his moderator in our debate, 
 against tlie Rev. J. M. for having advertised, as he insinuates, 
 that I would preach in his chapel *' on Universal ism." As the 
 notice was given after the debate, and in a presbyterian place of 
 worship, every one would have expected, alter such a notice, to 
 hear a sermon against universalism, just as they would expect 
 Mr. Morse to preach against presbyterianism, if they received 
 notice from a universalist pulpit that he would preach on that 
 subject? and just as Blair's sermon 07i intemperance is knowB 
 
xxxu 
 
 by every one to be against tliat vice. Yet this universalist graua« 
 marian is prepared to prove that nothing less than insincerity or 
 insanity could have induced Blair, that unparallelled rhetorician, 
 to say that he preached on intemperance when he preached 
 against it. The privilege which Mr. Morse has enjoyed, in the 
 instructions of so great a linguist and translator as Mr. Knee- 
 land, may be in some measure estimated by his own words in the 
 following extracts : viz. " When you gave the notice of his 
 meeting, were you not sensible at the time, that he [Mr. M'Cal- 
 la] intended preaching against universalism, and not on that 
 doctrine; which last expression, according to common usage, 
 necessarily presupposes he did intend preaching in f avow of, 
 and not against, universalism ?" " Preaching on a doctrine is 
 what signifies, agreeably to universal [he ought to have said 
 universalist^ custom, an intention to advocate or endeavor to 
 support such doctrine, whatever that doctrine maybe !" These 
 extracts speak for themselves. It only remains for me to re- 
 quest Messrs Ballou, " Mitchell and others of good judgment,'' 
 that when they hold their next inquest over subjects of delirium, 
 they would examine the intellectual condition of these faithful 
 brethren, one of whom has written, and the other countenanced 
 and published, such an unmerciful assault upon the English lan- 
 guage and common sense. i 'on- 
 
 Mr. Kneeland, apprehensive of the doctcine of hjs universalist 
 letter-writer, founds his impeachment of my understanding upon 
 three new allegations, all of which have no bearing at all, ex- 
 cept against my veracity : and if a violation of truth will consti- 
 tute a madman, our public hospitals must be greatly enlarged, 
 or the faithf 1(1 brethren of good judgment will have to build asy- 
 lums for themselves. To prove tliis we need not go one step 
 farther than Mr. Kneeland's first interrogative allegation. It 
 is as follows : " How could a man of sound mind denounce a 
 discussion as being altogether spurious, to which the testimony of 
 hundreds could be obtained, if it were necessary, of its being 
 as faithful a report as ever was made ; so faithful that no one has 
 yet been able to point out a single error aftiecting the arguments 
 on either side ?'' Mark the language of Mr. Kneeland and his 
 hundreds of universalist witnesses : " As faithful a report as 
 everivas made.'^ Out of the millions of reports that ever were 
 made, these persons have seen but a small number. They must 
 be very willing and well trained witnesses, who will swear t© 
 what they know nothing about. Although they have never seen 
 many more translations and grammars than reports, I have no 
 doubt that they would be as ready to swear that Mr. Kneeland's 
 is as faithful a translation as ever was made, and that Mr. Morse 
 is as great a grammarian as Dr. Bluir or any other man that 
 ever was made. Let it be remembered also, that some reports 
 
XXX 111 
 
 have been correct, and this one, Mr. Kneeland confesses, is, in 
 the language, deficient in accuracy. It may be asked then, how 
 could a man of veracity, or, to use his own phraseology, " how 
 could a man of sound mind," attest, as he has done, that a re- 
 cord of a twenty hours debate, not written by himself, and con- 
 fessedly inaccurate, is " as faithful a report as ever was made?" 
 I do not inquire what judges and lawyers will say to such testi- 
 mony: I ask Whatman on earth, but a lunatic, would believe 
 such a witness ? It is no wonder that they are rejected by our 
 courts of justice, for they have not the tear of God before their 
 eyes. But notwithstanding the hundreds that he pretends would 
 come at his bidding, I do not believe that he can find one wit- 
 ness who will give such testimony, except Messrs. Jennings, 
 Kneeland and Morse. As to the latter character, we have al- 
 ready given his criticism upon an alledged notice of the Rev. J. 
 M. that I was to preach "on Universalism." This was pub- 
 lished to convict Mr. M. of deception. What shall we think of 
 the veracity of that man who can do this, after he knew that it 
 was a notorious and well attested /ac^ that on the occasion refer- 
 red to, Mr M. did not leave the people in doubt, but stated at 
 large that 1 was to "answer Mr. Morse's sermon, delivered on 
 the Friday evening previous, in favour of Universal salvation ?" 
 This will appear by the following certificate. 
 
 " On the sabbath evening the 1st instant when John Magoffin 
 notified the congregation at Union Chapel, that Mr. M'Calla 
 would preach there on the following Thursday evening, he stat- 
 ed that Mr. M'Calla would then answer Mr. Morse's sermon, 
 delivered on the Friday evening previous, in favour of universal 
 salvation ; and he then stated some erroneous sentiments taught 
 in his books by Mr. Kneeland, such as this, that God was the 
 author of sin ; and said that Mr. Kneeland founded his sentiment 
 of universal salvation on this notion ; but he held no book or pa- 
 per in his hand from which he quoted nor did he say that he then 
 used Mr. Kneeland's own words. 
 
 Chesnut Hill, 13th August, 1824. 
 
 Christopher Yeakle, George Rex. 
 
 Jacob Lentz .Jacob Dutwaler, 
 
 Jacob Lentz, Jr. Henry Cress, 
 
 William Smith, Jacob Waas, 
 
 Jacob Cress, Francis Markoe. 
 
 The above include the signatures of the most respectable men 
 
 on Chesnut-hill., and of a lay elder of this city, well known for 
 
 education, piety and good sense. 
 
 Mr. Kneeland's lumping attestation of the voluminous report 
 
 of his promising disciple, who, it seems, has now become an 
 
 Universalist preacher, so abundantly illustrates the texture of his. 
 
 F. 
 
XXXIV 
 
 conscience, that I would gladly dispense with every comment 
 upon his moral sanity not imperiously called for by his own pub- 
 lications. These have given to the otherwise insignificant ques- 
 tion, "who sent the challenge?"' an adventitious importance. If" 
 God has graciously enabled me to receive, profess and defend an 
 essential doctrine of Christianity, I care not much to whose in- 
 vitation the controversy owes its birth. 1 have said that he gave 
 the first request in his printed lectures. He considers this de- 
 claration as not only evidence of moral guilt, but it is the second 
 of his three new proofs of an unsound mind ! It is not such des- 
 perate idiotisms as this that have given to the question its artifi- 
 cial importance. — It is his publis'^ng to the world an acknowl- 
 edgement of the fa,ct as coming from me ; which acknowledge- 
 ment has that identical evidence of forgery, which Mr. Knee- 
 land himself has discovered in the lettei- to Boston. This con- 
 duct was in my eye, when, in a letter to him of the 22d ultimo, 
 I promised a further comment upon lus views of cliristian prac- 
 tice. A few days before the debate, the parties, at Mr. Knee- 
 land's house, agreed to a written notification of the meeting, for 
 insertion in some public paper. As Mr. Kneeland was acquaint- 
 ed with the presses of the citv, our joint advertisement was left in 
 his hands. I did not suppose that Universalism had so far af- 
 fected his understanding as to make him alter such an instrument, 
 when exposure was the certain consequence. Yet, without my 
 privity or authority, he did add to it the following sentence ; 
 viz. " This discussion was first proposed on the part of xVlr. 
 M'Calla, and accepted by Mr. Kneeland." To save me the 
 trouble of noticing this conduct in the papers, I requested Mr. 
 Kneeland to correct his own error, and inform the public that 
 this declaration was added upon his sole responsibility. He 
 promised to do so. His failure in the performance of this pro- 
 mise adds to the guilt of the original transgression. 
 
 Althoujrh this article was understood to be by consent, yet as 
 we had ne; lectsd to sign it, it did not fnliy answer Mr. Knee- 
 land's purpose. He tlierefore took our rules of conference, an 
 instrument which we had signed, and this infatuated man delibe- 
 rately prefixed to them a similar declaration, in such a manner, 
 that on the face of the paj)f r, as published in the Saturday Even- 
 ing Post of July 10, this manufactured preamble of his appears 
 as manifestly to be signed by me, as the title of the rules, or any 
 article which they contain. To show this, we here insert the 
 publication in its primitive beauty, with 3ir. Kneeland's unau- 
 thorized introduction, enclosed in brackets. 
 
 "[PUBLIC THEOLOGICAL DISCUSSION. 
 
 " After the interchange of two letters on each side, the first of 
 which, dated July 2d, coming from the Reverend Mr. M'Calla, 
 
XXX7 
 
 ■and pr()pn'*in|5 a public debate which, beiii;^ accepted by the 
 Reverend Mr. Svneeland, led to a meetiuir ot the parties, when 
 the following articles were nuitually agreed upon.3" 
 Rules of Conference, adopted and signed this eighth day oj 
 \%'2.4.^ in the city of Philadelphia, by ,Sbner Kneeland and 
 L. '^I'Calla. (Duplicates given to the parties. ) 
 
 1. The proposition for discussion shall be as follows, viz. Is 
 ^e punishment of the wicked absolutely eternal ? or is it onlj 
 a temporal punishment in this world, for their good, and to be 
 succeeded by eternal happiness after death ? 
 
 2. Kach speaker shall be entitled to an alternate address of 
 thirty minutes, unless the other party waive his right. 
 
 3. The discussion to be moderated by three men, each of the 
 parties choosing one, and these two a third, who shall be consi- 
 aered the president of the bench. 
 
 4. The discussion shall (God willing) commence on the 13th 
 instant, at half past nine o'clock A. M. and continue, if necessa- 
 ry, until noon. It shall, if necessary, be i-esumed at four o'clock, 
 and continue until half past six r . M. and continue from day to 
 day until both parties shall be satisfied. 
 
 5. The debate shall be opened and closed by one party in the 
 forenoon and another in thei.fternoon, and in case of a continu- 
 ance, the party who relinquishes this privilege in the morning of 
 the first day, shall, if requiring it, enjoy it on the morning of the 
 second ; and so on. 
 
 6. The conference to be held at the Universalist Church in 
 Lombard stre^ t, and adjourned if necessary by mutual consent 
 to some other suitable place."'' W. L. !VI*CALLA, 
 
 ABNER KNEELAND." 
 Without taking time to dwell upon the features of Mr. Morse's 
 grammatical preceptor as reflected in the composition of the 
 above preamble, it may be safely observed that a man, who has, 
 without authority, written over my rame, a declaration which is 
 no less untrue than ungrammatical, is capable of writing chal- 
 lenges in my name to .\lr. I^allou of Boston, to Mr. Mitchell of 
 New York, to \1r. Kneeland of Philadelphia, or to any Universa- 
 list bedlamite whose " good judgment'' the " faithful brethren" 
 may celebrate. W. L. M 'CALL A. 
 
 No. 17. 
 
 FROM THE FRANKLIN GAZETTE, OF SKPT. IItH. 
 
 TO W. L. M'CALLA. 
 
 In yesterday's paper I observed three columns therein occupi- 
 ed with your signature placed at the bottom. In that commu- 
 nication, you appear to be wrangling, with your accustomed 
 
XXXV 1 
 
 expertness, with at least five different individuals, some of wliom 
 vol! have never yet seen! Permit me to ask you. sir, what all this 
 IS for? Is it because you had proved all or any of them to be dis- 
 honest or unchristian in any thing whichthey, or any one of them, 
 have said or done ? Or is the whole of that rancorous spirit 
 which your communication breathes throughout against those in- 
 dividuals to be attributed to your hatred of universalism, united 
 with your inordinate love of the doctrine of never-ceasing dam- 
 nation, not for yourself, but perhaps for your '"father, brother or 
 wife?" Is all the litigiousness with which your writing is graced 
 to be accounted for from your fond ness to believe that that God who 
 created all will consign a part to a quenchless burning hell? Let 
 me ask, in my turn,wiat shall i<;e think of that man who can call Mr 
 Ballou's acceptance of what he supposed at the time was a chal- 
 lenge from you '*an uncalled for refusal to meet me," when Mr, 
 Ballou in his rem;^rks explicitly says: "But before this, (i. e.) 
 before I join these Reverend divines in the doctrine of despair, I 
 promise to use my feeble powers to the utmost in defence of the 
 Gospel?" The refusal of Mr. Ballou to meet Mr. M'Calla is not 
 unlike what has more than once been called a refusal of the 
 church in Lombard -street to continue the debate, when Mr. 
 M 'Callaas well knew he could have had thehouse longer,as he and 
 others knew, that the weapons used by him against his opponent 
 were, before the close of the discussion, becoming very few and 
 feeble. Again, let me ask, what shall we think of that nian, 
 who, making Mr. M 'Calla his conservator, draws up a paper, 
 and after stating therein, designing to express Mr. Kne»'land's 
 sentiments, "God was the author of sin;" said that Mr. Knee- 
 land founded his sentiment of universal salvation on this notion," 
 instead of saying, as he ought to have said, in order to be consist- 
 ent with himself and his former statement, Mr. Kneeland has 
 written in a pamphlet thus: " God is the author of sin, and 
 therefore will not punish it?'' Will Mr. Magoffin be able to get 
 the names of ten respectable men attached to a paper, wherein it 
 shall be stated, that he never used the last quoted sentence a& 
 coming from Mr. Kneeland, or as exactly expressive of what 
 Universalists believe! Let it be remembered by the opposers of 
 Universalism that "the way of the trangressor i* hard, 'and that 
 no sinner has a right to expect, that he shall go unpunished for 
 his sins. Let Mr. Magoffin and the eininent philologist who 
 wrote in yesterday's Gazette turn their thoughts tvithin; view 
 their studied policy in their recent proceedings in relation to 
 Universalists, not forgetting the beautiful allusions which the 
 last has made concerning Hudibras, the wooden horse of Troy, 
 the Universalist bedlamite; or they may with equal propriety 
 bear in mind the conduct of any Presbyterian bedlamite, who 
 hereafter wishes to employ Mr. Al'- Calla as a champion. 
 
 WILLIAM MORSE. 
 Philadelphia^ Sept. 10, 1824. 
 
"XXXVll 
 No. 18. 
 
 FJIOM THE FKANKLIN GAZETTE. 
 
 TO MR. ABNER KNEEL AND. 
 
 Sir ; In answer to your letter of the 8tli instant, addressed 
 to rae on the subject o: my note to Mr Ballou, 1 would state, 
 that I vvas/wZ/y convinced that Mr. M'Oalla never, at aiiy tune 
 in iiis life, wrote, indited, or addressed one line on any subject, 
 to either Mr. Ballou of Boston, or Mr. Mitchell of JSew York, 
 by the simple declaration of Mr. M'Calla himself. His word 
 concerning any fact to which he would testify, is sufficient 
 ground for confidence to all who have any intimate acquaint- 
 ance with him. 1 have been acquainted with him for several 
 years, and could certify, were it needful, that he is a minister 
 in the Presbyterian church, in good an<l regular standing with 
 his brethren, and highly esteemed for bis honesty, eloquence, 
 talents, and piety, by thousands in our ecclesiastical commu- 
 nion, liis veracity, so tar as I know, was never questioned by 
 any before he commenced a correspondence withjou; and 
 since, none doubt il but a tea who believe in the universal sal- 
 vation of mankind. These seem to me to doubt tiie veracity of 
 Go(5, and to believe in the veracity of " the father of lies," who 
 said, " ye shall not surely die ;" so that it is no wonder it they 
 should call Mr, M'Calla " a liar." 
 
 The evideiiice which fully convinced and still cnvinces me of 
 his soundness of mind, is presented to me by my ears, vhcn I 
 hear him speak on any subject, for he talks like a man of good 
 sense ; and by my eyes^ when I read any of his writings 
 
 His debate with yourself convinced me that he is '* a man 
 of sound mind," and I think came near to convincing your 
 judgment, sorely against your will, that he is a champion for 
 what the greater part of the christian world calls orthodoxy, of 
 extraordinary polemical abilities and prowess. If he did not 
 conquer you, at least you will admit, that a man of no mean 
 powers of mind could not put him to flight in a contest of lour 
 days. In short, by the same kind of evidence which convinces 
 me that Mr. Kneeland is not insane, but has a sound under- 
 standing, and other mental faculties, which 1 deem nearly as 
 much perverted as those of Milton's devil, I am now convinced 
 that Mr. M'Calla, in native energy of mind, in soundness of 
 judgment, clearness of apprehension, accuracy of reasoning, 
 rectitude ot conscience, benevolence of heart, and even in the 
 kno^v ledge of Hebrew and Grecian literature, is every way Mr. 
 Kneeland's superior. 
 
 Mr. M'Calla's letters to yourself since the debate have not 
 failed to convince thousands who have read them with delight, 
 that you have no need to desire a controvertist of sounder in- 
 tellect. EZRA STILES ELY. 
 
 Philadelphia, September H, 1824. 
 
KXXVlll 
 
 No. 19. 
 
 FROM THE FRANKLIN GAZETTE, OK SliPT. 15. 
 
 TO MR. EZR\ SriLES ELY. 
 
 Sir — If, inreply to your noteofthe 11th instant, I do notuse 
 all that mildness to whicli I am accustomed, and which it is al- 
 ways a pleasure to me to observe, unless prevented by a sense 
 of justice to myself, you well know the example I follow, with 
 which you cannot be disj)leascd, since it comes from yourself. 
 
 In answer to my note, you say, " i \va^ fully convinced, &c." 
 This, sir, you informed the public before, the truth of which I 
 did not call in (jiiestion; it was therefore unnecessary to repeat 
 it: tie subject of my inquiry was the evidence by which you were 
 so convinced, and which you had nut given to the public. You 
 now say, '•^ his [Mr. M'Calla's] word is sufficient ground of 
 confidence, &c." If, sir, the public had been informed that 
 you had the "^word" of Mr. M'Calla as your authority for the 
 truth of what you stated, and which no one could positively 
 know except Mr. M'Calla himself, 1 should never have troubled 
 you on this subject. Or if Mr. M'Calla had been as prompt 
 in discovering the letter published by Mr. Ballou,as you were 
 in disavowing the false statements which it contained in rela- 
 tion to yourself and Dr. Wilson, the public would have been 
 set right at once, which would have prevented any groundless 
 suspicions. Mr. Ballou, however, had every reason to suppose 
 the letter genuine, and therefore treated it as such j and I do not 
 see how the public could be fully convinced to the contrary, until 
 it was discovered by the man whose name it bears. I have now 
 in my pctssession one of the letters in question, and am thereby 
 fully convinced that no part is in the hand-writing of Mr. 
 M'Calla. 
 
 It gives me pleasure also to find that Mr. M'Calla stands so 
 high among the clergy as a man of " honesty, eloquence, talents 
 and piety by thousands in our [Presbyterian] ecclesiastical com- 
 munion;" for all this adds weight to the importance of the late 
 discussion; and I still hope that nothing will occur to lessen him 
 in your estimation; but that you will still consider him " a cham- 
 pion for what the greater part of the (Christian world calls ortho- 
 doxy." That he has '-'extraordinary polemical abilities and 
 prowess," I believe will not be doubted by any who heard, or 
 who shall read the discussion. 
 
 But, sir, after all, notwithstanding this high opinion of your 
 friend Mr. M'Calla, you have not had the hardihood to deny that 
 he has made the incorrect statements with which he is charged; 
 neither have you attempted to reconcile the making of those erro- 
 neous statements with the possession, at the same time, of a sound 
 mind. He stated, during the discussion, that I had written and 
 
xixix 
 
 published a Greek Grammar, which is totally incorrect; that he 
 Tvas denied tlie use ot ihc church in Lombard -street any longer, 
 which is equally untrue; w'aicii statement he has repeated several 
 timessince, though it has been as often contradicted; and he has 
 given no evidence whs.tever of its truth. He has also stated 
 since the discussion that 1 have refused to meet hiui a}i,ain; that I 
 sent him the tirst number of the minutes of the discussion, and 
 requested hiu) to point out the enors if there were any; with 
 several other statements, which I could name if 1 were disposed 
 to multiply them, not one of which is correct. And, after all, I 
 am not disposed to " call Mr. M'Calla ' a liar,' " th>)ugh you 
 quoted those words, -'a liar!" thereby insinuating that he had 
 been so called by "a few who believe in the " universal salva- 
 tion of mankind," among whom you undoubtedly meant to in- 
 clude mel Such insinuations, without proof, more than to saj, 
 *' these SEEM to mc^ *c. " I consider far beneath the dignity of 
 either the gentleman or the christian. It is more charitable to 
 impute such intemperate language as that which has been used 
 by IVIr. M'Calla, and his vindicator, to a disturbed imagination, 
 •r a disordered brain, than it is to say that it proc< eds from, a 
 worse motive. To say that such language proceeds from a mind 
 that is 'sound," is only to acknowledge, in other words, that it 
 comes from a heart " desperately wicked." 
 
 I challenge you, sir, to show the least eviderice that Univer- 
 salists " doubt the veracity ot God!" And what evidence can you 
 give why it should so " skf.m^^ to you other than the evil surmis- 
 in"-sof your own heart ? By what evidence does it " sekm to you 
 that Uiiiversalists " believe in the veracity of the father of lies, 
 who said, ' ye shall not surely die?' " I know of no Universalist 
 but what believes that Adam did die the very death threatened, 
 and that too " in the day" of his transgression. But those who 
 believe that God threatened all mankind with eternal death, and 
 then saves some of them from it; what do they but "doubt the 
 veracity of God," and "believe in the veracity of the serpent, 
 who said to our mother Eve, who, no doubt, was one of the elect, 
 and who now says to all the elect, "ye shall not surely die?" 
 Unless all mankind die the death threatened as a consequence 
 of sin, how can y^ou vindicate the testimony of God, or prove 
 that the testimony of the serpent was false? 
 
 If some of these remarks should be rather " highly seasoned,''' 
 so as to make your " lips smack/'* how could you expect any 
 thing better from " Milton's devil?" 
 
 As to my inferiori'y, in every thing that is either learned, good 
 or amiable, to Mr. M'Calla, in the opinion of one who supposes 
 my " understanding and other mental faculties" so much "per- 
 verted," as the writer of the letter which I am now answering, it 
 
 * See your notice in tlif public papers of Atr. Rrownlee's work against the 
 ^inkers, previous to its publication. 
 
# xl 
 
 gives me no uneasiness whatever; because, in the mind of the 
 man with whom Mr. M'Calla stands so very high, I may be in- 
 ferior, and jet not be very low. 
 
 I am glad that Mr. M'Calla's letters to me have been read by 
 thousands," with so much "delight.'' I hope they will also be 
 
 willing to read the discussion. 
 
 ABNER KNEELAND. 
 
 Philadelphia^ Sept. ISth, 1824. 
 
 No. 20. 
 There was in the Democratic Press of Sept. lOtb, 13th and 
 15th, a contest between Mr. Jennings and an anonymous 
 writer by the name of Justice, in which the latter convicted 
 the former of corruption in hi& report of the debate. He also 
 produced evidence, both internal and external, that the re- 
 port was under the management oi Mr. Kneeland. Mr. Jen- 
 nings denied that the book was written at Mr. Knee!and*s 
 house, but conjesscd that it was sold there, because it was a 
 more central situation than his own ! He confessed that he 
 knew not even the letters of the sacred languages, but denied 
 that Mr. Kneeland, or any body else aided him in writing his 
 critical notes on these languages, except his " theologian" 
 at his "elbow, which by the bye, is a little family dog." These 
 are his own words. In the same paper, and in the Franklin 
 Gazette, there was a controversy between Mr. Magoffin and 
 Mr. Morse, in which the former convicted the latter of false- 
 hood in repeated instances. Mr. Morse hints very strong sus- 
 picions that his antagonist obtained assistance from me in 
 writing. This report which is utterly destitute of truth, he 
 appears to iiave invented as an excuse for obtaining such as- 
 sistance himself. His first and second pieces against Mr. 
 Magoffin could not have been written by the same hand, and 
 we shall soon see that the same remark is applicable to his 
 first and second pieces against me in Nos. 17 and 24. 
 
 No. 21. 
 
 FROM THE DEMOCRATIC PRESS, OF SEPT. 22d. 
 
 DEBATE ON UNIVERSA.LISM. 
 
 Just published and now for sale, in four numbers, at 25 cents 
 each, " Minutes of a Discussion of the Universalist Question, 
 between Mr. Abner Kneeland and Dr. E. S. Ely, conducted in 
 the Universalist Synagogue in Lombard street, Philadelphia, 
 July 13 to 17, 1824. Taken in short-hand, by R. L. Long- 
 hand."* 
 
xli 
 
 This debate originated in the following challenge of Mr. Knee- 
 land to Dr. Ely, as published in the Franklin Gazette of the 15th 
 inst.* Tiz : "I challenge you, Sir, to shew, the least evidence 
 that CJniversalists doubt the veracity of God,^' <!tc. 
 
 As it is probable that Dr. Ely, like a petulant friend of his, 
 will say that this is a spurious report, seein-: that the debate has 
 never yet taken place, I would ask that gentleman what advan- 
 tage there is in waiting,'' Does he expect that I could give the public 
 a inor* faithful transcript of his language, sentiments and method 
 after hearing him than before? A little experience would teach 
 him better. One fact is better than a thousand theories; and it is 
 a fact that cousin R. L. Short-hand was lately present at a de- 
 bate, and he has ascribed to one of the parties, if my information 
 be correct, language which he never uttered, and sentivnents 
 which he never believed. All that can be asked of a Reporter 
 is that he shall do justice to the argument; and this can be done 
 as well before the debate as afterward. 
 
 Mv opportunities of doingjustice to Mr. Kneeland's argument 
 are peculiarly happy, since every word in this report of mine is 
 copied from a book lately published by mv cousin R. L Jennings, 
 now a Universalist Preacher. This book Mr. Kneeland says is 
 *' as faithful a report as ever was made," and will therefore en- 
 able me to shew '.is strength to great advantage. 
 
 The whole work is hereby " submitted to the respective parties 
 and the moderators for their inspection." They are hereby re- 
 quested to note any errors that they may observe " affecting the 
 argument on eitb.er side." " Should no errors be pointed out by 
 [them] notwithstanding this request, it will be considered an 
 acknowledgment of the correctness ot the work, and it will be 
 recommended to the public accordingly." 
 
 As I, in company with my cousin, R. L. Jennings, would be 
 glad of " a more central situation than my own to dispose of the 
 work," he would oblige me by permitting his brother ** who stays 
 at Mr. Kneeland's through the day," for the sale of his books, to 
 sell mine also. Mr. Kneeland also would confer a favour by 
 taking my books through the streets under his arm, along with 
 cousin R. L. Shore-hand's productions. By this, however, I 
 would not have the public to understand that Mr. Kneeland has 
 any thing to do in my publication. 1 solemnly declare upon the 
 veracity of a Universalist Preacher, that 1 have no connexion 
 with that gentleman; no, not even so far as to have cousin R. L. 
 Jennings' "little family dog" " at my elbow." 
 
 Without detaining the reader farther than to observe that the 
 purchase of one number is an engagement for the whole work, I 
 proceed now to the discussion. 
 
 No. 1. 
 
 Tuesday, Forenoon — Dr. Ely opened by clearing away the 
 rubbish. 
 
 * See No. 19. P 
 
xlii 
 
 Mr. Kneeland. He has his mind marked out in a particular 
 track; for, having anticipated, as he supposed, thegiound v^ hich 
 would be occupied by his opponent, he had his matter ready cut 
 and dried to meet him. Has he referred to a single passage in 
 the scripture to support his side of the argument,^ 
 
 Afternoon. — Dr. Ely enters upon his proofs. 
 
 Mr. Kneeland. He seems indeed to avoid the proposition alto- 
 gether. I had expected he would have brought forth his strong- 
 est arguments in support of his side of the question, but am sorry 
 to find he has not produced a single one relative to the point in 
 discussion. 
 
 No. 2. 
 
 Wednesday, Forenoon. — Dr. Ely advances in the argument. 
 
 Mr. Kneeland. Let him come to the question, and the mo- 
 ment he can prove his proposition true, that moment I give up 
 the contesi, and must submit. But as he has brought forward 
 nothing for me to answer; nothing in support of his argument; I 
 have nothing to refute. I do not know even how to consume my 
 thirty minutes ! [Laugh.] My opponent has charged me with chal- 
 lenging the world to a public discussion. This I positively 
 deny. 
 
 Afternoon. — More proofs from Dr. Ely. 
 
 Mr. Kneeland. I ask what did we come here to do ? Why 
 collect this crowded and respectable audience together? Was it 
 not to discuss the proposition read in your hearing? I have there- 
 fore urged him on his own account, and for the sake of this en- 
 quiring assembly, if he be able to handle his doctrine as he ought, 
 that he doit at once; for as yet, he has not said one word about 
 it. It is useless for him to take up your time, and to disappoint 
 your expectations by talking about my opinions and the supposed 
 inconsistencies of my writings; for they have no bearing upon 
 thepovU whatever! It appears to me, and I think it must also 
 appear to you, that my opponent had not only the outlines, but 
 the very body of his argument prepared before he came to the 
 controversy; for he is going straight on in his long story without 
 taking notice of aught I say. 
 
 No. S. 
 
 Thursday, Forenoon. — Dr. Ely goes straight on. 
 
 Mr. Kneeland. I feel anxious to consume ray thirty minutes, 
 but in truth; I know not what to say. I have so repeatedly call- 
 ed upon my opponent to come forward with his evidence, that I 
 think there will be no necessity to call upon him again, if he has 
 any to produce. He has certainly not produced any yet that I 
 observed, and I pay all the attention to my opponent's arguments 
 that they deserve, as I take minutes of every thing of importance 
 which he advances connected with the subject, and yet I have 
 observed nothing. It has been suggested to me this morning, as 
 a report in circulation, and very generally received; that an im- 
 
xliu. 
 
 pressicn was made upon the andienee assembled here yesterday 
 afternoon, very mucb in favour of my opponent, and that his 
 cause was rising. If it be so I am truly ghid of it ! There is no 
 person present to whom such a report affords more satisfaction 
 than to your speaker; for, to it, in a great measure, may be at- 
 tributed your being drawn together this morning in increased 
 numbers. 1 am also glad that his cause is rising in yonr minds, 
 because the more powerful impression he now malces on you, 
 respecting the truth of his doctrine, the greater will be his de- 
 feat if he should fail to prove it. I am sorry that truth con- 
 strains me to declare, I have met with more powerful evidence, 
 brought in favour of eternal misery, by lay-men, even by ap- 
 prentice boys, at the I ommissioner's Hall in the ISorthern Li- 
 berties, than I have heard this morning from my opponent. I 
 feel sorry tbat a reverend gentleman should have come all the 
 
 way from to teach the citizens of Philadelphia theology, 
 
 without being possessed of abilities better adapted to the task. 
 
 Afternoon. — The Doctor's evidence increases in strength. 
 
 Mr Kneeland. Has he proved his part of the proposition ? 
 Has he met me on the point which was to decide it' So. he has 
 not. And is it because he has evaded it, and has tried to lead 
 you away from it, that his cause is rising? Does his cause yet rise? 
 Does it yet make the shining faces as f understand so many of his 
 friends had this morning? ^Jlfter a short lucid interval Mr. Knee- 
 land observetF] My hearers must ptn-ceive the reason why 1 go 
 into this extraneous matter. — What shall I do ? — Say nothing ? 
 If my opponent will give me any thing better to talk about} I 
 will not wander. j,.. 
 
 No. 4. 
 
 Friday, Forenoon, Dr. Fly still strengthens his proofs. 
 
 Mr. Kneeland. As my opponent has given me nothing new 
 to reply to, I have nothing of course to say in answer. Is the 
 cause of my opponent still rising. Has he gained such a won- 
 derful victory ? The nearer a man approaches to the brink of a 
 steep precipice the greater is the danger of his falling over. Has 
 it not been so with my opponeot? He would have drawn back, 
 but I was too close behind him. 
 
 Afternoon. Mr. Kneeland, While I am speaking he is read- 
 ing his little book, without attending to the arguments I mav of- 
 fer against his doctrine. My opponent has once more turned to 
 his little book, and of this I am glad, for he has really enter- 
 tained you better with what he has read therefrom, than he did 
 in his former address. This is no discussion — this is continued 
 reading straight forward on his part, and incessant entreaties on 
 mine, to bring him to the point in dispute. 
 
 Dr. Ely being informed Ijy Mr. Kneeland that the house might 
 not be had any longer, closed. 
 
xliv 
 
 Hearing that cousin R, L. Jennings had found dull sale for 
 his work in 6 numbers, I thought it safer to divide mine into 4. 
 If, liowever, it should meet with due encouragement, it is my 
 intention to add two more numbers to the second edition. The 
 5lh to coutam cousin Jenning's first great effort after his ordi- 
 nation to the ministry in the L'niversali^t Synagogue. It is bis 
 essay on little family dogs^ published in the Democratic Press 
 of the 13fh inst.* It is said that Homer wrote first the wars of 
 the frogs and then the war of Troy. There is no telling what 
 our cousin may yet come to. He has already made such pro- 
 ficiency in the dead languages, that he thinks himself able " to 
 compare the letters which are used to form one word with the 
 letters that are used to form another, and if the}* do not agree, 
 to alter them." At least, he thinks, " it is probable the writer, 
 [^that is, Cousin Jennings,^ could do this much himself, were he 
 to attempt it!" This is as much as to say that he has not yet 
 attempted it. What then must we think of that genius who can 
 consult Hebrew and Greek Lexicons and Concordances, and 
 write critical notes on the sacred languages, when he has never 
 yet attempted to learn their alphabets, and when he has no other 
 created assistance than a little family dog at his elbow. If he 
 had a great butcher's dog or a pack of hounds there, he would 
 be equal to a man of sound mind, who said a few years ago, that 
 he could speak all the languages spoken in Jerusalem on the day 
 of Pentecost. 
 
 The 6th number will be devoted to a couple of lectures writ- 
 ten by brother Morse on the philosophy of language, In the 
 first of them he will prove that when a preacher professes to 
 write on Universalism, a lawyer on Forgery, or a physician on 
 Insanity, they must write in favour of ihese things, or be guilty of 
 deception. t 'I'o this will be appended a few remarks of brother 
 Kneeland's last letter to Dr. Ely 4 shewing thatjit is more chari- 
 table to attribute the use of such language " to a disturbed ima- 
 gination or a disordered brain, than it is to say that it proceeds 
 from a worse motive !" The second lecture will be on the 
 subject ot controversial etii^uette ; in which brother Morse will 
 prove, according to the doctrine of his letter of the 10th inst.§ 
 that for an orthodox minister to route five Universalist assail- 
 ants at once, is as indecorous as the conduct of that revolutiona- 
 ry American who surrounded seven British soldiers. 
 
 Before taking leave of the pul)lic, I wish them to remember 
 that the above report of Mr. Kneeland's defence of Universal 
 ism is in his own words, as approved by himself, without either 
 alteration in language or injusticf- to argument. There is only a 
 little liberty taken in an arbitrary arrangement of his expressions; 
 in 'vhich however, I nave been very modest, in comparison 
 
 •See No. 20. f See No. 16. :tSee No. 19. §See No. 17. 
 
with my cousin R. L. Short-hand, in the liberties which he has 
 taken, in snppressinc; and inventing, culling and rollecting, alter- 
 ing: and arranginK the ♦expressions of Mr. Kneeliind's j»ntagonist. 
 
 R. L. LOxNGHA^D. 
 
 Philadelphia, Sept. 17, 1824. 
 
 No. 22. 
 
 FROM THE FRANKLIN GAZETTE, OF OCT. 7. 
 
 DEBATE ON UNIVERSALISM. 
 
 TO MR. WILLIAM MORSE. 
 
 In the Franklin Gazette of the ilth of September, you have 
 addressed a letter to me. It is not necessary for me to state 
 my reasons for answering it so tardily, or tor answermg it at 
 all. Although it may be dishonourable for the five persons of 
 whom you speak, to make an unfair and unjust assault upon 
 me, there is no reason to be ashamed thai God has enabled me 
 to make a successful resistance. " There is no restraint to the 
 Lord to sdive by many or by few." The case would not be alter- 
 ed if 30U and your four brethren were multiplied by a hun- 
 dred, each brandishing a forgt d letter in his hand ; For Jehovah 
 has p'i^miset! bis faithfid servants, that one shall " chase i; thou- 
 sand, and two put ten thousand to flight." Whenever five men 
 or five bundred resort to personalities and pious frauds, men of 
 sense *ill suspect that tbeir cause is desperate. Mr. Kneeland 
 consumed much of bis tedious time during the debate m canvas- 
 sing my personal character, and you and Mr. Ballon have since 
 joined him in tbat important occupation in the public prints, If 
 this were not intended to injure the truth, you might divide my 
 reputation, as the Jews did my Master's garments, between vou. 
 It is with the greatest reluctance that I leave, for a moment, the 
 real subject in controversy, to answer forgeries and fables, 
 whether the old wives who publish them be male or female, ^uc 
 or fifty. 
 
 Although you and your associates, in subserviency to the 
 great accuser of the brethren, are engaged in the same work, 
 you have different lists of charges. The sum of 3 our several 
 catalogues appears to be, that you accuse me of saying, daring 
 the debate, that Mr. Kneeland wrote and publisbed a Greek 
 grammar; — of saying, since the debate, that 1 was denied the 
 continued use ot the house; — that Mr. Kneeland has since re- 
 fused to meet me; — that Mr. Ballou has, without my invitation, 
 done the same ; — that Mr. Kneeland sent me the first number of 
 Mr. Jennings's report ; — tbat he has a hand with him in that 
 work ; — and that it is a spurious production. 
 
 As the affair of the Greek grammar is mentioned in the re- 
 
xlvi 
 
 port, an examination of its genuineness will, if Providence per-- 
 niit, recall that subject on a future occasion. Tlie refusal of 
 the house until my argument was completed may now receive 
 a partial attention. Mr. Kneeland has said in an article of 
 the 1st of September, and afterwards in his letter to Dr. Kly of 
 the 13(h, that it is untrue that I " was denied the use of the 
 church in Lombard-street any longer.'' In the former, he says 
 that " Dr. Ely knows himself to the contrary;" and in the latter, 
 that Dr. Ely has " not the liardihood to deny" this and similar 
 accusations. Besides the notorious concurrence of the audience 
 whc attended the debate, in denying this charge, itis well known 
 to you that Dr. Elv had denied it in that very letter which this 
 of Mr. Kneelamd professes to answer. As Dr. Ely was our 
 moderator on the last day, he must have known whether I was 
 denied the farther use of the house or not. If I was not refused 
 this privilege, he must have known that my complaint of the 
 house being denied was untrue, and that to acquit me of raise- 
 hood was becoming an accomplice in my crime. Yet in his let- 
 ter to Mr. Kneeland. of the 11th ultimo, he has not only acquit- 
 ted n>e himself, but has declared that he believes m3' veraci- 
 ty to he unquestioned, not only among the hearers of our debate, 
 but all others except a few Universalists. The following are his 
 own words: 
 
 " His veracity, so far as I know, was never questioned by any 
 before he conin)enced a correspondence with you ; and since, 
 none doubt it but a few who believe in the universal salvation of 
 mankind. These seem tomeio doubt the veracity of God, and 
 to believe in the veracity of the * father of lies,' who said ' ye 
 shall not surely die;' so that it is no wonder if they should call 
 Mr. M'C'allaa/um" 
 
 This declaration of Dr. Ely is a denial of Mr. Kneeland's 
 charge, and certainly attaches guilt to his subsequent assertion, 
 that Dr. VAy had *' not the hardihood to deny" a thing so no- 
 toriously incorrect. 
 
 In >our letter you appear to think with some reason, that this 
 subject may be illustrated by the case of Mr. Ballou, and the 
 forged challenge which gave him such unnecessary alarm. Your 
 ■words are, "the refusal of Mr. Ballou to meet Mr. M't'alla 
 is not unlike \vhat has more than once been called a refusal 
 of the church in Lombard-street to continue the debate.'' 
 
 1 confess they are alike in four particidars at least. I. They 
 are both well known matters of fact. 2. The same moral in- 
 firmity made Mr Ballou refuse to commence a discussion, 
 which made Mr. Kneeland refuse to continue it. 3. Both these 
 facts have been alike denied by Mr. Morse. 4. They resemble 
 each other in both being made occasions of a charge of untruth 
 against an innocent person, which charge recoiled upon its guilty 
 
xlvii 
 
 fiibficator. They are therefore almost as much alike as two 
 peas, or as the two pillars of Hamau's gallows, which hung the 
 man who built them. 
 
 While noting resemblances, you might with safety have added 
 to the list Mr. Kneeland's refusal to meet me again, since the 
 debate was closed. The assertion of this fact he has impugned 
 in his letter of the 13th ultimo. In his communication of the 
 3d of September to Mr. Rinns, he says, " it will be perceived that 
 I have offered to meet Mr. M'Calla again, or in other vvords have 
 accepted his challenge, on condition that his friends will open one 
 of <^heir churches to accommodate the audience, as proof that thej 
 approve of his manner of conducting an argument, together with 
 some other conditions therein named, not one of which has he 
 complied with. Until therefore he shall comply with those con- 
 ditions, or others equally fair, I have nothing more to say to him 
 on the subject." 
 
 It is said that he has impressed some of his credulous follow- 
 ers with a belief, that a compliance o» my part with one of his 
 conditions such as finding a church, is all that he requires, to 
 another meeting. In the above article, however, he refers to his 
 letter of August 2d, published in the Franklin Gazette of Aug. 
 21st, and requires a compliance " with some other conditions 
 therein named," such as uniting with him in religious worship 
 and giving him my hand *' in token oi friendship P^ that is, of 
 christian fellowship, as he means. These conditions evidently 
 require me to do what the church of Christ has never yet done j 
 that is, to acknowledge the Christianity of an Unitarian. They 
 require me to violate a good conscience, and give up the point in 
 dispute, before he will discuss it with me. What he means by 
 other conditions " equally fair,^^ I know not, unless he intends 
 to require that in place of worshipping with him, his antagonist 
 must be gagged, and that instead of giving him one hand, I must 
 have botli tied behind my back ; for these conditions would be 
 equally fair with those required in his letter. If I were to re- 
 quire as an indispensable condition to another meeting, that he 
 should appear on the arena with a halter round his neck, every 
 one would consider it a retreat from the conflict : so when he 
 makes a sine qua nan of a moral impossibility, it is a refusal to 
 meet me. No man who was willing to submit his opinions to 
 an investigation of this sort ever required such terms. Mr. 
 Kneeland himself did not demand them until sore experience 
 taught him to do so. His doing so, however, proves that while 
 he boasts of success, he feels the realities of a defeat. His 
 church was built for the spread of Universalism. He pretends 
 that our debate promoted this end : yet the house cannot be ob- 
 tained for me to finish n\y argument! He pretends that the dis- 
 cussion multiplied proselytes to Universalism, and greatly in^ 
 creased the sale of his books: vet we cannot have the house a 
 
ilviii 
 
 few clays longer, least his books and his followers should multiply 
 like the lice and tlie locusts of Kgypt ! A man whose con- 
 science will permit him to speak and act so inconsistently, is 
 not likely to be scrupulous about writing a false report, and af- 
 terwards denying it. 
 
 In Mr. Kneeland's article and letter of September 1st and 13th 
 he charges me with saying that he sent me the first number of 
 this report. I knew tliat Mr. Jennings had sent me the number; 
 although I believed then, and believe now, that it was done with 
 Mr. Kneeland's knowledge, and by his authority. I therefore 
 stated in my letter to Mr. Norvell of August 10, ' that a copy 
 had been sent to each of the parties." This was accompanied 
 with an intimation of the quarter from which it came, as in the 
 following extract: "The first number of Mr. Kneeland's pro- 
 mised minutes of the discussion, professing to be taken in short 
 hand by one of his friends, has made its appearance. If there 
 were no danger of detection, it would be a tolerably good book 
 for promoting the views of its author. He has informed the pub- 
 lic that a copy has been sent to each of the parties." This is not 
 saying that Mr. Kneeland sent the book, but " that a copy has 
 been sent." The person who sent it is "its author. He has 
 informed tn- public" of the fact. It has two authors ; Mr. 
 Kneeland, who promised the mitiutes, and Mr. Jennings, who 
 professed to taki' them in short hand. I meant, and I said with 
 sufficient clearness, or at least with sufficient correctness, that 
 the latter had sent me the first number. Mr. Kneeland insists 
 upon it that I represented him as sending it. 
 
 He has perverted Dr. Ely's language in a similar way, though 
 in a much more inexcusable manner. In his letter to him, he 
 speaks as follows; "And after all, I am not disposed to call 
 Mr. M'Calla a liar, though you quoted those words, ' a liar !' 
 thereby insinuating that he had been so called by a few who be- 
 lieve in the universal salvation of mankind, among whom you 
 UNDOUBTEDLY meant to include me." Dr. V.\y said and meant 
 that a few Universalists had given me this name, because he had 
 been circumstantially informed of the fact, as it occurred in the 
 Lombard street church, a few minutes after the debate had clos- 
 ed. But he neither meant nor said that Mr. Kneeland was one 
 of these persons, as appears by his verbal declaration, and by his 
 letter. But, like the man who thought that every body he saw 
 laughing was deriding /tim, Mr. Kneeland says, " you undoubt- 
 edly meant to include ?7}e." I suppose that we cannot hereafter 
 speak of the world, the flesh and the devil, without undoubtedly 
 meaning to include Mr. Kneeland, Mr. Jennings and his "lit- 
 tle family dog ;" which famous little animal has, according to 
 Mr. Jennings's own account, become his preceptor in theology 
 and criticism.* I could not give you a better piece of advice 
 
 • See No. 20 
 
xlix 
 
 than to j^uard you against both the teacher and his evil-doing 
 disciple, in the words of Paul to the Phillippians : " Beware of 
 dogs, beware of evil- workers." 
 
 Although Mr. Jennings is the only one who has openly ac- 
 knowledged his obligation to this Univeralist professor of theo- 
 logy, he is not the oniy cynical writer who defends his system. 
 Perhaps you are acquainted with a certain moderator, who after 
 a wholesome chastisement from the Rev, J. M. imitated Mr. 
 Ballon, by snarling an insinuation against the intellectual sound- 
 ness of his castigator. Excuse me for giving an extract from 
 Mr. Kneeland's last letter to Dr. Ely in illustration of the same 
 point. By way of administering a mild and charitable Univer- 
 salist reproof to the doctor, for an insinuation which originated 
 in Mr. Kneeland's own guilty suspicion, he tells him that he 
 considers such insinuations " far beneath the dignity of either 
 the gentleman or the christian. It is more charitable," conti- 
 nues this temperate and polished character ; *' It is more chari- 
 table to impute such intemperate language, as that which has 
 been used by Mr. M'Calla and his vindicator^ to a disturbed 
 imagination^ or a disordered brain, than it is to say that it pro- 
 ceeds from a worse motive. To say that such language proceeds 
 from a mind that is sound, is only to acknowledge, in other 
 words, that it comes from a heart desperately wicked." 
 
 The longer our correspondence continues, the clearer insight 
 we obtain into the means by which Universalists defend their 
 creed. They first charge their opponent with undoubtedly mean- 
 ing some trine which he never meant nor said. A solemn court 
 of inquiry is then convened, composed of the wisest heads that 
 can be found, on Mr. Kneeland's shoulders, and at Mr. Jen- 
 nings's elbow. In such a court, the accused and his vindicator 
 too, are immediately found guilty of ungentlemcmly and unchris- 
 tian conduct, proceeding from a heart desperately wicked. Then 
 sweet charity begins to agitate their tender bosoms, and they 
 set their heads and elbows closer together, to devise some pious 
 fraud, some plan of mercy, whereby these desperately wicked^ 
 ungentlemanly and unchristian characters may be lovingly trans- 
 mitted from the jail to the hospital. Like certain judges of old- 
 who handed over their orthodox victims to the secular arm, with 
 earnest entreaties to spare their precious lives, these bland jud- 
 ges of ours, charitably wish that we could only be immured for 
 fife, and considered by the community as unfit for society ! If 
 this were the doom of Mr. J. M. and Dr. E. and all their vindi- 
 cators, and the vindicators of truth, then each of their churches 
 might be furnished with a Universalist pastor who is compos men- 
 tis ; a qualification which is exceedingly important to the minis- 
 terial office, and which is to be found no where else than with 
 Messrs. Ballou and Kneeland, Mr. Morse, Mr. Jennings, and 
 his canine instructor. 
 
 G 
 
1 
 
 These five accomplislied specimens of sanity, chanty, and 
 Universalisni, liave not disappointed my expectations in any ar- 
 tifice which they have used to pollute my reputation. Hefore 
 the commencement of the present controversy, iny friends fairly 
 warned me of the consequences, in the tenor of the old proverb, 
 with which, no doubt, Mr. Jennings's experience coincides, "he 
 that lies down with dogs must rise up with fleas." Yet, through 
 grace, I am willing to bear all for the sake of that good cause, 
 which, through the power of God, is moving forward, although, 
 I may say with my Divine Redeemer, that "dogs have compas- 
 sed me :"the assembly of the wicked have enclosed me." How- 
 ever great may be their numbers and their industry, and how- 
 ever cunning they wish to be in their unprincipled malignity, it 
 is evident that their counsels, like those of Absalom, are left to 
 judicial infatuation. What more visionary scheme could a Uni- 
 versalist himself invent, than that of Mr. Jennings, to make the 
 world believe that without any human aid, he could record from 
 the lips of rapid speakers, with oithographical and even orthoe- 
 pical accuracy, long dissertations on Hebrew and Greek words, 
 when he does not pretend to an acquaintance with even the al- 
 phabets of these languages } He has made critical annotations 
 to my pretended speeches. These, like Mr. Kneeland's writ- 
 ings, are an affectation of great familiarity with Hebrew and 
 Greek literature. Is this consistent with the fact, that he does 
 not- know the names nor the powers of the letters composing 
 those words which he pietends to have written ? Without this 
 knowledge himself, and without the aid of any other human be- 
 ing, this Universalist wiseacre would have the world believe that 
 he can unlock the ti-easures of lexicons, and concordances, and 
 translations in the dead languages ! He must surely think not 
 only that the parties are insane, but that the whole community is 
 run mad. Such a tale carries in itself its own refutation. The 
 man who can invent and utter such a story must have an under- 
 standing as beclouded as his conscience is depraved. 
 
 Yet, strange as it may seem. Mr. Kneelaud, in the present 
 sinking state of his affairs, has caught at this straw, to keep him 
 from going to the bottom. He has even made repeated assault* 
 upon the character of my head and heart, because I will not 
 join him and his short-hand aid-de-camp in this mutiny against 
 common sense. What makes this Universalist conspiration 
 against sanity and integrity the more absurd, is that Mr. Knee- 
 land's participation in Mr. Jennings's celebrated minutes of the 
 debate is proved by frequent newspaper publications of his own. 
 While I proceed to show this, will you be so kind as to remem- 
 ber thnt your Mr. Jenninj;.? has said in the Franklin Gazette, of 
 August 2, " I therefore publickly acknowledge myself to be the 
 sole publisher of the said debate, and as publicly disown being 
 
li 
 
 engaged with either of the parties, directly or indirectly. ^^ Com- 
 pare this with Mr. Kneelai.ds previous declaration, published 
 July 21, tiiat "the whole discussion has been taken down in 
 short-hand by a stenographer employed for the purpose.' ' Who 
 it is that has employed this unengaged reporter must be learned 
 from the Universalists, one of whom, not being awaieof the cheat, 
 declared to several persons, of whom I was one, that the vestry 
 of his church, of whose integrity he appeared to have a high opi- 
 nion, intended to appropriate !lie surplus proceeds of the work, to 
 some charitable purpose. This he said by way of recommend- 
 ing the book to our patronage. Knowing that Mr. Kneeland 
 was the soul of that Vestry, and knowing that ' the tender mer- 
 cies of the wicked are cruel,' the plan did not meet my approba- 
 tion. 
 
 Whether Mr. Jennings is or is not "engaged with either of 
 the parties, directly or indirectly," will appear farther from Mr, 
 Kneeland's " caution to the public"' against the catch-penny 
 pamphlet, called the Substance of the debute. In this notice, 
 published in the National Gazette. July 23d, he pledges his word 
 that the public shall be furnished with "the real discussion in 
 full. ' His words are the following : "A copy-right of the real 
 discussion has been secured, and will soon be published in full." 
 In this instance he makes no allusion to Mr. Jennings, and in the 
 former he does not mention his name, but only speaks of him as 
 " a stenographer employed for the purpose." In both cases he 
 makes the promise on his own responsibility; Why could he not 
 make the same engagements with regard to the pamphlet which 
 he had just condemned as a catch-penny ? Evidently because 
 he had nothing to do with that work ; whereas Mr. Jennings's 
 catch-penny was subject to his control. This is the only rea- 
 son which a reasonable man can give for promising, on his own 
 responsibility, that it shall be the real discussion in full. 
 
 In Mr. Jennings's article of August 7, he says : "I am the 
 reporter of neither Mr. Kneeland nor Mr. M'Calla." Compare 
 this with Mr. Kneeland's letter of August 2. The following 
 are his words : " As to the new matter to which I had not an 
 opportunity to reply [Ps. 9: 5] since it makes nothing in your 
 favor, nor against any of my arguments, a bare note in a very 
 few lines will be all the reply I shall need." Although in the 
 debate Mr. Kneeland refused me the liberty of finishing m^ ar- 
 gument, he gave me the last speech. He voluntarily resigned 
 the privilege of replying then, and has ever since refused to open 
 the discussion anew. Notwithstanding this, he has no doubt of 
 an opportunity to reply now, and thus virtually have the last 
 speech in Mr. Jennings's disinterested and impartial report ! 
 
 As Mr. Kneeland had informed the public that a person was 
 " employed for the purpose," it was expected that he would one 
 
lii 
 
 day or other condescend to let us know his name. According- 
 ly, in a notice of August 6th, he tells us that these minutes were 
 *' taken in short-hand by R. L. Jennings." Although this no- 
 tice announced the work as now in press, and described its cha- 
 racter, and detailed its terms of sale and place of deposit, it was 
 not still Mr. Jennings's notice but Mr. Kneeland's. The form- 
 er is not yet known as an independent editor, but the latter of 
 this promising pair, who had first told us that a stenographer 
 was employed, then promised to give us the " real discussion in 
 full," now comes forward over the head of Mr. Jennings, and 
 informs us of his terms of supplying purcliasers, subscribers and 
 agents ; and closes by telling the public that the " books may be 
 had at the Rev. Mr, Kneeland^s, or at the bookstores generally 
 in the city. " 
 
 It is evident that the first plan adopted by these partners in 
 iniquity was for Mr. Jennings to keep himself out of view, and 
 to pass off their spurious minutes as an authentic report, ap- 
 proved by the moderators, but particularly authoi'ized by both 
 the parties 5 "knowing," as Mr. Jennings says, "that with 
 their approbation the work would be better received by the pub- 
 lic." For this purpose a general rumor was industriously pro- 
 pagated, that Mr. Kneeland and myself acted in concert. By 
 means of an Universalist who really thought the story true, a 
 near relative of my own was impressed with a belief of its cor- 
 rectness, until I undeceived him. As Mr. Kneland had already 
 in his own opinion, gained one object by writing for both parties, 
 without my consent, he tried what could be done by the same 
 method in carrying this point also. For this purpose, when he 
 published in the National Gazette his caution against the rival 
 catch-penny, and promised to the public his own catch-penny, 
 which he nicknamed " the real discussion," he added the follow- 
 ing note : viz. "Printers who have advertised the above work 
 will do an act of justice to the parties by inserting the above." 
 The effect which Mr. Kneeland knew this would produce, and 
 which it did produce very decidedly and extensively, was con- 
 siderably increased and confirmed by my being precluded from 
 the privilege of exposing the imposition in the same paper. 
 
 Although this artifice caught many a penny from persons who 
 have since declared themselves grossly deceived, Mr. Kneeland 
 found that it would finally fail. As the public must soon be 
 convinced that the report was disavowed and condemned by me, 
 he was determined to wash his hands of it, lest it should be 
 treated as a Universalist book. The plan must be altered. The 
 responsibility must now be devolved upon some impartial per- 
 son. Under this character it is that Mr, Jennings makes his 
 entre before the public as the sole editor of the work. A re- 
 port is circulated that he is a Baptist j of course my Triends must 
 
llii 
 
 buy his book. In the eommencement of this new campaign, he 
 blusters in the papers about not being able to find nse in the 
 city? insinuating that 1 retreat to the country for fear of meet- 
 ing him. At last, after riding twelve miles tor his accommoda- 
 tion, I obtained an interview with this new acquaintance, and 
 asked him to what religious denomination he belonged. He at 
 first insinuates that he is a Baptist. Upon a cross examination, 
 he is obliged to confess himself a Universalist. As this occur- 
 red in the presence of witnesses, he considered farther dissimu- 
 lation in this particular of no use, and therefore turned out Uni- 
 versalist preacher immediately after. Although this was done 
 under the patronage of Mr. Kneeland, who had, with his impli- 
 cit approbation, promised and proposed the report on his own 
 responsibility, and represented Mr. Jennings as "■ employed for 
 the purpose," the latter now declares himself "the sole publish- 
 er of the said debate," " the reporter of neither Mr. Kneeland 
 nor Mr. M'Calla," and is daring enough to " disown being en- 
 ^c^crfwith either of the parties, directly or indirectly.''^ 
 
 Being thus embarked in a vessel which Mr. Kneeland had 
 abandoned, the disciple hoists the same false colors under which 
 the master had sailed. Notwithstanding my frequent public 
 condemnations of his report, he persists, number after number, 
 in an attempt to persuade the community that I have not found 
 one fault in it, and of course that it appears to me correct. Take 
 his postscript on the cover of the fourth number as a specimen : 
 viz. "This fourth number is respectfully presented to the 
 public ; not with increased confidence of its correctness, 
 but with increased satisfaction that the former numbers have been 
 received with such general approbation, not one error having 
 been pointed out, according to the above request, in any one of 
 the three first numbers." The fifth number would, doubtless, 
 have been adorned with a similar postscript, if Mr. Jennings had 
 not known that it contained an invented address of one of the 
 moderators; which goes clearly to prove that this man is essen- 
 tially deficient either in skill or integrity as a reporter. With 
 divine permission this shall be more fully proved in a short time. 
 
 While Mr. Kneeland was the ostensible editor, he advertised 
 without hesitation that " the books may be had at the Rev. Mr. 
 Kneeland's." Since he has become ashamed 'of his authorship, it 
 is necessary to cloak his activity in selling the work. For this 
 purpose Mr. Jennings, in his article of the 11th ultimo, tells us 
 that the books were sold at Mr. Kneeland's house merely be- 
 cause it was a more central situation than his own, and that his 
 brother, a lad, stayed there during the day, as a salesman! A 
 very important point this, when the author had already told us 
 that the bookstores generally were engaged in the sale. But if 
 every bookseller were in Mr. Kneeland's situation, which how- 
 
Uv 
 
 ever is not the case, Mr. Jennings's fruitful invention could 
 easily furiiisli them with a lad apiece to bear the responsibility. 
 Howditferent is this complicated and contradictory system of 
 Universalist chicanery from the plain dealing of orthodox iiones- 
 ty! As soon as possible, ihope to lay before the publ c mv own 
 book, with my own name to it. I wish no one else to write it or 
 to father it for me. 
 
 Octobers, 1824. W. L. M'CALLA, 
 
 No. 23. 
 
 FROM THE DEMOCRATIC PRESS, OF OCT. T. 
 
 UNI VERS ALISM AND UNITARIANISM. 
 
 Mr. Binns: — In the universal joy of Americans, occasioned by 
 (he visit of General La Fayette,. the Clergy of all denominations 
 have a cordial participation. In Philadelphia, they have made 
 an open expression of a sentiment which is every where felt, 
 though generally in silence. On Friday the 1st inst. they wait- 
 ed upon our illustrious visitant in a bod v. They consisted of 
 Roman Catholics, Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists., German 
 Lutherans, and Swedish Lutherans. Besides Presbyterians ot 
 the General Assembly, there were members of the Scotch Re- 
 formed and Associate Churches, as also of the Dutch Reformed, 
 German Reformed and several other denominations, amounting 
 as 1 was told, to about seventy persons. How ever these diiiered 
 in their views of doctrine and worship, government and disci- 
 pline, they appeared to agree in these three things at least. 1. 
 In placing liishop White, the venerable Chaplain of the Revo- 
 lutionary Congress, in the chair. 2. In loving our national guest, 
 the companion of Washington, as an instrument in the hand of 
 God, for the establishment of American Liberty. 3. In exclud- 
 ing from their procession those clergymen, (falsely so called,) 
 who deny the supreme deity of Jesus CUnist, and a future state 
 of rewards and punishments. Those who are called Universal- 
 ists here, deny these and other essential truths of Christianity. 
 Neither they nor the Unitarians made their appearance, nor were 
 they invited. In this, the orthodox clergy acted as their fathers 
 did in the churches of England and Scotland, of France and 
 Switzerland, Germany and Holland, Bohemia and Poland ; as 
 did the Hussites and Lollards, the Waldenses and Albigenses, 
 tlie Claudians and Paulicians; like the churches and councils of 
 Greece and Rome in their best days, which rejected such 
 jnen as Arius and Sabellius; and like the Apostles, who rejected 
 Cerinthus and Simon Magus. 
 
 By the 9th article and 4th section of the Constitution of this 
 State, it will be seen that none but such a Universalist or Athe- 
 
Iv 
 
 ist, as denies " a future state of rewards and punishments shall, 
 on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any 
 office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth." God 
 has declared that " he that believeth on the Son hath everlast- 
 ing life, and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life, but 
 the wrath of God abideth on him.'' 
 
 W. L. M'CALLA. 
 
 Philadelphia^ Oct. 6th, 1824. 
 
 No. 24. 
 Although, upon a comparison of the foliowinp communica- 
 tion in the Democratic Press, of October I4th, with No. 17, 
 and other productions of Mr. Morse, it will be found that he 
 has got some man to lend bis pen, who had too much sense 
 and respectability to risque his name ; yet as Mr. Moise is 
 responsible for its contents, it shows him to be a decided 
 Unitarian in doctrine and practice. In doctrine, because he 
 denies the Trinity, and the existence of a Devil. In prac- 
 tice, because he denies what he knows to be true; that is, that 
 those, who, like him and Mr. Kneeland, reject the doctrine 
 of a future punishment, are disqualified by the constitution of 
 the state, from holding offices of trust or "profit. 
 
 For the Democratic Press. 
 ENDLESS MISERY AND TRINITARIANISM. 
 
 Mr. Binns.— In your paper of the 6th inst. a short communi- 
 cation made its appearance under the title of " Universalism and 
 Unitarianism," which for childishness and arrogance exceeds, iu 
 my humble opinion, any thing before presented to the public 
 from the pen of the self-constituted champion of reputed ortlio- 
 doxy whose signature it bears. The purport of the whole ap- 
 pears to be simply to inform the world of the fact, that " 7, (W. 
 L. M'Calla) have been in person to see Gen. La Fayette: whilst 
 some others, less officious, or less greedy after mushroom popular- 
 ity than myself, have not availed themselves of the opportunity" 
 
 1 -^I^a/'^^ ^'^"^^ ^^ ^^^ apparent, yet it is not the sole object 
 which Mr, M-Calla had m view in presenting the public with this 
 ! mportant item of intelligence, lie thought he had now too good 
 an opportunity to let pass of irritating universalists and unitari- 
 ans in a body, as well as attempting to prejudice the public mind 
 against them We have the satisfaction, however, to believe, 
 that Mr. xM'Calla stands entirely alone in this affair, and that no 
 sing e one of the liberal minded clergy in this citv, nay of the 
 whole country, will thank him for his officiousness; at this par- 
 ticular time, in striving to mar the reputation of those whose only 
 crxme is tliat their religious faith does not exactlv corresnon'd 
 with his own. "' ' 
 
hi 
 
 It is indcctl truly strange that Mr. M'Calla, on an occasion 
 ■vvliich called forth the gratitude of every heart, and in the midst 
 of tiiat universal harmony which pervaded all classes, sects, and 
 parties, could not have suppressed that spirit of maliciousness 
 for which he has on some former occasions distinguished himself. 
 The joy produced by the presence of the illustrious visitor, the 
 friend of civil and religious liberty, was pure and unmingled, and 
 would have remained uninterrupted, had it not been for the peev- 
 ishness of a solitary individual. Mr. M'Calla stated, that they all 
 agreed " in excluding from their procession those clergymen 
 (falsely so called) who deny the supreme deity of Jesus Chnst,''&c. 
 I would ask who excluded them? ffliy the Clergy. But did tlie 
 authority of the city, or did General La Fayette himself exclude 
 them.^ Surely not; iov universalists did visit him, and he treated 
 them with equal attention and respect, evincing thereby that 
 nobleness of mind which has marked his steps in every transac- 
 tion of his life. 
 
 Universalists and unitarians had the same privilege of forming 
 a procession that others had, and perhaps would have made as 
 respectable an appearance ('but for their numbers) as the proces- 
 sion did, in whose ranks was numbered the modest Mr. M'Calla. 
 The only sanction which Mr. M'Calla has given for the pro- 
 ceedings of which he has borne so conspicuous a part, is the con- 
 duct of those whose faith accords with presbyterians; but we have 
 great reason to be thankful that in this land of freedom and in- 
 dependence, such contracted views do not form the standard by 
 %vhich to judge of a man's piety or merit. As to his classing 
 universalists and atheists togetlier, he has manifested either too 
 much ignorance or too much wilfulness to render it worthy of 
 comment. What he has extracted from the 9th article of the 
 constitution of this state, he as well knows does not disqualify 
 universalists from holding oflices of trust or profit, as he does, 
 that many of the civil officers, not only of this state, but of the 
 United States, are universalists and unitarians. Before Mr. 
 M 'Calla boasts any more of his having visited the General, 
 while some others did not, which privilege (as he ivoidd insinuate) 
 was denied them., on account of believing the doctrine of univer- 
 salism or unitarianism, I hope he will have the goodness to in- 
 form the public what qualified the most distinguished citizens of 
 Boston and Cambridge for the company of Gen. La Fayette.: 
 or what qualified the Hon. John Q. Mams for the General's so- 
 ciety while he tarried in this city ! It will be easy for all to con- 
 clude who know the religious faith of the individuals to whom I 
 have just alluded, that their qualifications did not consist in em- 
 bracing the rfoc<rmeo/f/t 5 Trinity, of their believing in the exis- 
 tence of the devil as a '■'• fallen angel,^^ nor of their belief of the in- 
 terminable torments of the wicked. 
 Philad. Oct. 11, 1824. WILLIAM MORSE. . 
 
Ivil 
 
 No. 25 
 DEBATE ON UNIVERSALISM. 
 
 FROM THE FRANKLIN GAZETTE, OF OCT. 21, 
 
 Mr. Norvell : As my report of tlie late theological discussion 
 IS now completed, and will be presented to the public in a few 
 days, I beg leave to trouble you with the following remarks, in 
 answer to some of Mr. M'Calla's statements in relation to me, 
 which appeared in your Gazette of the 7th instant, presuming 
 that if I can show that the most prominent of his assertions are 
 not founded on fact, it would only be intrusion to attempt to 
 prove that the remainder are equally unfounded and unjust. He 
 insists, that / was employed by the Universalist church to report 
 the discussion. This is' not a fact. Had he taken the pains to 
 have inquired, he ivould have found that it was a Mr, Stetson 
 who was engaged by the church, which engagement Mr. Stetson 
 could not fulfil, in consequence of the discussion being protracted 
 longer than he could remain in the city ; or for some other cause 
 to me unknown. J then, being the only person who had notes 
 of the ivhole of the debate, considered it a duty I owed to the pub- 
 lic to publish my report of it, knowing that it could not be ob- 
 tained from any other source. Immediately after I had made 
 knoivn my intention, Mr. M'Calla appeared in your Gazette, 
 and stated that the work was " wwaw/Aonzerf," because, I sup- 
 pose published without his authority. I, in my reply of August 
 7, stated that I considered myself the reporter of neither Mr. 
 Kneeland nor Mr. M'Calla, not having been engaged by either 
 of them nor by any othtsr individual in. existence, but the report- 
 er of the public, whom alone I considered my authority for pub ■ 
 lishingit. From the purest motives, I undertook and have com- 
 pleted the laborious task; namely, from a conscientious belief 
 that it will be useful to the public^ Had any other person pos- 
 sessed the materials for furnishing the report in full, as I have 
 given it, I should have been glad to have been freed fron\ so un- 
 thankful an office; for it is well known to those who are in the 
 habit of reporting debates in congress, in the state legislatures, 
 or in the houses of parliament in Great Britain, that speakers 
 do not always repay with kindness the faithful labours of a re- 
 porter. Speakers are apt to forget many things they have stated j 
 the more faithful, therefore, tlie reporter is in reporting expres- 
 sions used by them in the warmth ot debate, the less they thank 
 him for his fidelity, when, in their cooler moments, those expres- 
 'sions meet their eyes, to which their heads, I will not say their 
 hearts, have given birth. The case of Mr. M'Calla, then, is not 
 singular, he is not the first who has denied his speeches, nor 
 is it likely he will be the last. It is natural for a man of san^ 
 guine temperament, in the warmth of argument, to use expres* 
 
 H 
 
Iviii 
 
 sions uhich, on leflectioii, lie uould perhaps gladly expunge 
 from the reporter's minutes,: but which, in this instance, are giv- 
 en to the world as they were delivered. Had I been less taithfiil, 
 it is probable I should have escaped the chastening pen of Mr. 
 M'Calla; and, as the author of a little pamphlet which appear- 
 ed immediately after the close of the debate, have passed along 
 unheeded. But Mr. M'Calla, as soon as I made known my in- 
 tention of publishing my report, being aware of the poivers of the 
 stenographic art, was determined to be beforehand with me; he 
 therefore endeavoured to prejudice the public against my report 
 by publicly denouncing it as " spurious*' before he had seen a 
 line of it! It is true, he has since attempted to provei\\2d it is 
 *' partial, unsatisfactory and spurious;" but how? Not as a can- 
 did man would, by pointing out, when requested, one or more of 
 the real or supposed errors, as a proof that he had something t» 
 ground his assertions on : No! but by telling the world that I 
 am a UniversalistI This, he thinks, is cjuite sufficient to justify 
 himinanv thing he ma}^ be pleased, in the plenitude of his cha- 
 rity, to ailedge against me, no matter how seriously it may af- 
 fect my interest or my character. This proof of my having 
 given an unfaithful report may do very well, coming from Mr. 
 M'Calla, for the bigotted, the illiterate, and the unthinking part 
 of the community; but it will not convince a man of sober reflec- 
 tion ; for he will see, immediately, that by pursuing this traim 
 of reasoning, it would be morally impossible to have a faithful 
 report. This debate was not the aifair of a select few, nor of a 
 party, but one in which all are interested, whether Pagan, Ma- 
 hometan, Jew or Christian ; and between the two points of con- 
 troversy their is no intermediate belief; for every individual in 
 existence, if he think at all on the subject, believes that there i* 
 a future state of punishment in another world, or there is not. As 
 I have thought and examined a great deal upon this subject, I 
 must necessarily believe with oneorotlier of the two disputants. 
 Suppose then, I believed with Mr .M-Calla, that there is a'future 
 state of punishment in an immortal state; by the very same rule 
 that he attempts to prove that a Universalist can not possibly 
 give a faithful report, he equally proves the utter impossibility of 
 a faithful report being given by one who is not a Universalist, or 
 by any other individual in existence. 
 
 Mr. M'Calla's reasoning upon this subject, however, is con- 
 sistent with the system of logic by whicli he can demonstrate to 
 the satisfaction of any person, as narrow-minded as himself, that 
 if a universalist were to give a loaf of bread t(.' a poor famishing 
 fellow creature to keep him from actual starvation, or to give him 
 a blanket in the depth of winter to keep his slow circulating 
 blood from freezing in his veins; or if he, as the San»aritan of 
 old, were to administer to the wants of a distressed 8>)d woii'uU.d 
 traveller; in any one of these cases, this Mr. M'Ca'ila, with a 
 
lit 
 
 wruly Levitical spirit, would prove it was a very ivicked, cruel 
 action! Now, sir, this is not a mere assertion of inine; it is what 
 he, who styles hiniseli' a servant of God, a minister of the meek, 
 the benevolent Jesus, has himself informed you. He stated in Lie 
 communication pf the 7th instant, that a (Jniversalist told him, 
 and several others who were present, that the surplus proceeds of 
 Biy report were to be given for some charitable purpose. " rhis 
 he, the Universalist, said by way of recommending the book to 
 our patronage. Knoiving that the tender mercies of the ivicked 
 are cruel, tao plan did not meet my approbationP^ This is the lan- 
 guage of a " s'lf-styled" minister of Christ : I have borrowed 
 Mr. M'Calla's expression " self-styled," and now give you my 
 authority for applying it to him. The scriptures declare that 
 *' If a man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Has 
 the Spirit of Clirist been manifested by this revereiul gentleman, 
 in his unprovoked and unfounded attempt to asperse my charac 
 ter as a reporter, without producing a solitary proof that he had 
 any ot.er ground for it than that I differed with him in point of 
 faithj unless indeed it be, that as he is going to publish the dis- 
 cussion himself, he wishes my book out of the way, to make room 
 for his own, reasoning as the Ambitious Alexander, that as the 
 earth cannot bear two suns, neit!.er can the christian world bear 
 two books. This indeed may be the sole cause of all his spleen, 
 but the man who could descend to such meanness to accomplish 
 his purpose must have an understanding as beclouded as his con- 
 science is depraved. But admitting all Mr. M'Calla has stated 
 about "conspirations," "engaged reporters," and "deputy 
 publishers," to be true, what will it amount to, if I can prove 
 that my report is fiiithful, satisfactory and impartial? This I shall 
 no\y do, and let the public decide between mere assertion and 
 positive proof. In his communication of the 7th instant, he says, 
 " It is evident that the first plan adopted by these partners in 
 iniquity was for Mr. Jennings to keep himself out of view, and 
 to pass off their spurious minutes &s an authentic report approved 
 by the moderators." Now to shew how regardless this man is of 
 truth, and of my reputation, I have by particular request obtain- 
 ed trom these very moderators certijicates of the correctness of 
 my report, which I here insert : 
 
 From the Rev. Br. Ely. 
 At the request of Mr. Jennings, I would state, that I have 
 not been able, since the publication of his "Minutes of a Dis- 
 cussion," &c. to read more than fifty pages of the work, which 
 is less than one sixth part of the whole. So soon as [ can find 
 tune to read the whole, I shall freely communicate, at his re- 
 quest, ray opinion of the same. He does not pretend, in every 
 senteyice, to give the words of the speakers, and therefore they 
 cannot be considered as responsible for any thing contained m 
 the Minutes, until they admit themselves to have spoken it, or 
 
else are proved to have uttered the same. For my part, I wish 
 the Minutes may be attentively read, which will prepare inqui- 
 rers tor the subsequent perusal of Mr. M'Calla's expected pub- 
 lication on the controver.sy; and for the estabUshment of their 
 ov n minds on this important question, whether there is any 
 punishment for impenitent sinners after the present life, or not ? 
 During the debate of Tuesday afternoon, July 13lh, I was ab- 
 sent; so that I can only express an opinion on the ^rstforti/ 
 pageSy and the short speech attributed to myself, on pages 234 
 and 235, concerning which I am free to declare, that 1 discover 
 in these forty-t^^ o paj^es, so for as my memory serves me, no 
 important error or omission. I uttered more than M>. Jennings 
 has recorded, and the other speakers may have done the same. 
 Had E attempted, after speaking, to give my own words, 1 do 
 not know that I should have been literally and verbally accu- 
 rate, any more than the stenographer. I did not intend to con- 
 vey the idea., nor can I say that Mr. Jennings has attributed it 
 to mc that Iwould have no objection to hear Mr. Kneeland preachy 
 under any circumstances^ wliich would imply, that I thought 
 him a minister ot the gospel, or of the true religion; ybr 7 
 would not, after knowing his sentiments, receive him into my 
 house in the character of a servant of Christ. As a man, I will 
 shoio him any kindness in my power; but I conceive myseff 
 positively forbidden to countenance any one, in any manner, as 
 a minister of the gospel, who brings an essentially different gos- 
 pel from that contained in the bible. After all, 1 think the forty- 
 two pages, of which [ now give my opinion, as just a statement 
 of what was uttered in my hearing, as could be expected of any 
 stenographer, who should attempt to follow men of ready ut- 
 terance, in a debate of twenty hours. 
 
 iZRA STILES ELY. 
 Philadelphia, October 12, 1824. 
 
 It will be remembered that these forty pages, to the correct- 
 ness of which the doctor has certified, contain the greater part 
 ot those very three speeches and a fragm.ent of a speech attri- 
 buted to W. L M'Calla, and which he in the Gazette in the 
 most positive terms disowned ! The speech of Dr, Ely, havings 
 nothing to do with the argument, I did not attempt to give in full 
 as delivered, but have merely given an outline of it, and this i 
 submitted to the doctor for his correction, before I sent it to the 
 press ; the only alteration he made was substituting week-day 
 for any day in the week: yet this outline of his speech, cor- 
 rected and approved by himself, Mr. M'Calla calls "an in- 
 vented address," which I put into the mouth of one of the 
 moderators ! Let him settle this point with Dr. Ely and his own 
 conscience. As to the correctness of the remainder of the 
 report, I beg leave to present you with the following certifi- 
 
cates, though I am fully aware they do not agree with the un- 
 foanded assertions of Mr. MTalla, nor will they " go clearly to 
 prove that this man is essenliall)' deficient in skill, or in inte- 
 grity as a reporter," as the truly christian spirited Mr. M'Lalla 
 basely insinuated in his last communication. The following 
 have been selected from those received. — 
 
 From the reverend William Hogan, late pastor of St. Mary's 
 Church. South Fourth-street, and the reverend William 
 Morse, pastor of the Second Universalist Church, Callowhill- 
 street. 
 To the public. 
 
 We, the subscribers, hereby certify, that we have examined 
 the "Minutes" of the "Theological Discussion" between the 
 rererend Abner Kneeland and the reverendWilliam L. M'Calla, 
 which were taken in short hand by Mr. R. L. Jennings, and, in 
 our opinion, they contain a true and faithful report of that dis- 
 cussion, without any omissions or additions affecting the argu- 
 ments of either of the disputants. 
 
 WILLIAM HOGA?f, 
 WILLIAM MORSE, 
 Philadelphia, October 13, 1824. Moderators. 
 
 Certificate from the reverend Abner Kneeland, pastor of the 
 first Independent Church of Christ, called Universalist, 
 Lombard-street. 
 Having carefully examined the report of the late "Discus- 
 sion" between the reverend William L. M'Calla and myself, as 
 taken in short hand and published by Mr. Jennings, I hereby 
 certify, that the arguments are essentially the same as delivered 
 by us, in all their parts, together with the style and manner in 
 which they were delivered: and although in many places I can 
 perceive some verbal difference, yet, as far as my memory 
 serves me, there is nothing added or omitted ivhich in any man- 
 ner affects the arguments on either side. 
 
 ABNER KNEELAND. 
 Philadelphia, October 16th, 1824. 
 
 Certificate from D. Francis Condie, M. D. 
 Mr. R. L. Jennings, 
 
 Dear sir — I received your request this morning, and in reply, 
 beg leave to state, that 1 attended during the whole of the dis- 
 cussion between the reverend A. Kneeland and reverend W. L. 
 M'Calla, on the subject of the punishment for sin, part of 
 which I myself took down : I have perused with attention your 
 "Minutes" of that discussion, as published; and have the plea- 
 sure of certifying to their correctness. You have not orly 
 presented every argument offered on both sides of the question, 
 
1« 
 
 but, what is always a difficult task, hare retained in the report 
 the peculiar style of each party, and most generally theW very 
 words. I may further add, that those with whom I have con- 
 versed, in relation to the work, as well those who oppose a« 
 those who believe in the doctrine held by the Universalist 
 Churches, have all borne testimony to its correctness. 
 
 Yours, D FRANCIS COISDIE. 
 
 South Fifth-street, October 13th, 1«?4. 
 
 The reverend Dr. Wylie, of the Presbyterian Church, Ele- 
 venth-street, has given me permission to certify to the following 
 effect- 
 That from motives of curiosity rather than approbation, he 
 attended at the church in Lombard-street, during tlie debate 
 between the reverend Abner Kneeland and the reverend W. L. 
 M'Calla, three times, in the whole about two hours and a half, 
 and although he has seen in the public papers, that the report is 
 not acknowledged by the Rev. Mr. M'C'alla to be correct, yet 
 truth obliges him to declare, that he can not discover the 
 least difference, even in expression, between what is contained 
 in the report and what he heard delivered by the speakers when 
 at church. 
 
 More certificates of the correctness of the report have been 
 received, but the above, it is presumed, will be considered 
 fully satisfactory. R. L. JEN N INGS. 
 
 I have trespassed, sir, largely upon your columns, and upon 
 the patience of your readers, but it is with the hope that tiiis 
 is the last time that I shall trouble you on this subject, for Mr. 
 M'Calla must convince me that the ears of those gentlemen, 
 who have certified to the correctness of my report, though 
 perhaps not so long as his own, are not capable of receiving 
 sounds, and their memories not capable of retaining them, 
 before I shall consider myself under any necessity of answering 
 any more of his publications, having here given sufficient proof to 
 satisfy any unprejudiced mind of the correctness of my report, 
 and it is presumed that even Mr. M'Calla, wide as he ranges in the 
 field of bare assertion, will not feel himself at liberty to state that 
 the respectable members of his own church, or the others, 
 whose integrity is equally unquestionable, are my partners in 
 iniquity, nor that they have given their names to aid in '* pass- 
 ing off spurious minutes as an authentic report.'' But if he 
 should be disposed to say so, let his future communications be 
 addressed to them, and not indirectly to 
 
 Yours respectfully, R. L. JENNINGS. 
 
Ixiii 
 No. 26. 
 
 J-KOM THE FRANKLIN GAZETTE, OF OOT. 23. 
 
 DEBATE ON UNIVERSALISM. 
 
 Although there was no reason, from the beginning, to hope that 
 such a character as Mr. Jennings would make a fair report of my 
 argument as far as it went^ my apprehensions on this subject 
 Were not, to the best of my recollection, publicly expressed until 
 after his first number made its appearance : yet he has repeated- 
 ly published that Mr.M'Calla "denounced the report altogether^" 
 *'before he saw it," " before he saw a line of it." This is the 
 burthen of his song in yesterday's Gazette. Mr. Kneeland also 
 has published that I denounced the vit^ovidi% altogether spurious. 
 Some of their followers have taken this for granted, and used it 
 with that industry which might be expected. Mr. Kneeland and 
 Mr, Jennings refer, I suppose, to a communication for the Frank- 
 lin Gazette of August 5, a few days before the appearance of the 
 first number. In this I said that I was, " contrary to a written 
 agreement, compelled to a preiiiature close, and afterwards de- 
 nied an opportunity of finishing.'* For this reason, his intended, 
 and as yet unseen work, is called a spurious production. This is 
 done in a note with express reference to what had gone before. 
 Although Mr. Jennings has said that I denounced it altogether., 
 and Mr. Kneeland as altogether spurious., this is wholly without 
 foundation. The word altogether was added by themselves, 
 contrary to my plain meaning. It has been already shown that 
 Mr. Kneeland wrote something much more serious than this 
 over my name, without my knowledge or permission. I hope 
 soon to show that Mr. Jennings is his promising disciple. U 
 either of these persons were to issue proposals for publishino- a 
 complete "Sew Testament, while yet they intended to omit what 
 they call the disputed books, and many chapters and verses of 
 other books, I should, after such information, pronounce it a spu- 
 rious production, without waiting to see it. I would not call it 
 altogether spurious, because I could not tell whether it might not 
 be genuine as far as it went. But these Universalist preachers 
 would think it quite justifiable to alter my expressions until they 
 would answer their purpose. They intended to publish for my 
 whole argument what I knew, and what they knew, to be only a 
 part. This would injure its integrity as much as if they were to 
 corrupt it by interpolations. I therefore pronounced it spurious, 
 and gave this as a reason. This was correct in language, and 
 true in fact. The community understood my meaning, and so 
 did those who perverted my words. 
 
 Mr. Kneeland pretends that Mr. Jennings is the sole publisher 
 of these Minutes, without being in the least under his control. 
 Suppose that I Aad denounced it as altogether spurious, without 
 
Ixiv 
 
 seeing it. Would not this be as justifiable as for him to pro- 
 nounce it altogether genuine without seeing it? And yet this he 
 did in the National Gazette of July 23, by promising, on his 
 own responsibility, before he read the work, that the public 
 should be furnished with ?/<e real discussion in fulL A faux pas 
 of this description, in an orthodox minister, is of suchfiiaportance 
 that he must be declared guilty even when innocent; but in Mr. 
 Kneeland it is a matter of as little consequence as a speck of dirt 
 on a climbing-boy. Some of those who have been most clamor- 
 ous against me, for a supposed premature condemnation of a 
 work really corrupt, see no fault in my opponent for a prema- 
 ture and unqualified approbation of the same work. 
 
 The plan upon which this report was conducted is perhaps as 
 fexceptionable as the execution. The author has insinuated thaf 
 there was some prospect of his becoming a reporter to congress. 
 Would they be satisfied it he would give nothing but their ar- 
 gument? Would Randolph, Clay and Webster wish their 
 thoughts clothed in the language of Mr. R. L. Jennings? Yet he 
 would persuade us that this is his privilege as a reporter. On 
 the cover of No. 1, he requests us to note only errors "affecting 
 the argument." On the cover of No. 3, he acknowledges that 
 he had omitted certain ridiculous words of Mr. Kneeland, of 
 which a hearer of the debate reminded him; yet he says, "I con- 
 sider myself only bound to acknowledge errors which may be 
 pointed out, affecting the argument^ on either side." On this 
 plan, a stenographer once reported a four hours' speech of an 
 eminent minister in this city, in such a compass as could be 
 read in fifteen minutes. What he did not understand he left 
 out; and what he thought he understood, he recorded in a man- 
 ner so shamefully distorted that the speaker submitted to the 
 mortifying drudgery of correcting the manuscript to keep him 
 from publishing things in his name whicti would be a reproach to 
 religion. 
 
 If the reporter be allowed to give his judgment of the argu- 
 ment instead of the words of the Speaker, it is evident that the 
 character of the speech must be formed, not by the sentiments of 
 its author, nor by his ability in defending them, but by the re- 
 porter's knowledge of language, skill in reasoning, and talents 
 and experience in composition. A man of ingenuity could clothe 
 a poor argument with a plausible dress, and vice versa. As Mr. 
 Jennings is now one of Mr. Kneeland's preachers, he probably 
 thinks himself eminently qualified in this respect. He may 
 even suppose that 1 owe him as polite a bow as Pope gave to 
 Warburton for expressing his meaning better than he could do it 
 himself. Mr. Kneeland may perhaps give it as a fourth evi- 
 dence of an unsound mind, that I, with such moderate claims, 
 prefer my own speeches to a set of (J niversalist harangues man-- 
 ufaclured forme by a student of his. 
 
Upon this plan of running one man's defence in the mould of 
 another, it is evident that its character must oe, in a i^reat mea- 
 sure^ formed by the reporter's creed, as well as his talents. Tliis 
 made Mr. K.neeland pervert many of my arguments, and mis- 
 state many of my declarations during the debate. It has made 
 him often insinuate, and even expressly assert, that my defence 
 had no argument at all. In his letter of August 2, he tells me 
 that I had uisspent/owr days, and ''probably might continue a 
 month in the same way, and, after all, to no purpose." It is, I 
 believe, the general opinion of men of piety and good sense, that 
 a strong and unanswerable argument may be drawn from the case 
 of the rich man and Lazarusj yet Mr. Kneeland said that "it 
 has no bearing on the subject in debate " In another place, he 
 says, " But as I before observed, I do not view it as having any 
 bearing upan the suojectin discussion whatever.'' Again, "there- 
 fore, I say that the account of the rich man and Lazarus appears 
 to me to have no relation to the subject of future happiness or 
 misery whatever." He called my defence '''a continued series 
 of quotations, unthout any argument, to prove the meaning 
 which was attached to them."' In another place he calls it " bare 
 assertion without proof or even ar^M/nen^." When ;VJr. Knee- 
 land, regardless of my words, gives this account of my ar;i;ument 
 what sort of a report are we to expect from his employed stenog- 
 rapher, when professedly disregarding my words, and giving 
 what he chooses to call my argument.^ 
 
 ' This plan is not only inconsistent with candor, but contrary 
 to Mr. Jennings's express engagements to the public. In his 
 communication for the Franklin Gazette, of August 7, he says, 
 " now, Mr. P^ditor, I propose publishing both of their argu- 
 ments in full, and together, as they were delivered.'" He did 
 this because he considered the debate public property, as he says, 
 " so soon as the words escaped the lips of the speakers." He 
 says, " I am accountable to the disputants and to society for 
 any thing I may add or detract from what was said." After 
 this declaration, a member of that society, to which he is ac- 
 countable, shews him wherein he has detracted from " what was 
 said;^^ and receives for answer that the reporter is " only bound 
 to acknowledge errors which may be pointed out, affecting the 
 argument.'''' As Universalists consider the case of the rich man 
 and Lazarus, and indeed most other scriptural pr.>ofs, as having 
 no bearing upon the subject, the reporter has only to view them 
 as not affecting the argument, and then dispose of them as he 
 pleases, without, in his view, detracting from what ivas said ! 
 Is this catching the words, as they "escaped the lips of the 
 speakers.^" He did not promise my ar uments in a mutilated 
 form, but " in full;" he did not promise them as manufactured 
 by an Universalist, but " as they wei'e delivered." 
 
 I 
 
On the covtM- of Mr. Jentungs's last numljer, he can imagine 
 no other reason for my condemning his Report, than that Mr. 
 M'Calla "• intends publishing the discussion himself !•' As it is 
 probable that the fear of rivalshipin the money-making business 
 has excited alarm, let him know that it was not for money that 
 I faced Mr. Kneeland before an audience, and it is for a much 
 higher object that I hope to meet him in the press. Although 1 
 have been at some expense, and it is lawful and honorable to 
 seek an honest compensation for my labour, my publication is 
 not to reimburse the one or reward the other. If God enable 
 me to accomplish it, I hope to see an edition of two or three thous- 
 and copies About twenty -five supernumerary copies, not one 
 of which shouhl be sold, would satisfy my cupidity. This is all 
 the profit that I claim. Except these, the profits of the whole 
 edition, whether great or small, are to be appropriated to the 
 funds of the Voung Men's Domestic Missionary Society, in this 
 place. That this maybe done in good faith, the pecuniary con- 
 cerns of the publication, shall be committed to other hands. A* 
 this public declaration is necessary to obviate groundless surmise, 
 and to inform purchasers that they will be feeding the poor, and 
 not enriching me, it is hoped that it is not an ostentation of 
 charity, in which grace I acknowledge with undissembled shame 
 Hiy inferiority to many brethren. 
 
 In the place above referred to, Mr. Jennings expresses serious 
 apprehensions that I mean to avail myself of his Minutes in aid 
 of my work. His lears are entirely vain. I would not copy 
 such a mass of error and nonsense for ti afold his profits. Does 
 he suppose that there is such a dearth of evidence, that we have 
 to resort 1o a publication in which the wrong side is defended by 
 one Universalist, and the right side by another.^ Durirg the 
 whole debate, I knew not that there was such a man as Mr. R. 
 L. Jennings in the world. If I did not need his aid in speaking, 
 I hope to write without him. 
 
 But he thinks me incapable of writing the discussion, because 
 I took no notes of what Mr. Kneeland said, and paid but little 
 attention to his speeches. A correct copy of the real discussion 
 "would be a verjf difterent book from that of Mr. Jennings. But 
 this is not my object. I repeatedly declared that Mr. Kneeland 
 liad not (tone justice tohis cause; and that if permitted to finish 
 the materials in my hands, I would engage to lay before the au- 
 dience a better defence of Universalisra than he had given. To 
 confine my attention, then, to what he has said, or what he can 
 say, would be a virtual refusal to meet the controversy in that 
 stage to which it has advanced, and would disappoint the expec- 
 tations of the public. Besides this, Mr. Kneeland and Mr. 
 Jennings are very anxious that I should confine my attention to 
 Mr, Kneeland's flimsy sophisms, tedious repetitions, and mourn- 
 
xvu 
 
 tul complaints, uttered during the debate, that be may still 
 boast tliat the writings ot his favorite, IVJr, Ballon, of Hartford 
 memory, remain unanswered. In a spurious edition of Buck's 
 'i'heological Dictionary, which has been, in no small deii^ree, 
 defiled by Mr. Kneelauii's fingers, he boasts, concerning those 
 productions and his own lectures, that " these works have 
 never been answered, altliough some of them, particularly the 
 two first, [Ballou on Atonement and his notes on parables,] 
 have i)eet> published about twenty years and liave gone through 
 several editions." 
 
 Mr. Kneeland suppressed a part of my defence in his " own 
 desk," as he calls tue Lombard-street establishment, and Mr. 
 Jennings seems exceed mgly anxious that it may be suppressed 
 forever. He appears to th.nk that for me to print more than 
 Lis master gave me leave to speak, would belong ralher to the 
 licentiousness than lo the liberty of the press. This is perfectly 
 in character. For, while infidelity boasts of its free-thmivi;;g, 
 and heresy, of its liberality, they have always endeavoured, when 
 they had it in their power, to suppress free intjuiry. It is er- 
 ror in fact, and not true religion that is in danger, under the free- 
 dom of our iiappy institution^^. 
 
 Among all Mr. Jennings's insinuations, it is pleasing to ob- 
 serve that he had not the temerity to assert that I had not tiie 
 means of writing my own argument, especially as he ould 
 have been contradicted by his own employer. In his own re- 
 port Mr. Kneeland s tys that his opponent " had his matter 
 ready cut and dried to m*.et him;" tuat he had " not only the 
 outlines, but the very body of his argument completely pre- 
 pared before he came to the controversy ;" •' that on his part 
 tlie discussion was completely prepared, in all its parts, before 
 he came into this house." As Mr. Kneeland has revised Mr. 
 Jennings's Minutes, and declared them " as faithful a report 
 as ever was made," we shall allow the authenticity of what is 
 there said in his name, whether it was said during the debate or 
 not. He has had a full opportunity of improving his argument, 
 and exerting his utmost strength. To his reasoning, as thus 
 published, due attention may be given, at the same time that 
 the arguments of Messrs. Ballou, Balfour and Chauncey, 
 Winchester and Huntingdon, Kelly and Murray, shall be dis- 
 played to the best advantage, according to my feeble abilities. 
 
 Hie concession which Mr. Kneeland has made, of his oppo- 
 nent's having *' not only the (mtUne but the very body of his argw 
 meut" '* coinpletely prepared in all its parts,^' proves not only 
 that I have the means of writing for myself, but the means of 
 exposing Mr= Jennings's garbled report^ This task is under- 
 
ixviii 
 
 talren for the purpose of defending the trutb and detecting cor- 
 ruption, not to obstruct the circulation of his work; for it may 
 do good, since he has retained some ot my scrijHure proofs, 
 notwithstanding all his unfairness. Neither do I undertake to 
 point out all the errors of the work, for that would be to cor- 
 rect almost every line which it contains. It is true, there is a 
 resemblance between my speeches and those which be has made 
 for me; and so there is between a portrait and a caricature, or 
 bet^^e^n a living animal and a dead animal ; but as a living dog 
 is better than a dead lion, so is an extemporaneous defence, 
 fairly reported, preferable to that which Mr. Jennings has as- 
 cribed to mc as the product ol laborious preparation. This 
 may he illustrated by a reference to a passage ii\ which he has 
 actually killed a verv useful animal which was mentioned in my 
 retort upon m^ opponent for endeavoring to expose my pro- 
 nunciation to contempt and ridicule. After speaking of hearing 
 a French gentleman pronounce the Latiji, 1 asked among other 
 things, " should I prick up my ears, as Sterne, in his Sentimen- 
 tal Journey, says an ass does, at every new object that he sees?" 
 Here, no doubt, Mr. Jennings tried his stenographical skill; 
 and you have the product of it in an erratum on the back of No. 
 4. It is as follows: " Should I have understood bim as Sterne, 
 in his Sentime' tal Journey, understcod the owner of the dead 
 ass, by the accent of his apostrophe to it?" Man^ impartial 
 persons, like Drs. E\j and Wylie, would, from inattention and 
 forgetfuiness, think this a fair report. There is a manifest re- 
 semblance between the original and the copy. The likeness is 
 at least as great as that which subsists between a man and a 
 monkey. The same species of animal is mentioned b^ me, and 
 reported by bim. There is this difference, however, that while 
 the beast was in my care, he was a living travelling ass, pos- 
 sessed of vivacity enough to start at every strange sight, as Mr. 
 Kneeland started at every pronunciation except bis own. But 
 no sooner does he pass out of my hands, than this short-hand re- 
 porter makes short » ork of him; and finishes him more efiec- 
 tually with a single stroke of bis pen, than his father Balaam 
 could by the repeated strokes of his staff 
 
 This is the way in which he has treated my whole array of 
 argument and satire. Whatsoever animation tbe\ had in my 
 hands, they are as tame as a troop of dead asses in his manage- 
 ment. He has not done justice, nor any thing like justice, to my 
 language, composition, sentiments, facts or arguments. In his 
 report, my language is low, swaggering, and even spiced with 
 profanity: and no wonder, 'Or it is that of a universalist. My 
 composition is vulgar, confused, incoherent, and as unintelligi- 
 ble as the above expression about " the owner of the dead ass 
 
with the accent of his apostrophe to it." This is not wonder- 
 ful, siuoe it is the composition of an untutored yoinif; man, full 
 of prejn ice, and just comiiiencing a profession tor which he is 
 not qualifiid. He has attribute<! to njcsf-nlimenlsand ta(;ts which 
 are talse in theniielvei!', and which 1 never believed nor uttered. 
 Is it to be expected, then, that he is a competent judge of what 
 does and what does not affect my argument? Atter casting my 
 words to the wind, as he has done, a suund argument in Savour 
 of that trutli which he hates, can be no nioie appreciated by 
 him than by his little theologian at his dhow. 
 
 As the task of ex imining such n mass of perversion is the 
 more disagreeable the longer it is protracted, 1 shall not take 
 time to detail the many false constructions of my meaning 
 which he has substituted for my expressions, f^ either will I 
 notice many of his supplements to my quotations, in which he 
 makes me appear vtry fooiish, by quoting a great deal of scrip- 
 ture for nie, where 1 quoted only a few words, and where a tew 
 were required by perspicuity, and candour required no more. 
 
 Numerous glaring interpolations also have greatly enervated 
 the argument and stultified its author. In two or three cases he 
 has quoted texts for nie which appeared quite relevant.: as Ez« 
 18: 20, 2t, in page 39. This is true also of Matth. 13: 11, 12, 
 in page 38. But he there adds the 15th verse, which is irrele- 
 vant. Isa. 65: 13, which he has given me in page 113. would do 
 very well if he had put it among tlie contrasts: but it is inserted 
 where it has nothing to do- These two last texts, which I never 
 quoted, I now add to my notes. John, 2: 14, in page 262, is 
 irrelevant. In page 51, he has given me a half a dozen verses 
 of John's Revelation, in the same way. Also four verses of 1 
 Cor. in page 63; and in page 131, he lias interpolated John 8; 
 24: In page 67, he inserted fifteen verses from Matt, and re- 
 ferred to a dozen more in Luke, about which I said nothing 
 there. In page 131, he makes me talk about Greek and doc- 
 trinal parallels without any meaning. In page 126, he makes 
 me quote the Greek of Matt. 24: 3, to show the meaning of a 
 Hebrew word. This, however, is not more outrageous than his 
 putting into my mouth that interpretation of Matthew's words 
 which iJnitarians adopt, and which I abhor. In the same heret- 
 ical spirit; he has, in page 132, made me speak foolishly, falsely 
 and irreverently of the resurrection of Christ, and to approve of 
 Mr. Kneeland's erroneous translation of a Hebrew phrase, 
 in page 153. The descant on regeneration, which he has com- 
 posed for me in page 144, appears like a parable in the mouth of 
 afool. In page 202, he does not say that I attributed inspira- 
 tion to Mr. Kneeland, but this would not have been more incon- 
 sistent with truth than to make me speak of "seventy inspired 
 
ixx 
 
 translators;" or to make me promise, as in page 98, that I would 
 not quote from Mr. Kneeland's Lectures any more. 
 
 Perhaps Mr. Jennings thought that his many additions on the 
 one hand, might be balanceii bj his many suppressions on the 
 other. In the latter, as well as the former, he has exercised a 
 prudent discrimination. While he manages my speeches so as 
 to make them savor of idiocy, he takes care to suppress Mr. 
 Kneeland's puerile display of the new coat of his miniature testa- 
 ment; which, by the by, is not near half as small, nor as hand- 
 some, as one belonging to his despised opponent, who never 
 thought of showing his toys. Neither did he tell us how many 
 languages Mr. Kneeland could read, and how many he could not 
 read for want of lexicons and grammars! Neither did he tell us in 
 
 fmge 162, that besides Mr. Kneeland's "appeal to all and every 
 earned person present," he challenged the city of Philadelphia 
 after his accustomed fashion. In the same page he has suppress- 
 ed Mr. Kneeland's declaration that the Hebrew expression in 
 Daniel xii. 3, was the same as that in Psalms ix. 5, and that the 
 conjunction and should be supplied in the latter, because it was 
 found written in the former. To be consistent, he has jugulated 
 my triumphant refutation of this sophistry in page 173. To 
 make amends for this, however, he has made me say in page 153, 
 that the very expression used in the Greek in Isaiah, is also used 
 in Daniel xii. 2. After fabricating this statement for me, he 
 takes occasion to contradict it in a learned Greek note. An 
 anonymous writer in the Democratic Press, whom I know not, 
 but whose fidelity should excite a blush in some of Mr. Jen- 
 nings's ordained and graduated witnesses, seems astonished that 
 in these days a man can write Greek before he can read it, and 
 asks, whence hath this man letters ? Mr. Jennings very sagacious- 
 ly refers him to his little theologian, a little family dog, to solve 
 the enigma. Our saviour and the apostles had a knowledge of 
 languages by miracle, but not from such a quarter. 
 
 On the cover of No. 6, Mr. Jennings informs us with some em- 
 phasis, that he was the only one who " took notes during the 
 t<;Ao/eof the debate." Yet in page 169, he tells us, ''sometning 
 is here wanting.'' The same anonymous writer who con- 
 victed him of another omission in the same page, has reminded 
 him of suppressing the following expression of Mr. Kneeland, 
 viz: " I observe the audience only hiss and clap when my oppo- 
 nent is up, and are silent when 1 am up, which 1 presume istrom 
 respect to me !" In page 288, he has taken no notice of his in- 
 terrupting me, and of the colloquy which ensued upon the point 
 whether it was of any use for me to prosecute my investigation 
 of the word everlasting and its conjugates, since he admitted 
 their uniform, unlimited meaning, for which I was contend- 
 ing. In page 300, he has suppressed the words of Rom. xvi. 11, 
 and my real comment upon them. From my fifteen affirmative 
 
Ixxi 
 
 texts, beginning on page US, he has dropped an half dozen, and 
 several others tVom my argument on the will of God, page 280. 
 When he does this, he often tills up with texts of his own. This 
 is the case in what he has said for me on everlasting and such 
 words, where he has suppressed scores of texts, without " affect- 
 ing the argument" in the least, as he would have us believe ! In 
 pages 207 and 249, he has given us a Universalis" carica+ure of 
 what I quoted from Gregory and Chrysostom, leaving out much 
 which the audience cannot help remembering, when, if God per- 
 mit, they shall see it in my printed argument. 
 
 To correct his report would be to write it over again in my own 
 Iani2;uage and arrangement instead of his. The above are not near 
 half of the errors which I have noted. That want of strength which 
 Mr. Kneeland has informed the public prevents me from writing, 
 hinders me from tinishingat present. The most of these corrections 
 are susceptible of ocular proof, in my notes which Mr. Kneeland 
 has so abundantly authenticated. It is true that Mr. Jennings 
 has adduced living witnesses against me. He has obtained and 
 published in yesterday's Gazette, the certificates of Drs. Ely and 
 Wylie.in company with those of Messrs. Hogan, Morse, Knee- 
 land, Condie and Jennings! I confess I do not envy Dr. Wylie 
 and Dr. Ely the company in which they are found, nor the busi- 
 ness in which they are engaged. Tiiey have permitted them- 
 selves to be enlisted in the army of God's enemies, in an assault 
 upon the truth and integrity of a man whose honesty and veraci- 
 ty they both believe to be unimpeachable, and whose reputation 
 in these respects, Dr. Ely vindicated in the paper, after he knew 
 my opinion and declarations concerning Mr, Jennings's report. 
 As I never asked of these truly eminent and highly esteemed 
 brethren, any other assistance than that of their prayers, their 
 countenance and their books, the least that could be expected of 
 them was, that if they would not throw their weight into the right 
 scale, they would reinain neutral. If the winning character of 
 disinterested and candid witnesses has ensnared them, I would 
 beg them to consider the court and the catise in which they have 
 testified. God says, " be not a witness against thy neighbour 
 without cause." Upon this infallible authority, the Scottish 
 fathers of these gentlemen bottomed their testimony against the 
 " Doeg-like sin" of being «' either witnesses or members of in- 
 quest upon irrelevant libels. " If, however, they had simply act- 
 ed the part of witnesses, and testified what they could recollect, 
 instead of adopting as their ow n, the manufactured testimony of 
 one party, b«fore hearing the other, who was sueing for a hearing, 
 their conduct would have been unexceptionable. But they have 
 now acted rather as judges than as witnesses. They knew that 
 Mr. Jennings and myself were directly at issue on the purity of 
 his report. He had been fully heard, and I had repeatedly, in 
 
Ixxii 
 
 public and in private, promised a replj with all possible expedi- 
 tion. Mr. Kneeland had revised and authenticated the report 
 Avhich was published. It was desirable that the other party 
 sho.ild have an opportunity of aiding the memories of these gen- 
 tlemen as well as his oppcment. They have already given their de- 
 cision ! and they know the consequence. Yetifthesonof Alcnomac 
 would not complain, why should the child of a King whom Alc- 
 nomac never knew.? I am not sorry that in much sickness and 
 weakness, God enabled me to defend his precious truth, even if 
 these brethren, after compelling me to self-defence, should 
 make this aground of an exterminating war. I know by sweet 
 experience in whom I have trusted: " And when my father and 
 my mother forsake me, then the Lord will take me up." 
 
 W. L. M'CALLA. 
 Philadelphia, October 22, 1 824. 
 
 No- 27. 
 
 In consequence of Dr. Ely's speech when taking the Mo- 
 derator's chair, and his afterward certifying- for Mr, Jen- 
 nings, the Uuiversalists are said to have i reatly extolled his 
 liberality, and to have boldly claimed him as one of their 
 own honorable fraternity . This probably arose in part, from 
 Mr Jennings's having circulated among them a grossly gar- 
 bled copy of his certificate, which may be seen below in 
 No. 29. But as the true copy, given above in No. 25, shows 
 the Dr. in his real character, as a willing witness for ortho- 
 doxy, and a decided enemy to hypocrisy and heresy, Mr. 
 Kneeland could not remain quiet under that weight of con- 
 demnation which the certificate left on him. He therefore 
 unburthened himself in the following effusion: viz, 
 " DR. EZRA STILES ELY. 
 
 We thank this Rev. Doctor that he has been willing to let 
 the world know his feelings towards " Mr. Kneeland" — that he 
 "will show him any kindness in his power, AS A man. — 
 Wonderful Doctor \ Now if God is only as good as Dr. Ely, 
 Mr. Kneeland is perfectly safe ; and the Doctor's squeamish' 
 ness, in conceiving himself " positively forbidden to counte- 
 nance him, in any manner, as a minister of the gospel" is a 
 matter of no concern, neither does it give Mr. K. the least un- 
 easiness whatever. But would it not h^ive been more becoming 
 in this sapient " D. I>." in speaking of JVIr. K. '* afier knowing 
 his sentiments," to have pointed out wherein they are erroneous, 
 than to have insinuated, (as he has done without proof,) that he 
 preaches an essentially different gospel from that contained in 
 the bible? Of such men it may be truly said, " Ye know not, 
 what manner of spirit ye are of." 
 
Ixxiii 
 
 In this Mr. Kneeland seems to think that if God is as 
 good as Dr. Elj, he is perlectly sate. Dr. Ely had said thai 
 he conceived himself positively forbidden to countenance Mr. 
 Kneeland as a minister of the gospel; that he would not 
 receive him into his house in the character of a servant of 
 Christ. Now if God refuse, like Dr. Ely, to countenance 
 Mr. Kneeland, does he think that the countenance ot Mr. 
 Morse and Mr. Jennings will secure his safety ? If God, 
 like Dr. Ely, should refuse to receive this heretic, "in the 
 character of a servant of Christ," does he think himself per- 
 fectly safe in the character of an.enemy of Christ, or a ser- 
 vant of the devil ? But Dr. Ely has refused to receive him 
 into his earthly house, in his present guise. If God, like 
 him, should exclude Mr. Kneeland from his house in heaven, 
 does he think himself perfectly safe in the Lombard-street 
 Church, the floors of which gave way during our debate? 
 
 No. 28. 
 
 FROM THE FRANKLIN GAZETTE. 
 
 Apology to Dr. Wylie. 
 DEBATE ON UMVERSALISM. 
 
 Mr. NoRVELL — As you have deelin d publishing for me for 
 the future, accept ray sincere thanks tor past favors, and per- 
 mit me to inform the public through your paper once more, 
 that my argument on Universalisra shall appear as soon as pos- 
 sible. Also permit me to make a public apology to Di. Wylie 
 for the strictures which lately appeared in your paper on his 
 conduct. These were bottomed upon a mistaken supposition 
 that although Mr. Jennings had reported my speeches falsely, 
 he had reported his conversation fairly. This was not the fact, 
 as the public shall see at a convenient time. 
 
 Yours, respectfully, VVM. L. M'CALLA, 
 
 Philadelphia, October 30, 1824. 
 
 Note. — We have offered to continue to publish for all the 
 parties engaged in the abovementioned controversy on the con- 
 dition of paying for the insertion of their communications; a 
 condition both reasonable and jnst.^^Franklin Gazette. 
 
 No. 29. 
 Not satisfied with misrepresenting Dr. Wylie's testimony, 
 Mr. Jennings lays violent hands upon Dr. Ely's certificate, 
 ^s given in No. 25, and after cutting out passages which arc, 
 
 K 
 
Ixxiv 
 
 in No. 30, tjuoted against hira, publisher it, as thus altered, 
 for Dr. Ely's certilit ate, without giving- any notice of" the 
 suppressions which he had made! The following- is a copy 
 as published iH p. 334 of his work, in a supplementary num- 
 ber. 
 
 The Rev. Dr. Ely, of the Sd Presbyterian Church, Fine-street^ 
 has certified as follows : 
 
 At the request of Mr. Jennings, I would state, that I have not 
 been able, since the publication of his " Minutes of a Discus- 
 sion," &c. to read more than ffty pa^es of the work, which is 
 less than one sixtli part of the whole. Ho soon as I can find time 
 to read the whole, I shall freely communicate, at his request, 
 my opinion of the same.— During the debate of Tuesday after- 
 noon, July 13th, 1 was absent, so that I can only express aa 
 opinion on the first forty pages, and the short speech attributed 
 to myself, on pages 234 and 235, concerning which I am free to 
 declare, that I discover in these forfy-tivo pages, so far as my 
 memory serves me, no important error or omission. I think the 
 forty -two pages, of which 1 now give mv opinion, as just a state- 
 ment of what was uttered in my hearing, as could be expected 
 of any stenographer, who should attempt to follow men of readj 
 utterance, in a debate of twenty hours. 
 
 Philadelphia, Oct h2, 1824. EZRA STILES ELY. 
 
 No. 30. 
 
 BBOM THE AiMERICAN SENTINEL. 
 
 DEBATE ON UNIVERSALISM. 
 
 Mr. Jennings, in the Franklin Gazette of the 2tst ult. think- 
 ing it of no avail to uige any longer the old refuted fables invent- 
 ed by envy and disappointed ambition, seeks to rest the whole 
 cause upon two points ; my calling him an employed stenogra- 
 pher, and my calling his Minutes a corrupt report : " presum- 
 ing,'' says he, " that if 1 can show that the most prominent of his 
 assertions are not founded on fact, it would only be intrusion to 
 attempt to prove that the remainder arc ecpially unfounded and 
 unjust." Onthelirst point he tells us that if Mr. M'Calla had 
 " taken the pains to have enquired, he would have found that it 
 was a Mr. Stetson who was engaged by the church, which en- 
 gagement Mr, Stetson could not fulfil in consequence of the dis- 
 cussion being protracted longer than he could reniamin the city ; 
 or for some other cause to me unknown." Let it be observed 
 here, that Mr. Stetson was employed by the church, and not by 
 Mr. Kneeland, and he declined the engagement and left the city 
 before the debate was closed. This then was the time for Mr. 
 Jennings to come forward with his proposals. In his next words 
 
Ix.w 
 
 %e plainly intimates that he had done so, and that my opposition 
 •otmjieiiced iiniuediateiy aiter he aaci iioi Air. Kneciauti had of- 
 fered the work t* tlie pu'uiic. iii» vvoitisaie, '•' luuuediateiy af- 
 ter J had made known inj intmiion Mr. iVl'Caila appeared in 
 your Gazette aud Mutod that tlie work was uuautiiyri^ed." 
 Where was it tliat Mi. Jenmu^j^s had maae known hia imtaAon, 
 before i made this siateiuent i iNo where that i have seen. Mr. 
 Kueeiand had made known his intention ofiea enough, lie had 
 told us, July ^Ist, several Uajs* afier ihe deoate, and of course 
 alter Mr. Stetson nad lelc the city, that " the whole discussun 
 has been taken down in short hand by a stenograpiier employed 
 for the purpose." Mr. Jennings ni his last puolication telis us 
 tliat Mr. Stetson did not take notes of the whole but only a part 
 of the discussion, and that Mr. Jennings was "the only person 
 ■^vho had rutesol the <('/*o/e of the deoate." Also on the cover 
 ot his sixth number he sujs "■ no person took notes during tne 
 tchoie of the deoate except mynei/.^' Woo but Mr. Jeiinings 
 then, can be xMr. kneeiand's employed atenographer who took 
 down the whole diacua-iion, since he from his own sliewing, was 
 the oidy peraon who iiad notes oithe wliole debate i^ iiut we are 
 not here Uft to mere inference. That same Mr. Kneeland who 
 had told us aDove that tiie whole discussion was recorded by a 
 stenographer employed for the purpose, teiis us in his notice of 
 August oth, that the i\i mutes were " taken in short hand by R. 
 L. Jennings." He does not teii us that the church had employ^ 
 ed him, but he acts in every siage of the business thus far, as 
 if he himseil han tiie sole coiuroi and the undivided responsioi- 
 litv of the undertaking. Ht does not tell us, as Mr. Jennings 
 now does, that Mr. Stetson was tiie employed stenographer j ior 
 tins would be impossible, because this employed stenographer 
 had taken down the ?/'/io/e discussion, whereas vir. .Stetson re- 
 corded only a part. He noes not tell us of any derangement of 
 plan on account of Mr. ^tetson's departure from the city, for it 
 was after this departure that the whole discussion by this em- 
 ployed stenographer was first promised : but he announces the 
 ■work once and again with<mt any change of plan or workman, 
 and in such a way, in one case, as to make the reader beiievc 
 that it is published not by Mr. Jennings, but the parties. At 
 last, when he tells us that the first number is m the press and 
 proposes his terms of sale, 1 informed the public, to prevent a 
 gross imposition, that the work was published by one party ex- 
 clusively, and not authorized by me. In order to give an air of 
 impartiality to the work, Mr. Kneeland then persuades the com 
 munity thatAe had not authorized the work ; but that without his 
 having any thing to do with it, it was as faithful a report as ever 
 was made. Then also for the first time, Mr. Jennings seems to 
 emerge from his subordinate condition; and publicly to declare 
 
Ixxti 
 
 himself "the sole publisher of the said debate, and as publiclj 
 disown being engaged with either of the parties directly or indi- 
 rectly.'^ For believing Mr. Kneeland's assertion to the contrary, 
 he accuses me of a high offence, and is willing that all our lesser 
 matters of dispute should follow the fate of these two questions, 
 is lie an employed stenographer ? is his report corrupt ? My 
 proof of the jformer is very simple, and although it rests upon the 
 testimony of Messrs. Kneeland and Jennings, bad witnesses I 
 confess, since they contradict themselves and one another, yet 
 they ought to be good in a Universalist court, although disquali- 
 fied by the constitution of Pennsylvania. Mr. Kneeland says 
 that the whole discussion was recorded by an employed steno- 
 grapher:— Mr. Jennings says that he was the only one who re- 
 corded the whole discussion: — Therefore he is the employed 
 person. Accordingly his Master at last formally announces his 
 name. 
 
 There is a way of corrupting a work of this kind without any 
 of those grievous interpolations and suppressions which were ex- 
 posed in the Franklin Ga/.ette of the 23d ult. The strength of 
 each part depends on its connexion, and every fact and argument 
 will become nugatory, every anecdote and retort will become 
 insipid. There is no difference between the best and the worst 
 composition, w^hen they are read across the columns of a news- 
 paper. Not satisfied with transposing my remarks on the dis- 
 orderly conduct of the Universalists, and thus introducing them 
 where there is no call for them, he actually transposes his notice 
 of the clapping and hissing of the audience which occasioned the 
 animadversions of the parties. Near the middle of page 47, he 
 tells us that there was " loud clapping, then hissing." Now it 
 is a fact, which the audience will doubtless recollect, that this loud 
 clapping took place just before "Mr. Morse sat down,'' and of 
 course belongs to the middle of page 48. During the debate I 
 observed that m}^ opponent sometimes cpmplained of my doing 
 nothing but reading my little book, and at other times, that I did 
 nothing but exercise my wit upon his speeches. This contradic- 
 tion, I observed, reminded me of the table of the traveller and 
 the Satyr, the latter of whom drove the former from his cave (not 
 hut, as Mr. Jennings has it,) for blowing hot and cold with the same 
 breath. Mr. Jennings thinking that this was applicable in page 
 80, tells it there for me better probably than I told it myself^ but 
 in page 87 to which it really belongs, he merely refers to it, after 
 making a confused and incorrect statement of the facts which 
 occasioned me to relate it. A disputant who should speak as he 
 has made me do in page 112, about the lion and the eagle might 
 be suspected of an addled brain. This unsavoury omelet which 
 he has mixed for me, is about equal to the barbecue with which 
 he favoured us from Sterne's Sentimental Journey. In this 
 place he does not give my authority, certain Scottish Reviewers 
 
Ixxvii 
 
 to whom I expressly referred for my real remarks, but he refers 
 to them in page 86 where I said nothing about them. 
 
 In quoting a certain passage of Scripture I observed that it re- 
 lated to the end of the world. Mr. Kneeland immediately set to 
 work to prove that this expression, the end of the world, did not 
 mean what we usually understand by it. As these words were not 
 in the text but only in my comment, I thought that Mr. Kneeland's 
 criticism resembled one of Thomas Paine's which I had read 
 more than a dozen years ago, on Job 37, 18. Without consult- 
 ino- the sacred text where he would have found that the word 
 there used meant a molten metallic maan, Mr. Paine exercised 
 his ingenuity upon our translation, inolten looking-glass; to prove 
 that the book of Job was written since the manufacture of glass 
 was discovered. The only time that I used this illustration was 
 in connection with an argument which Mr. Jennings professes to 
 give in page 97, where the illustration is not found, but only an 
 indefinite reference to it as having been given before. Turn- 
 ing back, we find it transposed to page 86, and attached to a 
 foolish observation carved out of something that I said, but to 
 which it is no illustration at all. He probably observed also that 
 my reference to the metallic mirrors of the ancients was clumsy 
 and obscure. For the sake of perspicuity, he makes me say that 
 "the original does not signify glass, but something as transpa- 
 rent as glass!" Transparent metallic mirrors 1 He might as 
 well have made me talk of transparent millstones. 
 
 Mr. E. of Maysville, Ky. once lent me a little work on Uni- 
 versalism which supposes the case of a poor afflicted widow 
 reading Scarlett's translation of 2 Cor. 4-17, and enquiring of 
 him what he meant by aeonian in that text. On Thursday af- 
 ternoon of thi' debate, I recounted this case as one which I 
 had read. Mr. Kneeland insinuated that the case was manu- 
 factured for the occasion; and asked why 1 did not use the 
 name of Kneeland at once, as that was what 1 meant. The 
 next morning I commented upon 2 Cor. 5 1, and supposed the 
 case of a sinful and miserable man like myself instead of the 
 widow, going to Mr. Scarlett; or, as my opponent seemed to 
 prefer it, suppose that 1 should go to Mr. Crimson, to enquire 
 the meaning of this celebrated word aionian. This was un- 
 doubtedly the first instance, and, unless 1 am egregiously mis- 
 taken, it was the only instance in which the word crimson was 
 thus used. Yet in page 250 where this case is reported, this 
 word is not found. Turning back to pages 224, 247, we find it 
 tranposed to the case of the widow, and twice used in that con- 
 nexion where it was never mentioned. 
 
 Besides all the errors which have been already exposed, 
 notes are now before me of more than four score instances of 
 palpable alterations, some of them affecting the argument, and 
 
Xxvtti 
 
 all afff ctinff the cTiaracter of the speaker for HnHerstand5n? or 
 probity. This leniark is not inten led as an ackno * h liiifiiipnt 
 of the purity of the report in other places, where Ins alterations 
 are less observable, nor is it intended as an intimation that the 
 public indulgence shall be taxed by a multiplicity ot specifica- 
 tions. It shall be taken tor granted, that it a suitable propor- 
 tion of these spurious speeches can be invalidated, this w ill suf- 
 ficiently prove, according to Mr. Jennings' rule, "that the re- 
 mainder are equally unfounded and unjust." But this Aill ap- 
 pear much raore plainly when those whn heard the debate shall 
 compate Mr. Jennings' report with my argurr<ent For this 
 ■work we shall wait, to .shew my real division which he has so 
 transformed in page 22; and my real criticism which he has 
 pretended to copy in pages 284 and 324, and other places. In 
 page 220, he appears disposed to make a solemn subject ludi- 
 crous, at my expense, and at the expense of truth. In illustra- 
 ing Paul's ex])ression, before the everlasting times, by an ex- 
 pression ot the same writer, far above all heavens, I had occa- 
 sion to tell the audience oi' the aerial and ethtrial heavens, and 
 the heavens of heavens. My first heavens, the atmosphere of 
 our earth, in which birds fly, Mr. Jennings makes the residence 
 of God and sometimes God himself. My second heavens, in 
 ■which the sun, moon and stars are fixed, he makes the resi- 
 dence of the Son of God, or the Divine 8on himself ls\j 
 third heavens the abode of God and saints and angels, he makes 
 the residence of angels only. His making me refuse to pray 
 for Universalists, under pretence that they had committed the 
 unpardonable sin is not the only error that can be plainly 
 proved in page 81. Moris his manner of introducing Epicurus 
 who died for fear of poverty, when he was worth 70,(>00 ses- 
 terces, a solitary error in page 183. 
 
 Mr. Jennings thinks himself a witness between the parties in 
 some matters of fact, and therefore has a special eye on these 
 in his report. As Mr. Kneeland continued to the last day, to 
 inform the audience of his want of matter to fill up his time, I 
 informed them on that daj, after one of these complaints, that 
 as I had much more to say than the time allotted would allow, 
 I should be much obliged to my opponent for such crumbs of 
 bis half-hours as he could spare. This had a bearing upon the 
 question whether I was allowed time to finish my argument or 
 not. Mr. Jennings therefore in page 259, converts it into a com- 
 pliment to Mr. Kneeland 's superior learning, without the least 
 reference to my want of time. His words are the following, 
 viz; "And although I may not have the learning of my oppo- 
 nent to make converts of vou all, yet I hope he will give me 
 the crumbs which fail from his table.'' It is evident that he 
 
noted the word crumbs, with his boasted "powers of the steno- 
 grapiiic art," and then made the rest as lie pleased. 
 
 It will be recollected that after my remarks about Mr. Knee- 
 land's Greek Grammar of which I ^poke from inibrmation ob- 
 tained in the house during the debate, 1 was immediately cor- 
 rected as to tbe matter ot fact. It was said that he had not 
 ivntten it. My reply was, "Perhaps, then he published it 
 without writing it, as I have indirect e\iden(e that he did with 
 his Lectures and Translation." In page 2o-2, wh)ch is fidl of 
 errois, Mr. Jennings makes me say ''Peihaps he meant it was 
 published without having been written at all!" In Mr. Knee- 
 land's letter of the I8ih ult. to Dr. Kly, he sa\s, concerning 
 me, "he stated during the discussion that 1 had written and 
 published SL Greek Grammar, which is totally incorrect." To- 
 tally incorrect!! That is he neither wrote a Greek Gram- 
 mar, nor published a Gjeek grammar; tor if he did eitb( r the 
 one or the other, the remark attributed to me is not totally in- 
 correct, but half of il is true. Which then is the greatest 
 crime, for me to say, through mere mistake, that my opponent 
 wroie a book which he had reall) published, or for hin> know- 
 ingly to deny the fact of publishing? But it will be recollected 
 by the audience that I frequently requested to be corrected 
 where mistaken in stating ti e words, sentiments, or acts of my 
 opponent. Of these requests it is not observed that the impar- 
 tial Mr. Jennings has taken any notice. 
 
 After Mr. Kneeland had tried a variety of arts, with but lit- 
 tle success, to divert me from an argument which he could not 
 withstand, he introduced a certificate of Harry Starr, a promis- 
 ing young satellite of our Universalist luminary, to prove that I 
 had announced to a brother clergyman a determination " to 
 plague him by playing off," and that 1 " would not come to the 
 point." Without recording all the features of dissimulation ex- 
 hibited in this transaction, it may be observed that my opponent 
 manifested a determination to make me spend my precious time 
 in combatting this slander, or submit to its stain. For this pur- 
 pose he says, in page 216, "I hope therefore, my opponent will 
 not fail to prove the contents of the note which I have read not 
 to be true. If he fail to do this, what will be your decision.^" 
 As this was a mere scheme to enable Mr. Kneeland to play off 
 from the point, and to plague his antagonist, f determined to 
 stick to the argument and pay but little attention to Harry, al- 
 though I had a certificate of the clergyman in question to prove 
 an alibi^ and the testimony of four persons present when Starr re- 
 ceived his infjrmation, to show that the light that was in him was 
 darkness. I therefore contented myself with telling the audi- 
 ence on the last day emphatically, that this was a fabrication, 
 got up for ,•. particular purpose. In Mr. Jennings's report of 
 this concise nutice in page 244, he has omitted this emphatical 
 
Ixxx 
 
 expression. Just before my opponent read his formidable com- 
 munication, three anonymous letters were put into my hands. 
 Although 1 took no written minute, memorandum or note of them 
 nor ever said that I had, Mr. Jennings says for me in page 217, 
 " I have on my Minutes a memorandum of some notes which I 
 also have received." 
 
 As my opponent occupied much of his time in complaining of 
 my little book, I showed it to the audience, observing that it 
 contained three sheets of letter paper folded into 96 pages, five 
 of which were blank, and so many others unused, that all my 
 notes in the debate did not probably occupy more than two 
 sheets and a half. The report makes this the size of the whole 
 volume, and the pages to amount to thirty. This is about as 
 true, however, as the profanity which he has attributed to me 
 shortly after in page 87. 
 
 If Mr. Kneeland did not succeed in exposing my pronuncia- 
 tion, his employed stenographer has effectually done it. In page 
 1 68 he has given me a z. for my sibilant s. and an a-w for my Ger- 
 man aspirate. In the next page he attributes to me a guttural 
 instead of a nasal sound. In the foregoing page he makes me 
 say that in the pronunciation of Hebrew I agreed with Dr. Wil- 
 son, whereas I said that Parkhurst was my guide, from whom 
 Dr. Wilson differed. In page 185, he makes me name Dr. Wil- 
 son, as a more learned man than Dr. Campbell of Scotland, 
 whereas I only referred to him as a gentleman of this city, who 
 had been mentioned by my opponent with Dr. Campbell, and of 
 •whom I had that opinion ; but did not give his name. 
 
 In a certain case 1 had to remind my opponent that the Mo- 
 derators were only to decide on matters of order. In page 171, 
 he makes me say that the Moderator " sits here as a judge of 
 plain matter oi fact and nothing else !" To give a detailed ac- 
 count of all such alterations as these would be more than the 
 public would bear, and certainly more than is necessary for 
 their satisfaction as to the real character of the report. In page 
 173, he gives me Dr. James, a President of a college in Scot- 
 land, instead of Dr. Jamieson, who was no President. In 186, 
 he changes Dr. Miller into Professor Stuart. In the same page 
 he makes me speak of David's writings instead of his dead body. 
 In the next page he changes an escape into a surrender and al- 
 ways into very seldom. In page 173, he omits a modern Dr. 
 ]V). whom I expressly mentioned, and gives me Priestley^s Cor- 
 ruptions inste-dd of Miller's Letters to Baltimore. In page 282, 
 he makes me compliment the candour ot Kneeland instead of 
 M'Knight; and in 223, makes me say that I, instead of my op- 
 ponent, had quoted Parkhurst. In page 279, he makes me say 
 that in the refutation of L niversalist writers, 1 would use their 
 arrangement instead of my own. In page 80, he has, besides 
 
Ixxxi 
 
 many other capricious turns, changed backs into bosoms, axidrnv 
 hearers into his Indians. In page 203, he has chano-ed Old 
 England to NewEnghmd, and in the bottom of 298, has substi- 
 tuted the Scriptures for my little book. For a Hebrew transla- 
 tion of the New Testament which I had just borrowed, he has 
 in paj:;e 218, substituted a Greek Testament, and has, of course, 
 changed my Shcol, intended to counteract an assertion of my 
 opponent, for Hades which has no application. This, however 
 did not aj/ict the argument more than clianging Hebrew into 
 Greek and Greek into Hebrew, both of which he has done in 
 page 153. As Mr. Kneeland declared sin to be a mere nega- 
 tion, I observed that to condemn or punish it, would be like 
 condemning a vacuum or punishing a man for an empty stomach. 
 Without affecting the argument, as Mr. Jennings supposes, he 
 has made me say, that " It would be like attempting to clear a 
 vacuum, or like administering an emetic to clear an empty stom- 
 ach !" As the Report in general has much the eftect of the 
 antimonial preparation, more than half the glaring alterations 
 which have been noted must be dispensed with. To sa\ e time 
 in this disgusting occupation, my i-eferences to most of the cases 
 have been very short and therefore obscure. This arises from 
 his having not only altered the particulars referred to, but al- 
 most every thing connected with them. Unless therefore, the 
 whole passage is restored to its original purity, the rest.)ration of 
 the word to which I refer, would appear as unaccountable a> to 
 see Saul among the prophets, or a Presbyterian minister of the 
 highest standing associated with a herd of Universalist wit- 
 nesses. 
 
 I have neither time nor disposition to enumerate the many de- 
 viations from truth which have been proved against Mr. Itlor'se in 
 the public prints. I would only suggest to his biographer, that 
 he can borrow from Smollet a very suitable title for his memoirs. 
 Let them be called " The Adventures of an Atom." Mr. 
 Kneeland, a party, and Mr. Jennings, his employed stenogra- 
 pher, are well known. Mr. Condie is one of tiiose whjf in 
 great wi-ath and disappointment, called me a liar at the close 
 ©f the debate. As this indecent conduct was occasioned by the 
 triumph of truth, I was more amused at the livid hue with which 
 rage had adorned his countenance, than 1 was hurt at his words. 
 His testimony manifests the same zeal in the same cause. With 
 Mr. Kneeland he is delighted to make the Report an exhibi'iou 
 of my peculiar style and manner', and with Dr. Wylie's certifi- 
 cate coined by Mr. Jennings, he even makes it give my very 
 words and expressions. Although this is v/hat Mr. Jennings at 
 first promised, he has long given it up, and taken refuge under 
 <he argument without the loords Even the modest Mr. Knoe- 
 Tand says in his certificate, " in many places T can ]»ereeivesome 
 
ixxwi 
 
 verbal din'ercnce," aiul Di. Ely certifies, that " Mr. Jennings 
 does not pretend, in every instance, to give the words of the 
 speakers." It would be well for the witnesses to agree with one 
 another and not to give the reporter more credit than he claims. 
 
 Witli one breath Mr. Jennings tells us that he has "merely 
 given an outline" of Dr. Ely's speech, and with the next, express- 
 es great indignation at my calling his report of it " an invented 
 address." The evidence of my own ears, of others who were 
 present, and Dr. Ely's own declarations, must form my apology. 
 Although I was myself a witness, both parties were heard before 
 my opinion was publicly expressed. The reason which Dr. 
 Ely gave for correcting his piece at all was the very same which 
 was given by an euiinent minister of this city, mentioned in my 
 lasi article. It was an unwillingness that any thing injurious to 
 religion, should be published with his name attached to it. He 
 declared to me expressly, "If Mr. Jennings has reported you 
 as he has me, you have good reason to complain." Long ago 
 he gave me privately the same opinion of the first number which 
 his certificate contains. I told him that he would not always be- 
 lieve so. By way of specimen I asked him what he thought of 
 Mr. Jennings's report of my division in page 22, compared with 
 the report which I should then give him. Mr. Jennings sajs, 
 that I undertake to "prove the absolute and eternal punishment 
 of the wicked, 1st, by the scriptures; 2dly, from the account 
 which they contain of the attributes of God; and Sdly, from the 
 condition of fallen man." My report of the division was this: 
 1, Inference; 2, Implication; 3, Contrast; 4, Negation; 5, Af- 
 firmation. The comparison convinced him that Mr. Jennings 
 was wrong, although he had not before observed it. The daj 
 after the publication of the certificates, Mr. Jennings's rfearf ass 
 was presented to Dr. Ely and Uv, Wylie as another specimen, 
 with the same result. 
 
 This last mentioned gentleman, like Dr. Ely, told me long 
 ago, that he could discover no error in the report, but like him 
 he could detect one when pointed out; and when he gave his 
 opinion to Mr. Jennings he did not recollect, if he ever knew, 
 my intention of giving my side of the question in relation to the 
 particulars of the Minutes. 1 could not obtain an interview with 
 him until my last article was in the office, and probably set up, 
 or my remarks concerning him should have been of a very differ- 
 ent character If he had really spoken as Mr. Jennings reports, 
 I could still say of him and Dr. Ely, notwitlistanding this injury, 
 that they are " truly eminent and highly esteemed brethren.'* 
 But although Dr. VVylie gave this fair and impartial reporter 
 liberty to " make any proper use he pleased'' of his real opinion 
 concerning the Minutes, he did not give him leave artfully to 
 make a false impression concerning the conversation, as he has 
 
Ixxxiii 
 
 done so often concerning my speeches. In a letter to me of the 
 25th ult. from which a few words have just been quoted, the Dr. 
 says, " Truth obliges me to remark that the various items of the 
 conversation between Mr. Jennings and me above stated, have 
 been rather artfully put together. To the best of my recollection, 
 the word * although' together with the two underscored expres- 
 sions, are inferences of his own. At all events, I have no hesi- 
 tation to say that the stateuient, taken tout ensemble., conveys a 
 different meaning from what was intended. Judge yourself, 
 whether the premises [the foregoing narrative in the letter] war- 
 rant such a conclusion. The manner in which these truths are 
 stated by Mr. Jennings, seems to present the air of a strong con- 
 viction of conscientious obligation to come forwax'd and state the 
 /rw/A in evidence against Mr. M'Calla, a man tvhose veracity / 
 believe unimpeachable. Very contrary to thif was the fact.' 
 Here then is the amount of Dr. Wylie's testimony. Mr. Jen- 
 nings asked his opinion of his minutes of two hours and an half of 
 the debate, while as yet the other party was not heard. Dr. 
 Wylie confesses that he can see no fault in it, and gives him li- 
 berty to make any proper use of this declaration. This faithful re- 
 porter then cooks it into acertficate, in which he reports the Dr. as 
 saying, that" truth obliges him to declare tha.the cannot discover 
 the least difference even in expression." The Dr. now speaks for 
 himself, and says that trtith obliges him to remark that this preten- 
 ded obligation to give a premature testimony, and this exactness 
 of the Report ^'•even in expression,''^ given to him by the reporter, 
 Are inferences of his own; that the items of the conversation have 
 been rather artfidly put together., and that the statement altogeth- 
 er conveys a different meaning from what was intended, and one 
 very contrary to fact. If all this is said by Mr. Jennings's own 
 witness concerning his report of a few sentences, what are we 
 to expect in a report of a twenty hours's debate. 
 
 The testimony of Dr. Ely, taken altogether, is not much more 
 favourable. But if it were, the Universalists are the last who 
 should claim the benefit of it, since they have in their spleen, 
 denied him the essential qualifications of a witness. It will be 
 recollected that Mr. Kneeland, in his letter of the 13th of Sep- 
 tember, attributed to him insinuations which he said were " far 
 beneath the dignity of either the gentleman or the christian." 
 To keep from ascribing such language to " a heart desperately 
 wicked,'" he is forced by the sweet impulse of charity, to conclude 
 that it does not proceed " from a mind that is sound. " Yet not 
 many months after laying aside his testimony in my favour, on 
 ihe pretended ground of lunacy, he is produced against me with- 
 out any perceivable change for the better. It is true, I am wil- 
 ling to admit him as a witness^ every one knows him, as well as 
 
Ixxxiv 
 
 Dr. Wylie, to be one of the greatest lights ot" our countrj; every 
 body knows that Mhen Mr. Kneeland accused him of unsound- 
 ness, and when Mr. Morse accused Mr. Magoffin, and when Mr, 
 Ballou accused me, they did not believe what they said, for we 
 should all be very sound, if we would go over to their side; yet 
 they ought to know that when they have committed themselves 
 by such gross, guilty, slanderous dissimulation, they ought, for 
 decency's sake, to preserve a small degree of consistency, and 
 not to disqualify a witness one moment and summon him the 
 next. 
 
 Where now are those hundreds of witnesses whose testimony 
 Mr. Kneeland told us "could be obtained if it were necessary, 
 of its being as faithful a report as ever was made .►"' I am in- 
 formed that general orders were given from the pulpit and the 
 press for their battallious to muster with all possible speed. On 
 the cover of the last number of the Report, Mr. Jennings " ear- 
 nestly requests every individual" who is willing, to send his cer- 
 tificate " as soon as possible to the office of the Saturday Even- 
 ing Post, or to the residence of the publisher." It was prudent 
 to name two places, as one could hardly be expected to contain 
 the certificates of so many hundreds. The roll is called, and 
 the faithful brethren, Messrs. Kneeland, Jennings, Morse, Hogan 
 and Condie are found in their places. Now, gentlemen, are you 
 willing to certify that this is " as faithful a report as ever was 
 made?" Is it as faithful as some made by Mr. Stansbury, Re- 
 porter to Congress ? Mr. Morse and Mr. Hogan, speak your 
 minds, for you must understand this matter well, as you gaped 
 and yawned and looked out of the window so much while the 
 Kentuckian was speaking. They testify that the report is 
 " without any omissions or additions affecting the arguments :" 
 and remember that this school does not consider even the case of 
 Lazarus and the rich man as affecting the argument. Well Mr. 
 Kneeland, can you admit any flaws ? Be cautious now, and do 
 not expose us. " In many places I can perceive some verbal 
 difference." What ! is this the character of "as faithful a re- 
 port as ever was made ?" If T/owgo that far, what may we not 
 expect from the other party ? Dr. Condie, you are ready 
 ENOUGH, it is true, but your testimony is not worth much fov 
 that very reason. In this sad condition, they were no doubt 
 much refreshed with the testimony made for Dr. Wylie by Mr. 
 Jennings, and with that of Dr. Ely whom they had before reject- 
 ed as unsound. Since its publication, Dr. Ely's opinion has been 
 directly opposed by witnesses of equal respectability, and I hope 
 will be changed by himself when he has heard both sides. — The 
 injury done to Dr. Wylie by his reporter, I confess, does not 
 give me great pain, wnce it proves Mr. Jennings unfaithful in a 
 
little, and of course not to be trusted in much. It has also made 
 rae better acquainted with a man whose forbearance, conscien- 
 tiousness, candour, and tenderness of affection I hope to imitate, 
 and whose society and friendship I desire to enjoy in this, wil- 
 derness and in the land of promise. 
 
 W. L. M 'CALL A. 
 Philadelphia, Nov. 4, 1824, 
 
PART FIRST. 
 
 The question which has called us together involves an 
 essential doctrine of Christianity. Hence arises, in part, 
 my great willingness to engage in its discussion. For the 
 lawfulness of such an undertaking we have the authority of 
 God's word, apostolical precedent, and the example of the 
 Reformers ; of whom Martin Luther held a debate of ten 
 days with the Pope's Legate, at Leipsic; and Melancthon, 
 Calvin and Knox had their public conferences with the ec- 
 clesiastics of the establishment to which they were opposed. 
 These do not necessarily give scope to evil passions more 
 than written controversy. This method of defending the 
 truth may, in certain circumstances, be conducted as de- 
 cently and as profitably as the other plan. Yet if my con- 
 duct in the commencement or prosecution of this enterprise 
 be censurable, I wish it to be explicitly stated and under- 
 stood that the blame is my own exclusively. As I am not 
 considered responsible to my brethren in this particular, 
 they cannot be at all implicated in the business. My only 
 desire is, that if God enable me to speak for edification, 
 he alone may have the praise. On the Triune God of Israel 
 is my only dependence. Willingly do I confess my natural 
 depravity, and inability to do any thing acceptable to God, 
 or profitable to his people, except by the grace of a risen 
 Saviour, and by the help of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 \mong those errorists who deny the eternity of future 
 punishment, there are two general descriptions — the Des«- 
 tructionists who believe in the annihilation of the wicked, 
 and the Universalists who believe in their eternal happi- 
 ness. Some inspired men, as Job and Jeremiah, have, in 
 the bitterness of their souls, lamented over their own exist- 
 ence, and appeared to think, with the suicide, that annihi- 
 lation was preferable even to the sufferings of this life, and 
 of course preferable to the eternal and the insupportable 
 wrath of God, threatened in his word. This system is 
 equally opposed to the scriptural account of degrees in 
 
88 
 
 punishment ; >vbicli we are certainly taught by our Saviom* 
 in his sermon on the mount, where lie dooms one to the 
 judgment, another to the council, and a third to hell fire ; 
 the servant who sinned against knowledge to the punish- 
 ment of many stripes, and iiim who sinned ignorantly to 
 comparatively few stripes ; and those who despise the gos- 
 pel to a more intolerable punishment than that of Sodom 
 and Gomorrah. Annihilation admits of no degrees, nor 
 does it admit of that consciousness of existence and appre- 
 hension of the existence of an indignant Creator, which 
 the Scriptures attribute to the condemned sinner, wlicn it 
 is said, *'ye shall know that I am the Lord." " He siiall 
 ©ev^ard him and he shall know it." '* Ye shall know that I 
 thei Lord have poured out my fury upon you " 
 
 Among Universalists there is a great variety. Some 
 believe in a limited punishment in the future world, others 
 confine it to this life. In each of these sects, there is a 
 variety of sentiments concerning the description of punish- 
 ment to be inflicted, some considering it condign, others 
 penitentiary, others disciplinary. My opponent passes for 
 a Universalist and not a Destructionist. He professes to 
 belong to that sect which confines punishment to this life, 
 and to that class which considers punisliment disciplinary, 
 that is, intended for the good of the subject. His sentiments 
 and my own, may be seen in the question which we have 
 adopted for discussion, and the several clauses of which, 
 we have espoused respectively. " Is tlie punishment of the 
 wicked absolutely eternal ? or is it only a temporal punish- 
 ment in this world for their good, and to be succeeded by 
 eternal happi)iess after death?' The affirmative of the lat- 
 ter clause advocated by my oppinent is a denial of a future 
 state of rewards and punishments It presents Universal- 
 ism in its most daring aspect, but only in that degree of 
 turpitude to which every description of this error naturally 
 leads. Unconnected with materialism as it certainly is, 
 in the phraseology of the question, this system would send 
 the antediluvian rebels to Heaven before Noah, tiie Sodom- 
 ites before Lot, the Egyptians before Moses, Korah, Dathan 
 and Abiram before Aaron, the Canaanites before .Joshua, 
 the blaspheming tliief before the Apostles, and Judas before 
 Christ. Did these holy characters need more punishment 
 lor discipline, for repentance, or for satisiaction tlian those 
 rebels who died before them ? or was there any thing in tiie 
 
89 
 
 duration or intensity of their sufferinga, which would give 
 to the death of these rebels an extraordinary eftirary ? In 
 general their pains were neither very tedious nor very se- 
 vere. The experience of :uany can attest that there is com- 
 paratively little pain in drowning: The agony is in coming 
 to again. Whether those who perished in the general de- 
 luge and in the Red Sea were disciplined into holiness by 
 their death, we may conjecture by the example of the Ca- 
 Jiaanites and many others who suffered much, before their 
 deati), and were only hardened under tlie means of soften- 
 ing, and blasphemed God on account of their plagues. 
 
 The several systems which liave been desciibed are so 
 nearly related, that they may hat hour the advocates «>f each 
 other, without any material change of ground; as a prison- 
 er may go from one cell to another, without escaping from 
 confinement. In this tiiey resemble the x^tians and Socini- 
 aiis, whose subtle vacillations have been exposed by Wardlaw 
 of Scotland and Miller of America. "When they feel 
 pressed by a text or an argument which bears hard on the 
 Socinian hypothesis, they take refuge in Arianism, and en- 
 deavour to maintain that the ditlirulty vanishes, on the plan 
 of the pre-existence and super-angelick nature of Christ, as 
 held by Arians. On the contrary, when pressed by a pas- 
 sage of Scripture, or a consideration, w hich wears an as- 
 pect unfavourable to Avianisni, they can with equal dexterity 
 avail themselves of the Socinian doctrine, and argue with 
 the lowest Humanitarian." The youngor Edwards has 
 shewn that Dr. Chauncey has been guilty of the same ter- 
 giversation in the Universalist controversy. While profes- 
 sedly defending the doctrine of a future penitentiary pursish- 
 ment, he is not ashamed, in passing certain fortresses, to 
 hoist the colours of ihe Destructionists. My opponent also, 
 in the 206th page of his Lectures, appears to adopt a similar 
 policy, in order to escape the torce of Matt. 10: 28, and 
 Luke 12: 5, which direct us to fear God, who, "after he 
 hath killed, hath power to cast into hell '* In this passage 
 my opponent sees two difficulties. One is that God hath 
 power to cast into hell. This he removes in a note, by say- 
 ing, " because God has power to destroy, it does not neces- 
 sarily follow that he will." But knowing that this assertion 
 is a direct contradiction of the word of God, which says 
 that he will *' destroy them that def^troy the earth," and that 
 with an *' everlasting destruction;'* and recollecting also 
 
 H 
 
90 
 
 that the second ililiiculty in tlie text is that this takes place, 
 nu' in this life, but " aitn- he liath killed," my supple oppo- 
 nent seeks relief hy resorting to that very use of the word 
 distroy^ wliich gave to the Destructionists thei!* distinctive 
 appellation. His words are these ; •' But I have no objec- 
 tion in the supposition t!«at this text is to he understood in 
 a higher sensej and th:.t it refers to the sovereignty of G- d, 
 w! «» lia** power, as all will admit, to renderany being y\\i(,m 
 he hath made, exlinct. He who created man, is able to 
 desttoy him in every sense in which hcexisti as man." Here 
 he pji plains the scriptural threatening of the destruction of 
 the wicked, to mean the destruction of his existence, the ex- 
 tmction of his being, which is annihilation. 
 
 My opponent is c(pially wavering as to the reason Mhy 
 our Creator punishes the wicked. In his Lectures and in 
 that clause of the question w hicli he has undertaken to de- 
 fend, he represents God as all mercy, punishing the wick- 
 ed only for their good, in that brief summary of the Uni- 
 versalist faith which is annexed to the system of psalmody 
 used (as I understand) by that society in this place, God is 
 represented as an inexorable judge, without any forgive- 
 ness except up(m the ground of our making full satisfaction 
 to the law by oui* own sufferings. The words arc *' We 
 believe it to be consistent with the character and govern- 
 ment of God, and perfectly consonant to the design of his 
 law, to punish all wilful oftenders, and to administer to 
 every transgression and disobedience a just recompence of 
 reward.'* That my opponent sometimes preaches this doc- 
 trine of a condign instead of a disciplinary punishment may 
 be seen In the ?35th page of his duidecimo sermon published 
 in the pjesent year, where he declares that " all tlie hell 
 there is, (and we believe in all the jjunishment cf which the 
 scriptures speak,) is inevitably certain to the wicked: and 
 their portion in this 'lake ofiire and brimstone,' in these 
 * sorrows of death,' and ' pains of I.ell,' not only is, but ever 
 will be, in exact ratio to the measure and magnitude of sin. 
 It is on this principle that God rewards every man accord- 
 ing to his works Tho same adherence to the doctrine of 
 satisfactory punishment is found in the spuiious edition of 
 Buck's Theological Dictionary. My opponent has there 
 said, u der tiie article *' Universalists,'' that " they contend 
 that the wicked receive a ^\ix\\shme,wi proportioned to their 
 crimes.'* 1 should like to know what the condign punish- 
 
ment of the wicked means, if it is not that which is " pro- 
 portioned to their crimes," and " in exact ratio to the mea- 
 sure and magnitude of sin." When this is laid upon an 
 adequate surety, and the oifending individual is pardoned, 
 there is an exercise of mercy; '* for to the Lord our Gid 
 behmg mercies and forgivenesses," *' keeping mercy for 
 thousands, forgiving iniquity, and transgression and sin, 
 and that will by no means clear the aiiilty.' Yet when this 
 punishment is laid upon the oflenders themselves, and full 
 satisfaction is exacted fiom them, however just it is, there 
 is no display of mercy intended in it. In this plan there is 
 no room foi* Christ, although the scriptures say *' through 
 him is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins." My oppo- 
 nent, not satisfied with thus contradicting the Gospel of 
 Christ, " in whom we have forgiveness of sins,'' contradicts 
 himself intlie \ev\ next woj-ds to those last quoted, by say- 
 ing *' that punishment iiself is disviptinary, and not incon- 
 sistent with mercy.'' S\ 'uit! is it an exercise of mercy to 
 inflict upon all men, in their own persons, '* a punishment 
 proportioned to tiseir crimes ?" Is it like parental discipline 
 to punish all n7en individually *' in exact ratio to the mea- 
 sure and magnitude of sin ?" Is there no room for ♦* repen- 
 tance and remission of sins/"' " Is there no halm in Gilead, 
 'is there no piiysician there?" In the gospel we are taught 
 that God inflicts a condign punishment upon our Divine 
 surety, and a discijjlijiary chastisement upon those w!!<;se 
 sins are fully and freely forgiven through his blood : but 
 when my opponent, leaving a Saviour out of view, attempts, 
 in the very same sentence, to make these two descriptions 
 of punishment meet in the individual offenders, he shows 
 either the most licentious inconsistency, or a want of ac- 
 quaintance with the plainest terms in technical theology. — 
 Yet great as the incongruity of these two systems is. they 
 are not more at war with each other than they are vvith 
 scripture and common sense, when, as at present, they re- 
 ject the doctrine of future punishment. How can that man 
 be said to receive in this life, either a disciplinary or a satis- 
 factory punishment for the most heinous crime, in the very 
 perpetration of which he dies instantaneously ? How can 
 either of these punishments be inflicted on a suicide, in this 
 life, for a crime which, in the very act, removes him beyond 
 this life? 
 
 It is hardly necessary to shew the multiplied inconsiaten- 
 
&2 
 
 Gies of my opponent by reminding yoa that on this very 
 occasion, he lias added a penitentiary punishment to the 
 descriptions mentioned already He lias promised that if I 
 prove the first clause of our question, he will then '• prove 
 that the punishment of the sinner is only temporal and salu- 
 taiy, to be succeeded by \\i^ reptnitatue and never ending 
 ha])piness.''* Without dwelling on the impossibility of a 
 suicide's repenlin^i in i\n^ life, of" a crime which, in a twink- 
 ling, terminates his life, I would observe that tbis shifting of 
 the question from one system of Universalism to another, is 
 effecluallv precluded by the question adopted by the parties. 
 One of tlie most remarkable characteristics of a Christian is, 
 that he is willing to make a distinct and uiiequisocal profes- 
 sion of his faith in the presence of the universe. But the 
 anxiety of my opponent to secure opportunities of shuffling 
 has led him into a most pitiable, though abortive attempt.f 
 to elude the trammels which our rules have placed upon 
 bim, by confining him to one particular scheme of error. 
 
 But why should he so repeatedly:]: make my proving the 
 first clause of the question a prerequisite to his attempting 
 the establishment of the second I Are they not substan- 
 tially one question ? Is not the establishment of eternal pun- 
 ishment a refutation of Universalist limitations? And if these 
 limitations be proved, does not my system fall of course ■ The 
 only reason why the second clause was proposed on my part, 
 "was to compel my opponent to take a decided stand with 
 that particular sect and class of TJniversalists to which he 
 chose to belong. This stand he has taken by the very fact 
 of adopting the question. If the transaction be insincere, 
 let the censure lie upon the guilty person. 
 
 It seems also strange that my opponent should, in the com- 
 mencement of this discussion, § complain that my first half 
 hour did not contain more evidence, and that heshould throw 
 the blame of his sterility upon my supposed remissness. Let the 
 cause be what it may. his complaints are truly doleful. In order 
 to the application of a remedy, let the evil be well understood. 
 It is described in his own words, as follows, viz : " But as he 
 has brought forward nothing for mo to answer, nothing in 
 support of his argument, I have nothing to refute. I do not 
 know even how to consume my thirty minutes," "1 feel anxious 
 to consume my thirty minutes, but in truth, I know not what 
 
 • Miniitcg, p. 44. -f- Minutes, p. IC. 
 
 J^inolcs, pp. 58, 44. § Minutee p. 15. 
 
93 
 
 to say.*'* This, then, is the evil ; he has nothing to say ; he 
 knows not how to fill up his time. It this sorrow heimputed 
 to my mode of managing the controversy, I will endeavour to 
 supply his deficiencies by the aid of Univer.salist authors, and 
 thus give a better defence of Universalism than my opponent 
 has dor.e. In the fear of God, this shall be done in a con- 
 scientious way, by selecting the several heads ot argument, 
 which our antagonists advance against us, and by marshalling 
 their scripture authorities adduced in support of these argu- 
 ments, to the best advantage, beginning with the weakest 
 and ending with the strongest. This is not only the most 
 honest but the most politic plan ; because if their best array 
 cannot be defeated, we had better capitulate at once, and if 
 it can be overthrown, it had better be done immediately. 
 
 UNIVERSALI8T CANONS. 
 
 Preparatory to this measure, it is necessary to pay some at- 
 tention to the numerous factitious rules of exegesis by which 
 the Universalist writers deceive themselves and others. The 
 proof which God has condescended to give will not answer 
 their purpose. They must have such as they choose in their 
 sovereignty to demand. The Jews disregarded our Saviour's 
 miracles, and said, " let him now come down from the cross 
 and we will believe him." So these authors disregard volumes 
 of plain inspired evidence, and demand that which would be 
 exactly right to their perverted judgments, which take wrong 
 for right and right for wrong. In this view they require that 
 our proofs should be drawn from the right book aud the rio ht 
 part of the book. These texts must be in a right style, the 
 same as the context; and of a right composition, invulnerable 
 to heretical conjecture. These rules are recognized by my 
 opponent, in the 209th page of his Lectures, in a note which 
 he has copied from the improved Unitarian Version of 2 Pet. 
 2: 4, which informs us that " God spared not the Angels that 
 sinned, but cast them down to hell." The following' are his 
 words; viz ** If God spared not the messengers who had 
 sinned, i. e. the spies who were sent to explore the land of 
 Canaan, &c. See Simpson's Essays, p. 205, &c. But if the 
 common interpretation be admitted, it will not establish the 
 popular doctrine concerning fallen augels. For, 1, The 
 epistle itself is of doubtful authority ! 2. From the change of 
 style, this is the most doubtful portion of the epistle! 3. By 
 
 • Miautes, pp. 37, 39. 
 
94 
 
 those who admit the genuineness of the epistle, this chapter 
 is supposed to have been a quotation from some ancient 
 apocryphal book, and the Apostle might not mean to give 
 authority to the doctrine, but to argue with his readers upon 
 known and allowed principles!" So it seems of no avail for 
 us to prove the genuineness, authenticity and inspiration of 
 our authorities, if even a nameless heretic can be quoted, by 
 whom it is supposed that the writer did not mean what he 
 said ! Thus do these modern Pharisees and Sadducees make 
 void the law of God by their traditions and impious con- 
 jectures. 
 
 Besides these things, they demand in our authorities, what 
 they or their friends suppose to be the right words and phrases, 
 subject, and sense ; with a right extent of reference and ad- 
 dress ; by a right number of authors, and a right frequency 
 of repetition ; and that at what they suppose to be the right 
 times. In Hebr. 7: 16, we find the word endless or indisdutu- 
 ble* in connection with life. In the 22?id page of my 
 opponent's lectures, he says, " if this word could have 
 been so much as once found connected with death, in the 
 same manner as it is here connected with life, it would have 
 given more support to the doctrine of endless misery, than all 
 that is contained in the Bible besides." He now asks,f " why 
 did they [the inspired writers] not make use of this term 
 about the meaning of which there could be no dispute ?'* He 
 makes the same high sounding demands:J: concerning the 
 phrase§ which is, in Isa. 45: 17, translated world without end. 
 He says, " If he [his antagonist] can, let him, find the passage 
 in which the words are found in connection with punishment, 
 misery, or death, and again I say,' I will give him the argu- 
 ment, and our discussion will end." Thus my opponent will 
 not believe the truth, however plainly declared in Holy Writ, 
 unless it is revealed in such words and phrases as he shall dic- 
 tate ; and he takes care to dictate such as he thinks can never 
 be found in that connection. Neither would he yield, if all his 
 demandii were complied with ; as is evident trom his refusing 
 so to do, when through the suggestion of a friend, Ps.9:5, was 
 quoted, in which the Hebrew phrase^ used in connection with 
 punishment, is, according to his own acknowledgment, equiva- 
 lent to the expression used in Isa. 45: 17, in connection with 
 happiness. 
 
 * axafa^roj 
 J Minutes, p. 105. \ Minutes, pp. ir.-;, 181, 252. . 
 
95 
 
 After one Universalist has directed the inspired penman 
 what word to use, it is no wonder that another should dictate 
 the subject of his whole discourse. Balfour, in the 3d sec- 
 tion ol his enquiry, will not admit that (he " damnation of 
 hell,*' spoken of in Matt. 23: 33, can mean an eternal punish- 
 ment, because the whole discourse is not exclusively confined 
 to eternal subjects. He says that it " occurs in the fullest 
 and plainest discourse ever uttered by our Lord concerning 
 th« temporal miseries coming on the Jewish nation." " How 
 comes it to jjass that if the damnation of hell means eternal 
 misery, it should only be introduced in such a discourse?'' It 
 might as well be asked how ' our daily bread'' can mean bodi- 
 ly nourishment, when spiritual blessings are evidently the chief 
 subject of the Lord's prayer. Throughout the whole Bible, 
 temporal and eternal things are connected as they are in 1 
 Tim. 4: 8, where godliness is said to have the *' promise of 
 the life that now is; and of that which is to come." 
 
 But if these writers cannot keep the Apostles from mingling 
 different subjects in the same discourse, th»^y are determined 
 to remedy the evil, by giving to their works what they consider 
 the right sense, or in other words, by giving to the Scriptures 
 whatsoever sense will bestsuit their views of Universalism,even 
 if it should attach to Christ and his apostles the charge of error. 
 This, in fact, appears to be the real object of their distinction 
 between the theocratical and popular sense of Scripture. Bal- 
 four in his 2d section, declares that the Jews in the time of 
 Christ, believed falsely in future punishment ; and that our 
 Saviour's language with regard to Lazarus and the rich man, 
 *' was only availing himself of iheiv popular belief, to she\r 
 them the obstinacy of their unbelief.'' In the next section he 
 infor;iiS us that all our Saviour's language concerning Abra- 
 ham's bosom, and the place of torment in this conspicuous 
 passage "is merely brought in as a part of its imagery," and 
 that, on such subjects, it is not our Saviour's design to adher© 
 " strictly to the truth of things." If by this distinction or 
 any other, Mr. Balfour could prove the Son of God a liar, he 
 would doubtless be congratulated by all the devils in hell, and 
 by many of bis brethren on earth. Of the felicitations of one 
 of them at least, he would be absolutely certain. In a pam- 
 phlet, entitled " Fresbyterianism versus Presbyterianism'' 
 published by my opponent, in the year 1819, you find him as- 
 serting in the 16th page, concerning the plainest historical 
 and doctrinal declarations of Scripture, " all this is popular 
 
Si6 
 
 laiiguao-e, aud is true ouly in a popular sense ;" that is in a 
 "faise^ sense, as he afterward explains it. By the aid of this 
 distinction, he inculcates that all those passages which are 
 usually perverted to the defence of Unitarian ism anii Uni- 
 versalism are to be understood in the theocratical or true 
 sense; and all those which convey most plainly the essential 
 doctrines of Christianity are to be understood in the popular 
 or false sense. Upon the ground of this distinction, furnished 
 him by Mr, Balfour, he asserts " that God does whatever his 
 creatures do,*' that God " is not resisted at ali,-" that " when- 
 ever the consequences of the actions of man are beyond his 
 fiiresight or motive, those consequences cannot be imputed to 
 ban, but must be imputed to God alone;" that '* man, consid- 
 ered as an instrument in the hands of God, is altocf ether pas- 
 sive." "This system considers man as having nothing to do." 
 "Man, in this sense of speaking, is altoyelher passive, and 
 acts only as he is acted upon." By this plan, my opponent 
 has, in page IG, ascertained the theocratical faleshood of all 
 those passages " in which men are said to go astra\ like 
 sheep, or to return again to the great Shepherd,- to resist the 
 Spirit of God, or to yield obedience to his law; to be lost or 
 to be saved ' ! !! " It is in the popular [that is the false] sense, 
 only, that men can be subjects of either praise or blame." 
 *• In this sense, he is no more accountable than the axe is ac- 
 countable to the man who useth it, or the saw to the hand 
 which shaktth it."* 
 
 After my opponent thinks that he has hewn down all the 
 cedars of Lebanon by this newly invented weapon, he sits 
 down with the self complacency of a certain character who 
 " eateth and wipeth her mouth and saith I have done no 
 wickedness." He even boasts, in his 22d page, that he has 
 done much good. "Thus," says he, " according to this sys- 
 tem, being well understood, and these rw/t^s adhered to in con- 
 struing the Holy Scriptures, all those contradictions in lan- 
 guage, and confusion of ideas, which are so obvious in other 
 systems of divinity, are completely done away." He thinks 
 that by denying the purity of God, the depravity and ac- 
 countabiirty of man, and the doctrines of perdition and sah'a- 
 tion, we are to understand better, that revelation which was 
 given for the express purpose of teaching those very truths 
 which he denies ! No wonder that Dr. James P. Wilson, 
 of this city, said, in his printedf animadversious upon 
 
 •See pp. 16, 18, 20, 22. t In 1820. I 
 
97 
 
 the pamphlet which contains these sentiments, that "the 
 principles of this Universalist appear to be nefarious, beyond 
 a parallel." 
 
 But as this way of contradicting the Scriptures by admit- 
 ting their truth in a popular sense, is rather an unpopular 
 thiHg among- the churches, some writers have given to this 
 popular or false sense, a more plausible name, by calling it 
 jyarabolical. You would scarcely expect this from Mr; 
 Ballbur after his telling us that "a parable, like a fable, is 
 designed to impress on the mind, in a pleasing manner, some 
 important truth" He admits that they may be used to es- 
 tablish a " particular doctriue. of Christianity " but prudent- 
 ly remarks that '* the utmost caution should be observed in 
 reasoning from them," for this purpose. Yet when becomes 
 to examine a particular case, instead of establishing a " doc- 
 trine of Christianity," or discovering an •* important truth," he 
 takes it for granted that the dialogue between Abraham and 
 the rich man is *' a fiction" and pretends that thus far we 
 agree with him ; and he charges us with inconsistency for 
 believing in opposition to him, that the account of the rich 
 man being in torment is *' a fact,'* In the next paragraph 
 he gives this assumed position that the narrative is paraboli- 
 cal as one reason why we should not believe *' what is said 
 about Hades being a place of torment.'' In another place, 
 he says concerning the rich man, '♦ But if this is only a sup- 
 posed person^ I ask those who may differ from me, to prove 
 that the person is a real being. If they advocate the torment 
 to he a reality, they ought first to prove the person tormented 
 in Hades to be not a parabolic per son, before they draw the 
 conclusion that the torment is not aparabolic torment. The 
 first must be proved before the last can be admitted; for a 
 person must exist before he can be tormented in any place. 
 If the person mentioned is a real beinq, and the torment he 
 complains of a reality, and not ^fictitious or parabolic re- 
 presentation, we have a right to demand why every thino- ia 
 this account is not considered a narrative of facts, and not a 
 parable:* According to this extract from one of mv oppo- 
 nent's favourite authors, a parable cannot be a narrative of 
 facts; aparabolic representation in a fictitious representation, 
 and nothing can be truly predicated of a parabolical person, 
 because he is only a supposed person, and not a real being. 
 Isjhis like impressing " upon the mind, in a pleasing man- 
 • Section 2d, 
 
Qei, huuic iui[jortant truth ?" This rule was iuvented to stamp 
 with the seal o^ fiction, e\er\ important irvth which stands in 
 the way of the heretic. By this rule Mr. BaHou, in his first 
 Lecture on the Parables, proved that fhe axe which " is laid 
 unto the root of the trees," will not even penetrate the outer 
 bark, much less prostrate theui in the iire. In his second, he 
 has shewn that there is no danger of the wicked being con- 
 sumed like chaff in unquenchable fire; and in his third, that 
 they need not fear having their bodies cast into hell as a place 
 of torment. All these passages of Scripture are, in his view, 
 parabolical, and fictitious of course. For the same reason, 
 he and my opponent reject our Saviour's account of the day of 
 judgment, which Mr. i3allou,in the 174th page of his Treatise 
 on Atonement, has styled the " parable of the sheep and 
 goals." He also thinks that he has closed the impassable gulph, 
 not as Curtius did, (for he is probably more like the Jewish 
 rich man, than the Roman hero,) but by pronouncing it a 
 parable, that is, a fiction. 
 
 But let us apply the rirlc as held by these characters, to 
 some familiar cases. Mr. Balhm has not, 1 believe, told us 
 that the ten commandments wcie apaii\ble, hut he might as 
 \V'>1! have done it, as to have made a fiction of Luke \\y. 18, 
 *' Whosoever putteth away his Vvife, and marrieth another, 
 committeth adultery; and \\hosoever marrieth her that is 
 put away from her husband, committeth adultery." This 
 is Mr. Ballou's 37th parable. Of course he must consider 
 tlie husband and w\^e parabolical persons, and not real beings. 
 Then all that is said about marrying, divorcing, and mar- 
 rying again, is only ajictitious representation. Would not 
 this make void the law of (rod '? Besides much doctrinal 
 and practical instruction, vn c have in the 78th Psalm, a long 
 and strictly true histoi-y of God's people for many hundred 
 years. But in the second verse, the inspiied writer calls it 
 a parable. Is it therefoi-e a Jiclion ? In the ^8d and 24th 
 chapters of Numbers, the Spirit of God foretells tlie future 
 habitation, increase, prosperity and triumph of his people 
 Israel, and the advent and kingdom of Christ. The inspir- 
 ed vvritej* repeatedly calls these j)redicti(»ns a parable. Be- 
 cause Israel is mentioned in a parable, had this people no 
 real existence ? Was the star that should come out of Jacob 
 ou\y a"* supposed person,''* or an imaginary being? And 
 was his coming a mere fictitious representation ? But re- 
 member that it was not mine positively declared that Christ 
 should come, and his people prosper, than that his cneniieq 
 
99 
 
 should perish forever. In the 20t!i verse of tlic 24th chapr 
 tei", the histoiian says, " aM(l wlien he hxiked on Ainalok, 
 he took up his parable, and said, Am;ilek was the first 
 of the nations, hut his latter end shall he that he perish 
 forever'* To deny the truth of these parables could be ex;i 
 pected from none hut an infidel, and in Proverbs 2(»: 7, Solo,- 
 nion assures us that no wise man will lame them, by believ- 
 ing a part to be truth and a part fiction. *' The legs of the 
 lame are not equal ; so is a parable in the mouth of fools." 
 
 But we have aheady obsei-ved that atiother of their rules 
 of exposition is that a scriptural declaration must have a 
 right extent of reference and address. My opponoit says,* 
 *' the jtunishment of Gehenna is never threatened to the 
 Gentiles." He denies that Christ ''threatened with the ]um- 
 ishrnent of Gehenna, any others than Jews." Mi-. Balfour 
 says "that not a word about Hell or Gehenna is said to 
 the Gentiles by any of the inspired writers." He says *' that 
 all that is said about Gehenna in the way of threatening or 
 in any other shape was spoken to Jevks : JeviS and they 
 only were ti»e persons addressed wlien speaking of Gehen- 
 na It is not once named to the Gentiles in all the New 
 Testament, nor are any of them ever threatened with such 
 a punishmcuf't Their object is to shew that hell (h)es not 
 mean the eternal misery of every unbeliever, but only the 
 temporal calamities of the Jewish nation, in the destruction 
 of Jerusalem. To prove this they state what need not be 
 disputed, that the inspired discouiscs about Gehenna were 
 addressed to Jews only. Their conclusion is. thai these dis- 
 courses refer to them only According to this rule no part 
 of the Bible can relate to Ireland or Fhiladel])hia, because 
 not addressed to their inhabitajits. Most of tlic ^Scriptures 
 were originally addressed to the Jews, yet a great portion 
 of ihem refer eitiier expressly or implicitly to the Gentiles. 
 Can it be supposed that the poor in spirit, the meek, the 
 mou! nei-s, the merciful, the peace-makers, the pure, and th« 
 persecuted among the Gentiles, cannot be happy because 
 the beatitudes were addressed to the Jews? Our Saviour 
 once said to ceitain Jews, '< He tiiat helieveth and is bap- 
 tised shall be saved, but he that helieveth not shall bedanui- 
 ed." Because this was not addressed to Gentiles personal- 
 ly, have they therefore no part in either salvation or dam- 
 nation ? Our Saviour intimates that those who are unwilling 
 
 * Minutes, p. 177. 
 4: Settion '2d and 3d. 
 
100 
 
 to part with an offending hand, or foot, or eye, shall "be 
 cast into Ijell, into the fire that never shall be quenched." 
 Are none but Jews unwilling to forsake their sins^ If Gen- 
 tiles resemble them in character, they must part.ike of 
 their punishment. Our Saviour says to the Jews, " \ c ser- 
 pents, ye generation of vipers ! how can ye escape the dam- 
 nation of hell ?" Are no serpents and vipers to be found 
 among the Gentiles ? I should guess that all the hissing 
 wl)ich we have had against the truth in this house has not 
 Come from Jews. If, then, unbelievers of all nations are 
 the Children of the old serpent, it may be truly said of them, 
 that they cannot escape the damnation of Gehenna. Neither 
 will it avail in proof that Gehenna relates to the destruc- 
 tion of Jerusalem, to say, as Mr. Balfour has done in his 
 4th section, that John, who wrote after that event, "omits all 
 our Lord's discourses in which it is mentioned ;" since he 
 has also omitted the sermon on the Mount and the apostolic 
 commission above quoted, and many olher things which re- 
 late to Heaven as well as Hell, to salvation as well as per- 
 dition. 
 
 It has already been announced that the Universalist polem- 
 ics require that our proofs should be uttered by what they 
 esteem a right number of authors, a right frequency of re- 
 petition, and at the right times. My opponent, on this sub- 
 ject, speaks as follows : Paul " never once made use of this 
 term Gehenna or hell in all his preaching. Ah! Paul, have 
 you preached the whole counsel of God ? and yet we can- 
 not find this wonderful term in all your preaching ! ! ! Now 
 my hearers, I ask you, how could Paul preach the whole 
 counsel of God, and yet not preach the Gehenna or hell of 
 my opponent, if this doctrine oHiell be contained in any jjart 
 of the counsel of God?"* Although Mr, Balfour admits 
 that our Saviour threatened unbelieving Jews with the dam- 
 nation of hell, yet, in his 4th section, he sees no reason even 
 for them to fear, because the Apostles " were commanded to 
 preach the Gospel to every creature," and "they addressed 
 the worst of characters, but to none of them did thei/ ever 
 say, how can ye escape the damnation of hell V* To prove the 
 same point he tells us in chaj). 2. sect. 2, " that the word 
 Gehenna or hell is used by our Lord, and by James, but by 
 no other person in the New Testament." Near the close of 
 Section 4th, he says, " Now let it be supposed, that by this 
 
 ♦ Minute*, p. 17&. 
 
101 
 
 expression, our Lord meant endless misery in h future state. 
 I ask is it possible our Lord should only mention this once? 
 I ask again, can it be believed, that he who said on the 
 cross, * Father forgive them, for they know not what they 
 do,' should have ceased, but with his dying breath, to warn 
 these men that such a place of endless misery awaited them? 
 I ask once more, is it possible that he, who, when he beheld 
 the city, * wept over it,' on account of tempoial calamities, 
 in which it was soon to be involved, should shed no tears in 
 anticipating the endless misery of its wicked inhabitants ?" 
 From this it would appear that, with such chaiacters, the 
 authority of our Lord, or of an inspiied Apostle is not suf- 
 ficient. They will believe nothing but what has been de- 
 clared by all the sacred college, very often, on all import- 
 ant occasions, and especially in the hour of death. In the 
 second section of Balfour's first chapter, he leaves "it to 
 any candid man to say, if Hades be a place of torment after 
 death, whether our Lord would only mention this once." 
 In the same section of the next chapter, he asks, " how is it 
 to be rationally accounted for, that our Lord o/</y oric^ during 
 his whole ministry, should say to the unbelieving Jews, 
 * how can ye escape the damnation of hell?' if by this he 
 meant future eternal punishment ?" The same question 
 might be asked concerning Paradise as a place of happiness, 
 although the one time that our Saviour used this word was 
 in his dying hour. Yet it is evident that those who will thus 
 limit the Holy One will not believe when all their arrogant 
 demands are complied with : for his unl>elief still continues, 
 although, according to his own acknowledgment,* Gehenna 
 is twice called in Mk. 9th, ' the fire that never shall be quench- 
 ed.' He observes that " properly speaking, this expression 
 occurs no less than five times ; for it is three times said, by 
 way of addition, * where their w orm dieth not and the tire is 
 not quenched." In another place,+ he appears to think that 
 twelve repetitions are not sufficient to entitle their authors 
 to credit. His words are the following ; viz, " Admitting 
 for the present, that it occurs twelve times, and in all these 
 it is certainly used to express a place of eternal misery, it 
 deserves notice, that this is not so often in the whole Bible, 
 as it is used by many preachers in a single sermon ;" and 
 he might have added, as Mr. Balfour repeats this miserable 
 subterfuge, in a single chapter. 
 
 ♦Chap. 1, Sect. 3. 
 t Chap. 1, Sett. 2, 
 
102 
 
 LNtVERSALIST PRACTICE. 
 
 Having said thus much of their principles of interpretation, 
 by wliich they have imposed upon themselves and others, a 
 w ord or tw o concerning theii* practice may not be improj)cr. 
 Although their antagonists may accompany their sciipture 
 authorities with elaboiate explanations and arguments, they 
 scruple not to accuse them of quoting naked texts, \\ itb.out 
 argument : yet when it suits their purpose, they can glory 
 in pervei'ting detached passages of scripture without expla- 
 nation. In the 201st page of Mr. Ballou's Treatise on 
 Atonement, he says " Time would fail me, to ^^Tite one half 
 that might be quoted from the piophcts on this subject. I 
 ask for no explanation, on their testimony ; if what they say 
 do not prove my doctrine, I will not have recourse to expla- 
 nations." As he is a professed writer on dark sayings, pro- 
 veibs and parables, he ought to know what w as revealed to 
 Solomon in the introduction to his I'roverbs ; \a hcie \\q are 
 taught that it is the part of a learned man who has attairicd 
 to " wise counsels, to understand a proverb, and the inler- 
 pretation, the words of the wise and their dark sayings." 
 My opponent, however, incorrectly attributes to me as a 
 crime, the very thing of which his favourite boasts so vain^ 
 lyj and lest he should not be believed for the Mant 
 of sufficient repetition he gives it to us often enough. lie 
 accuses his antagonist of stating texts " without any argu- 
 ment to pi'ove his interpretation of them correct ;" of bring- 
 ing " text after text without attempting to prove his intei'- 
 pretation of tliem to be correct by fair argument ;" of giv- 
 ing " passage after passage without any argument or expla- 
 nation j" of giving "a continued series of quotations without 
 any argument to prove the meaning wiiich was attached to 
 them." &c. &c. &c.* These groundless assertions appear 
 intended to reduce his antagonist to a level with a man who 
 repeatedly confesses that he has not wherewith to occupy his 
 sluggish periods. 
 
 There is one very remarkable feature in the practice oi' 
 my opponent. Sometimes he can scarcely converse, preach 
 or print, without a perpetual recurrence to the dead langua- 
 ges. A sermon published by him this year, is quite richly 
 interlarded with Hebrew. In this wonderful production, he 
 tries to give the people some acquaintance with Hebrew ra- 
 dicals. In a note he informs them of the distinction in the 
 
 * Minntcs pp. 272, 181, 216, 230, 77, 58. 
 
103 
 
 .genders of Hebrew nouns ; and what must have been very 
 important to tliose who did not know one letter from anoth- 
 er, lie informs them that " the reader, must read all He- 
 brew woi'ds fi'om right to left."* He has refen-edf to de- 
 bates which he has had in the Commissionei^'s Hall v^lth 
 J ay men and apprentice boys. These men were more remark- 
 able for honesty and good sense than for biblical literature. 
 It is well known that he was in the habit of appealing to the 
 original scriptures with such disputants as could not follow 
 him thither. Tliis he does in letters written to one of these 
 apprentice boys, dated Feb. 14th and Marcli 8th, of the pre- 
 sent year. In the latter of these he parades his several La- 
 tin versions, the same literary ware, which, like a pedlar 
 with his pins and needles and buttons and combs, he has dis- 
 played before this assembly. Having endeavoured in vain 
 to weaken the confidence of his young correspondent in our 
 common version, and to get him to adopt my opponent's new 
 translation, which he ridiculously pretends is a correct trans- 
 lation of Griesbach's Greek Testament, he plainly lets him 
 know in a letter of Feb. 16th, that he must admit Griesbach, 
 of which he knew not one word, or their correspondence 
 -should close. " Then" says he, " have I put an end to this 
 discussion.":|: After thus making the sacred originals a 
 sine qua non to a discussion with a youth who knew nothing 
 •f tliem, he proposed to me, in the commencement of our dis^ 
 
 * See his 18mo : Compendium of a Sermon, p. IS.Also, in the 126ih page of 
 the Minutes, Mr. Jennings has, in a note, given us a good deal of Greek and 
 Hebrew, accompanied with the following instructions for'those, who like, himself, 
 could not read these languages, viz. " The Hebrew words which are written in 
 tlie Hebrew characters, are read from right to left. These remarks may be of 
 some use to the unlearrred, and for iliera alone they are designed." As it is a 
 notorious fact, and one which has been publicly acknowledged, that Mr. Jen- 
 nings never read nor wrote a word of Hebrew or Greek in his life, it is easy to 
 see that this note was penned by tiie same wiseacre who wrote the Comppudium 
 of a Sermon. Yet Mr. Jennings begins the note by saying that " the Reporter 
 writes the Hebrew without the points."' This is a worthy disciple of a man who 
 expects to teach unlearned readers to pronoimce his " Hebrew words which ai"e 
 written in Hebrew characters" by simply telling them that these words " are 
 read from right to left." It would not be a greater evidence of that in\becility 
 to which the understanding is reduced by an overweening pedantry, if he were to 
 expect a land-lubber to navigate a frigate from here, to England, by being simply 
 informed that he was to sail from West to Ea«t. 
 
 t Minutes p. 43. 
 
 1^ See " Letlera of Coj-respondence between the Rev.. Abner Kneeland and 
 WTWiaoi Justice.'' 
 
104 
 
 cnssion, that we should lay them aside, and abide by our 
 received Translation: !* 
 
 REFUTATION. 
 
 The exposure now made of my opponent's canons of cri- 
 ticism, and his practice, and that of his brethren, in contro- 
 verting the truth, may be considered at, answer to a great 
 part of what they preach and write on the question between 
 us. Their doctrines remain unsupported, when their prin- 
 ciples of interpi-etation arc pi-oved essentially wrong. That 
 cause is always suspected, whose advocates frequently shift 
 their ground ; who fill up their time, not by answering their 
 opponent's arguments, but by groundless complaints that he 
 has none ; and who make a great flourish of learning among 
 the illiterate, and yet retreat from the light among those who 
 can consult originals. That their cause ought to be suspect- 
 ed and condemned, that their doctrine is without evidence, 
 will appear by a full and fair examination of the arguments 
 advanced by themselves in its defence. With the help of 
 God, this shall be done under the following heads. 1. The 
 present character and sufferings of mankind. 2. The offer of 
 salvation. 3. Arguments for a purgatory. 4. Restitution. 5. 
 The Attributes of God. 6. His fatherly chastisements. 7. 
 The will of God. 8. 9. 10. Christ's Prophetic, Kingly, ancj 
 Priestly offices. 
 
 FIRST UNIVERSALIST ARGUMENT. 
 
 A wi'iter of some name, against the Universalists, gives 
 the following division of their sources of argument. " 1. The 
 universal goodness of God. 2. The universal atonement of 
 Christ 3. The universal offers of salvation. 4. The univer- 
 
 • Inthe Minutei pp. 256, 272, Mr. K. in opposition to his repeated deelara- 
 tions that I had no argument, acknowledges that tliere were some argument and 
 aorae eriticisiii on my part ; yet he seems to think it " not necessary" for me 
 " to say any thing more about the meaning of certain Greek words." Before the 
 debate he was so anxious to make t/ie nnleartied acquainted with aioiiioti, hades, 
 g-ef-enna,tartarut, &nd RH»oi.,that he couhl not wait to teach them the alphabet 
 befoi-e he would have them reading from right to left. It is said that some of his 
 followers were in the habit of escaping any argument or te.it, by crying, "Mr. 
 Kneeland says it is not so in the Greek." \t that time, he thought our Bible so 
 imperfect as to need his New Translation and all hi» other critical labours. How 
 much his mind was changed during the debate, will appear from an account of it 
 which he published a few days after, in which. he says scornfully " there was an 
 aionian fight about the words '•""'^5 ximw.ov, Q^^t^ See. which was mostly lost to 
 the audience, and which ended ne«rly where it commenced." He says moreover, 
 " No rational roan can believe any thing essential to salvation which is nolplain- 
 (y and cleanly revealed, and which depends On Bomethiiig better thati ench eqtti- 
 vnoal terms for its support." 
 
105 
 
 sal goodness of mankind. 5. Their universal punishment in 
 this lite." His two hist divisior.s I malce my first; because 
 they are the wealiest and tiie least relied upon by their ad- 
 vocates. A single case is not now recollected in which they 
 have tirged them at all; and il" they were to insist that all 
 men are good, wc couhl only say with the Spirit, "there is 
 none good;" and the same' Spirit declares that some sins 
 shall not be forgiven; *• neither in tliis world, neither in the 
 world to come:'' so that punishment in this world, whetlicr 
 pai'titil or universal, does not preclude a future punishment. 
 SECOND UNIVERSALIST ARGUMENT. 
 The arginnent drawn from the offer of salvation cannot 
 be more fairly treated tlian by admitting that salvation is 
 offered to alfw ho hear the gospel, and are willi;ig to be 
 saved in God's appointed way. But the mere invitation to 
 the supper mentioned in Luke 14tli, did not avail those who 
 made excuses, and concerning whom it was said, ''that none 
 of those which were bidden shall taste of my supper." 
 
 THIRD UNIYERSALIST ARGUMENT. 
 
 As it is a fixct that many Universalists advocate a sort of 
 purgatory, a concise notice will be taken of those texts which 
 are erroneously thought to countenance that doctrine. 
 
 1. Isa. 4: 4. "When the Lord shall have washed av,ay 
 the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the 
 blood of Jerusalemfrom the midst thei-eof by the spirit of 
 judgment and the spirit of burning." This is explained, in 
 Isa. 31: 9. 48: 10, where it is dci lared that the Lord's "fire 
 is in Zion and his furnace in Jerusalem ;" and that his people 
 are chosen, or as some copies ha^ e it, they are tried, " in tlie 
 furnace of afliiction." 
 
 2. Zech. 9: 11. "As for thee also, by the blood of thy 
 Covenant, I have sent fortli thy prisoners out of the pit 
 wherein is no water." Concerning a temporal captivity, Isa. 
 51: 14, uses the following similar language. " The capthe 
 exile hasteneth that he may be loosed, and that he sliould 
 not die in the pit, nor that his bread should fail." T'i© 
 Israelites owed to the blood of the Great Covenant Sacrifice, 
 their deliverance from Egypt and Babylon a well as their 
 preservation fi'om Tophet. 
 
 3. 1 Cor. 3: 13-15. "Every man's work shall be made 
 manifest, for the day shall declare it, because it shall be re- 
 realed by fire, and the fire shall try every man's work, of 
 what sort it is. If anv man's work abideth, which he hath 
 
 ' O 
 
106 
 
 Luilt thi'iTiipoH, lie shaJl receive a reward. If any man's 
 work sliall be burnt, he shall suffer loss; but he himself sluiU 
 be saved, yet so as by fire." The following arc vei*ses 9, 12. 
 '• For we are labourers together with God. Ye are God's 
 husbandry, ye arc God's building. Now if any man build 
 upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, liay, 
 stubble.*' Here tlie otHcers of tiic church are said to build it 
 «p of good and bad members. When the building is assailed 
 by the fire of persecution, the wood, hay, and stubble are 
 consumed; that is, hypocrites apostatize, while the faithful 
 pastor and the souml niembers, the gold, silver, and precious 
 stones, endui'c the flame, and shall be saved or refined and 
 preserved, yet so as by or through the fire. 
 
 4. 1 Pet, 3: 9, '• By whom," (tiiat is, the Spirit, see verse^ 
 18,) " By whom also he w ent and preaclied unto the Spirits 
 in prison." That these spirits were in hell at the time of th« 
 Apostle's wi'iting is agreed. But that they were in piison 
 when the Spirit of a long-suffering God preached salvation 
 to them, is disi)uted on the authority of the next verse, which 
 confines the long-suffei'ing of Goi^ iii respect of them, to the 
 days of Noah, aiul confines the salvation of God to the few, 
 that is to the eight souls w hich were in the ark, Vei'se 20, 
 ** which [spirits now in prison] sometime [that is long ago] 
 were disobedient, wiien once [that is long ago] the long- 
 suffering of God w aited in the days of Noah, while the ark 
 was aprepai'ing, wherein few, that is eight souls were saved 
 by water." If salvation was preached to them in hell or af- 
 ter their death, why should the long-suffering of God be thus 
 restricted in their case, to "the days of Noah while the ark 
 was a preparing ?" 
 
 FOURTH UNIVERSALIST ARGUMENT. 
 
 Mr. Ballou,* in shewing " that all will be brought, finally, 
 to the enjoyment of spiritual life and jjcace," says, " Ther* 
 is a passage in Acts 3: 20, 21, which reads xQvy literally iiji 
 proof of my ai'guuient. * And he shall send J esus Christy 
 w hich befoi'e w as pi*eached unto } ou, w bom the heaven must, 
 receive until the times of restitution of all things, which 
 God hath spoken by the moutli of all his holy proj>hets since 
 the world began." As the word apokatastasisf here render- 
 ed restitution, occurs only once in the New Testament, and 
 not once in the Se])tuagint, there may apj)ear great room 
 for fanciful and erroneous interpretations. Yet in the 70 of 
 
 • Treatrae on Atonement, p. 193. t «:TM*T«o-TKr'=- 
 
107 
 
 Amos 5: 15, we find a conjugate used in connection with the. 
 judgment oi civil coints on eartii, in cxartiy the same meaning 
 which the word has in Acts 3: '21, in reltition to the judgnier.t 
 of the last day. The prophet says, "Hate evil and love good, 
 
 KAI APOKArASlbShTh EN FULAlS Kill M A. ;f and esiabiish 
 judf/ment m the ya(ys:^ In Acts 1:11, it is said that Christ 
 "shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into 
 heaven." In the passage in question, it is said tliat tlie Lord 
 shall send him; and that this sending and coming shall be at 
 the ^QVxwXoiWwrestitatiotu or comliiu lion, or esialdislwtenfy 
 or seUldhtent, or (ons.inmatwn of all tliings. In I Cor. 15: 
 24,25, \\e find that one feature of t!iis important settlement 
 is the restitution of " the kingdom to God, cAen the Fathei-;'* 
 and another is, shall we say a restitution ofalleneniies to the 
 bosom of the Redeemer? No; but at that period, he shall have 
 "put all enemies under his feet;" '• and these shall go away 
 into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eter- 
 nal." It is true that Mr. Ballon and my ojiponent who 
 quote this prophecy of refer concerning the restituti'on of 
 all things, deny that a general judgment shall ever take 
 place. But the same Apostle* has predicted this denial also, 
 w^hen he says "that there shall come in the last days, scof* 
 fers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, where is the 
 promise oikis coming'.'" 
 
 FIFTH UNIVERSALIST ARGUMENT. 
 As it is believed that God*s holiness, justice and truth re- 
 quire the eternal punisliment of incorrigible offenders, and 
 that the scriptiii-es limit the application of his love, mercy, and 
 grace accordingly, the consideration of these attributes shall 
 be postponed to my first argument in favour of future pun- 
 ishment. We shall in the mean time attend to \\ hat is urged 
 from God's fore-knowledge, his immutability, and his bei;ig 
 the God of universal creation and providence. Although Win- 
 chester;]: thinks that the argument from God's universal pro- 
 vidence " has weight in it," and professes to give the authori- 
 ty of — 1st, the American Indians, and iidly, the Apostle Paul, 
 in support of it ; yet he says, " this I do not insist upon." It is 
 hoped, therefore, that I shall be excused from insisting upon a 
 sophism which can as well refute the doctrine of present suf- 
 fering, as of eternal punishment. As he supports the argu- 
 ment from the universal creation only by a perversion ot* 
 
 * 2 Pet. 3- 3 4. f Xal arO>tXT«TTII«-«Tt IV avXXly K{lf<» 
 
 \ Uis Universal Restoration, dialogue 4th. 
 
108 
 
 Isa. 57: 16, which is a promise to the church of Christ, that 
 j)a>;sago may be attent'etl to among others of the same descrip- 
 tion, uihler the 9th argument, to w hich it propei'ly belongs. 
 
 Isi Mr. Winchester's 4tli (liah>gue, he jnolcsses to dispUiy 
 the sti'ong hohis of Univei'salism. I. God is tlie universal and 
 only creatoi'of all. 2. The universal bcp.evolenceofthe Dei- 
 ty, or love of God to his creatures. 3. Christ died for all. 4. 
 The unchangeableness of God. o. The imuuitability of God's 
 cou)isels. t>. God hfitji given all things into the hand of 
 Christ. 7. The scriptures must be fuKillcdj the scriptures 
 camiot be broken.* 
 
 The .Jdof these arguments will be my last. The 6th, the 
 one before the last. Tise ist and 2d have been already post- 
 poned. Tlie texts under his 5tl. liead shall be generally consi- 
 dered under my 7 th and 9th. 1 o his 4t!!, 5th, and 7th, it may 
 noM be briefly ansv. ered that because we believe in the truth of 
 God's M'ord, and the innnutability of the counsels of an un- 
 unchangcable God, therefore we <'.fclare that the wicked "shall 
 go into ever(asfm</ punisiiment, and the rigliteous into ever- 
 lusiiny life :" for this is declared by tJiat God whose nature 
 and counsels cannot change, and by those scriptures which 
 *' cannot be broken." 
 
 The argument from the fine-knowledge of God has, not- 
 withstanding its dai'ingim{)ictY, been ui'ged vei'y much, to my 
 own knowledge, even by the followers of Winchester, wiio are 
 generally esteemed the better sortofUniversalists, and some- 
 times appear to be almost christians. Mr. Ballou declares 
 that if "the Almiglity" knew "before he made man" " that 
 he would deserve an endless punishment," "Ht proves that an 
 injimte crmity existed in Gud! T The only reason why this 
 profane language is repeated, is that it has been taken for sol- 
 id argument, by some who did not consider that if it be cruel to 
 foie-know eternal punishment, it must be cruel, only in a less 
 degree, to fore-know tem])oral suffering, \\ ithout j)reventing 
 it. "Man is born to trouble as the s])arks fly upward." The 
 God of j)rovidence foresees all his temporal sins and sorrows,f 
 and the God of judgment fore-knows all his eternal sins and 
 sufferings :\, yet this <hjes not attach an infinite degree, no 
 the least degree of cruelty to the immaculate character of 
 .Tehovah: and that blasphemer who can say thatit does, needs 
 
 • Did Mr. Jennings, in the 22d page of" his Report, give me this last argumoit, 
 to make nie talk as childiilily as Mr. Winchester ? 
 t 2 Kings, 8; la 13. 
 % M*tt. 25; 4i, 46. 
 
109 
 
 not a mark in his forehead to convince all tender clu'istianfc 
 tliat he is an enemy to revealed religion. 
 
 SIXTH UNIVERSALIST ARGUMENT. 
 
 Fatherly Chastisements. My oppoiicnt has quoted the fol- 
 lowing passaj^es. Job. 5: 17. " Behold ! happy is the man 
 whom Goti coiiectetli, thercfnre despise not the chastening of 
 the Almia;litv." Prov. 3: 12. •• For \\ horn the Lord loveth lie 
 correcteth, even as a father tiie son in whom he dclighteth.^'* 
 My opponent observes,! "'althoiigli the Father of all mercies 
 has said [Ps. 89: :32,33.] that he will visit the transgressions 
 of his children • with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes/ 
 he adds. * nevertheless, my loving kindness will 1 not utterly 
 take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail.' And again, 
 Hebr. 1*2: 9 — 11, * Furthermore, we have had fatiiers of our 
 flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence ; shall 
 we not much rather be in subjection nnto t'le Father of our 
 spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened 
 US after their own pleasure ; but he for our profit, that we 
 miglit be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for 
 the pi'esent, seemeth to be joyous but grievous ; nevertheless 
 afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness 
 nnto them which are exercised thereby." The inference 
 which my opponent would have us draw from these and simi- 
 lar passages is, that none can be punished forever, because this 
 would be to their inexpressible injury; wiiereas in these 
 texts, God is represented as viewing all mankind in the light 
 of children, and as correcting them in loving kindness, that 
 they may be profited by a growtli in holiness, righteousness 
 and happiness. 
 
 But in each of the chapters from which the above texts are 
 taken, there is CNidence that these tilings are said of the pious 
 and not of all mankind. In Job 5: 12 — 14, we find that he 
 who corrects his children for their good, also "taketli the 
 wise in tlieir own craftiness ; and the counsel of the froward 
 is carried headlong." In Prov. 3: 32 — 35, we find that •* the 
 froward is abomination to the Lord ;" " the curse of the 
 Lord is in the house of the wicked ;" ''he scorneth the scorn- 
 ers;" *' shame shall be the promotion of fools:" and in other 
 passages of scripture, this shame is said to be " a j)ei'petual 
 shame," and an "•'everlasting confusion."]: In the bi^th 
 
 ♦Minutes, p. 140. 
 t Minutes, p. 180. 
 % Jer. 20; 11. 23; 40. 
 
110 
 
 'Psalm* we are taught that God's cliildrcn whom he covircts 
 are those who know the joyful soimd oi'justicc ami jiuii^Lieiit, 
 mercy and truth; who Malk in the light of his countenance ; 
 V ho I'ejoice in his name all the day ; and are exalleti in his 
 righteousness, and not their own : t!>at is, they aie ];ersons 
 who are Justified, adopted and sanctified through grace. (_ on- 
 cerning others he says in vej-se lOtli, " thou hast scattered 
 thine enemies with tliy strong arm." Hebrews l:;^; H, tells us 
 that these enemies are not children but bastai-ds, and ai-e 
 therefore let alone, as Ephraim was when joined to his 
 idols. Verses 5th and 7th imply, as many other scriptures 
 plainly declare, that tliese bastards do not entluie the chas- 
 tening of tlie Lord either ^^ ith l'e^ erence or fortitude, but 
 first despise it and then faint under it ; whereas his childi'i n 
 are suppoi-ted under it, and profited by it. 
 
 SEVENTH UNI VERS ALI ST ARGUMENT. 
 
 The will of God. As we are now entering upon tlie strong 
 holds of Universalism, in which time and labour nuist be 
 spent to present their system in the most adAantageous light, 
 let it be remarked that when, in the name of the adversary, 
 the orthodox are chai'ged with denying scripture, it is not to 
 be understood that the charge is admitted on our part : neither 
 are tlie Universalists to be understood as making this cojifes- 
 sion, when, either now or hereafter, 1 lay such errors at their 
 door. With this explanation, it may be said that the orll)o- 
 dox limit to a part of mankind, that "good will towards nun" 
 which the angels, at the birth of Christ, proclaimed to belong 
 *' to all people."t Orthodoxy says tliat God wills the death 
 of the sinner; but in Ez. 33: 11. 18: 23. 32, " IJiave no plea- 
 sure in the death of him that dieth, saitli the Lord God, wliere- 
 fore turn yourselves and live ye." The scriptures say in 2 
 Pet. 3:9. " The Loi-d is not slack concerning his promise, as 
 some men count slackness, but is long suffei-ing to us wai'd, 
 not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to 
 repentance." Does not Orthodoxy say, that he is willing that 
 many sliould be lost without i-epentance ? The Bible assures 
 us in 1 Tim. 2 : 4, that God "wi7/havc all men to be saved, and 
 to come unto the knowledge of the truth :" Whereas Ortho- 
 doxy says that he ivill have only some men to be saved, and 
 the rest to perish without knowledge. In vain will they en- 
 deavoui' to escape the force of these declarations by distin- 
 
 • See Yerses 1*~16, 28— 3«, 
 t Luke 2: 10, U, 
 
Ill 
 
 guisliing between God's secret and revealed will, for he does 
 not contradict liimsclf and speak deceitfully : a)jd as to their 
 admission that it is his will of precept only, and not his will of 
 j)urpose that all nien should he saved, is not this in direct op- 
 position to his own word, in Eph. 1 : 9 — 11, where it is said 
 that he hath " made known unto us his ivUL accordi)ig to his 
 (jood pleasure \\\\\Q\\\\(t. liatli /^M/7^05ft/ in himself, that in the 
 dispensation of the fulness of times, he might gather together 
 in one all things in Christ, both which are in Heaven, and 
 which are on Earth, even in him; in whom also we have ob- 
 tained an inheritance, being /?/€(/e«<m<<<e</ according to tlie 
 purpose of him who worketh all things after tlie counsel of his 
 own wiiL'* Here God is said to gatiier together in one all 
 things in Christ. Does not this mean that he will save all 
 men ? But this is said to be accoi-ding to his will; " accoi-d- 
 ing to ins good pleasure which he haih purposed in himself;" 
 accoi-ding to his purpose of predestination, and the eounsel of 
 his own wiL."* On these grounds wef confidently argue that 
 G(*d's will of pui'pose is always accomplished ; — that it is his 
 will o( purpose that all men, universally shall be saved; — and 
 that therefore, all men universally shall be saved. 
 
 The texts ali'eady adduced are given in proof that it is 
 God's will of purpose that all men universally shall be saved. 
 The only difficulty therefore which can remain is, to prove 
 that his will of purpose is always accomplished. But this is 
 acknowledged by the standards of the Orthodox, and the 
 above passage from Ephesians which says that God '• work- 
 eth all things after the counsel of his own will" is produced 
 by the Presbyterian Confession of Faith, Chapter 3, Section 
 5, to prove it. To support the 1st Section of the same Chap- 
 ter they have quoted Romans : 1 5, 1 8, also, which is much 
 to our purpose, " I will have mercy on whom I will have 
 mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have com- 
 passion." " Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have 
 mercy." Speaking of God's creatures, the £nd section of the 
 2nd diapter declares that lie " hath most sovereign dominion 
 over them, to do by them, for them, and upon them, whatso- 
 ever himself pleaseth." In support of this most certain truth, 
 they quote Dan. 4 : 25, 35. ♦* The Most High ruleth in the 
 kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will ; and all 
 the inhabitants of the earth arc reputed as notliing ; and he 
 
 ♦ ForJohaC: 39, see argument 9th, to which it belongs in fommon 'with 
 tbe sevenih. 
 
 t Tke Uoiversalists. 
 
112 
 
 doetli according to bis xoill in the army of heaven, and among 
 the inhabitants of the earth, anil none can stay his hand, or 
 say unto him, what doest thou?" God says, in Isa. 46: 10, 
 *' My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my j)leasvreJ* 
 God's will of purpose is the desire of his heart, the determina- 
 tion of his divine mind. It is sovereign and immutable and 
 cannot be tln\arted. Job, 2S : 13, " He is in one mind, and 
 who can turn him ? and what his soul desireth, even that he 
 doeth." 
 
 In answering the above argument, the Orthodox need not 
 oppose the sovereignty of God. Most conscientiously do I 
 agree %^ ith the Bible and the Confession of Faith, that his will 
 of purpose is always accomplished. But although my op- 
 ponent at this moment, professes the same doctrine, to serve a 
 turn, he has in other stages of the debate, filled up his weari- 
 some minutes by holding it up to the derision of the audience. 
 Neither shall I explain the above texts by saying, as Mr. Bal- 
 lon has attributed to us,* tliat they are '• expressive of God's 
 revealed v,\\]» but not of his sea el will; arguing that his re- 
 vealed will is in direct oj)position to a will which he has seen 
 fit not to reveal."' His i-evealed word, though not a full de- 
 velopement of his seci'et will, is nevcrtlieless perfectly consis- 
 tent with it. Yet as his commands are often broken, and thus 
 his mandatory m ill not always fulfilled, it is called his will 
 ofpreeept to distinguish it from his will of purpose which is 
 ever fulfilled. For this fiistinction we have plain authority 
 in many scriptures where there is a certain ivill of God wliich 
 is expressly declared not to be done. Luke 12 : 47. "'And 
 that sei'vant which knew ids Lord's will and prepared not- 
 himself, neither did according to his will.''' Matt. 21 : 31. 
 " Whether of them twain did the will of his father ? They say 
 unto him the first." It is ijlainly imjJie*'. that the second did 
 not. Now that will oi God which this second son did not 
 pei'form, and which the ahf)ve mentioned servant did not per- 
 form, cannot be the desire of Ins heart, or the determination 
 of his soul, or his will of purpose ^ because this is always per- 
 formed : but it must be his law, or his conmiandments of what- 
 soever descri])tion, which we therefoi-e call his will oi precept 
 and which, though like theii' author, holy. Just and good, aj'e 
 often disi-egarded. It is to this that our Saviour must have 
 referred when, in weeping over Jerusalem, he said '" how oft 
 did I U/77/," (as it is literally rendered,) " how oft did I will t© 
 
 * On Atonement p. 203. 
 
113 
 
 gather thy children together as a lien gathereth her chickens 
 under her wings, and ye would not !" Because of their 
 " would nol,^- his precepts were disregarded, while his divine 
 purposes were accomplished in tlieir just destruction. So it 
 is with regard to most of the texts quoted concerning the will 
 of God for the salvation of all. In Ez. 18: S2, God took no 
 pleasure in the death of him that dieth ; yet he did die, as 
 every persevering unheiiever must forever. In the next au- 
 thority quoted, the Apostle Peter tells us* that " the Lord is 
 not wiliing that any should perish." If this were his will of 
 piirposey none would ever perish : yet the same Apostle tells 
 us in the same epistlef that some, " as natural brute beasts, 
 made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that 
 they understand not, and shall utterly perish in their own cor- 
 ruption." The Apostle Paul tells us:}: that "the preaching of 
 the cross is to them iXvAi perish foolishness." But Peter tells 
 us moreover that it is God's will " that all should come to 
 repentence." If this he the desire of his heart, then all must 
 and will repent: but if it be only his will of precept^ some may 
 violate this will, and remain impenitent. That this is the 
 fact, Paul teaches ;^f " For it is impossible for those who 
 were once enlightened" "if they shall fall away, to renew 
 them again unto repentance.'''' Therefore this will of God 
 tiiat they should repent, must be his command. This is so 
 evidently the meaning of such passages, that M*Knight, 
 who is generally very cautious in admitting any important 
 truth, manifests on this subject an unusual degree of candour 
 and even gives the word command instead oiwill in his trans- 
 lation of 1 Tim. 2 : 4. " Who commandeth all men to be 
 saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." If it 
 were not his precept but the determination of his soul, all 
 men would be saved, and all would come to the knowledge 
 of the truth. But God says, in Hosea 4 : 6, " My people 
 are destroyed for lack of knowledge;" and in John 5: 29, 
 "they shall come forth, they that have done good unto the 
 resurrection of life, and they that have done evil unto the re- 
 surrection of damnation." Since, therefore, some are damn- 
 ed and not saved ; since some are destroyed for lack of knowl- 
 edge instead of coming to the knowledge of the truth, God's 
 will on this subject must be that oi precept and not o{ pur- 
 pose. The same doctrine is established by Rom. 9: 15, 18^ 
 
 * 2 Peter 3: 9. 
 + 2 PeL 2 : 13. 
 + 1 Cor. 1: 18, 
 K Heb S'. 4—6, 
 
 P 
 
H4 
 
 (luoteil against us, let the will of Goil in Uiat passage be un- 
 derstood as it may. After saying that God hath '• mercy on 
 whom he will have mercy," the Apostle adds by way of con- 
 ti'ast, " and ^hom he will, he hardencth." 
 
 The only remaining text advanced against us under this 
 liead of argument, is Eph. 1: 9 — 11. where it is said, "that 
 in the dispensation of the fulness of times, he might gatiier 
 together in one, all things in Christ, both which are in 
 heaven, and Avhich are on earth, even in him." This gath- 
 ering of all things in Christ, is acknowledged to be accord- 
 ing to God's ivill ofpurposen as asserted by my opponent, and 
 pi'oved by the verses immediately preceding and following 
 the 10th just now quoted. On this subject there is no dis- 
 pute, and my opponent might have saved himself mucljt un- 
 necessary labour* by passing it over as a thing admitted by 
 both parties. The only question is, what is meant by this 
 gathering of all things in Christ wiiich is to take place in the 
 dispensation of tlie fulness of times ? My opponent has iden- 
 tified it with " the times of restitution of all things,"t alrea- 
 dy explained in our 5th Universalist argument. If this be 
 cori'ect, and I believe it is, then this gathering of all things 
 in Christ is that restoring, constituting, establishing, or set- 
 tling of all things, which shall take place at the general judg- 
 ment, when there shall be a restoring of " the kingdom to 
 God, even the Father," and when he shall "put all enemies 
 under his feet." Not only is the innumerable multitude of 
 the redeemed called " all things," by the Apostle, but in this 
 same chapter, he speaks of tiiesc enemies upon w^hom he 
 tramples, by the same general description of " all things." 
 Verses 22. 23. "And hath put all t/iings wnder his feet, and 
 gave him to be the Head over a// fluv(/s to the church, which 
 is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all." Here 
 are two very different classes of mankiiid, and each of them 
 is called " all things." The first " all things" which our 
 heavenly conqueror puts under his feet, we are informed by 
 the same Apostle in 1 Cor. 15: 26, constitutes thcbody of his 
 enemies. The second " all things" constitutes "the church 
 which is his body;" " for we arc members of his body, of his 
 flesh and his bones." as the same epistle declares.^ Now 
 although we read of Christ gathering tlie members of the 
 <'luu'ch invisible into his arms as the shepherd does the lambs, 
 
 • Minutes, {n>. 202, 293. 
 t Minutes p. 293. 
 X 5: 30, 
 
115 
 
 and of his placing them, in the great day of i-estitution, on 
 his right hand, as shecj), we never once read of ids putting 
 them under his feet. The scriptures expressly inform us 
 that this treatment is given to emmi'^s, botli by Ood and man. 
 The amount of this" authority which has been cited against 
 us, when taken with its context, appears to be this ; tiiat it is 
 God's will of purpose that when the trump of judgment shall 
 sound, Christ's mystical body which was before divided^ 
 a part being in heaven and a part on the earth, sliall be gath- 
 ered in one. and that those who liave not obtaijied that pie- 
 destinated inheritance, mentioned in the lith vei'se, shall ac- 
 cording to the 22nd, be put under his feet. The argument 
 then, from that class of texts which relates to the will of God, 
 instead of proving Univei-sal Salvation, proves only that the 
 invisible church, the body of believers, shall be saved, while 
 the synagogueof Satan, the enemies of the Divine Redeemer, 
 shall be lost forever. The Apostle's saying, as in the 10th 
 verse, that God will gather " all things" in Christ, is no bet- 
 ter evidence for universal salvation, than his saying, as in 
 verse 22nd, that he shall put ''all things" under his feet, is 
 proof of universal damnation. But as the scriptures are con- 
 sistent and not contradictory, we may and ought to explain 
 this to mean, as the Bible uniformly declares, that he that 
 believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be 
 damned. 
 
 EIGHTH UNIVERSALIST ARGUMENT. 
 
 Christ's Prophetic Office. — When he speaks to his follow- 
 ers of his being with them, he says, in John 12: 35, *' the 
 light is with you;" that is, with the Jews: but in Acts 26: 
 18, he sends Paul to the Gentiles, " to open their eyes, and 
 to turn them from darkness to light." In Luke 1: 79, he is 
 said '' to give light to them that sit in darkness and in the sha- 
 dow of death;" and in Luke 2: 32, he is called "a light to 
 lighten thy Gentiles and the glory of thy people Israel." 
 Neither does this light shine in vain, but it dispels the dark- 
 ness, and illuminates the world universally.* It is said, in 1 
 John, 2: 8, " the darkness is past, and the true light now 
 shine th." In Ephes. 1: 8, it is written, " ye were sometimes 
 darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord." On this sub- 
 ject Mr. Bailout quotes Isa. 49: G. "And he said, it is a light 
 thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes 
 
 ♦ Say the Universalists. 
 t Oa Atonement, p. 2U0. 
 
llf) 
 
 of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel ; I will also 
 give thee ibr a light to the Gentiles, that thou niayest be my 
 salvation unto the ends of the earth/' 'J'o the same amount, 
 Ml-. Murray repeatedly* quotes Habb. 2: 14, ** For the eaith 
 shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of God, as 
 the waters cover the sea." But none appears more pointed 
 than Jolm 1:9, '* That was the true light Avhich lightcth 
 every man that cometh into the world."f Compare this with 
 the 4th verse, and you \\ill see that this is a quickening, sav- 
 ing light, *'In him was life, and the life was the light of 
 men." In the text just quoted from Isaiah, this light is iden- 
 tified with saltation. In Acts 26: 1 8, we are taught that turn- 
 ing them from darkness to light, is the same as turning " them 
 from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive 
 forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are 
 sanctified." JS'ow let it be observed that in consequence of 
 this saving light, the above authorities prove that " the dark- 
 ness is past," that those who " were sometimes darkness," 
 are now "• light in the Loi-d ;" that " the eai-th shall be filled 
 ^vith" this light, even " unto the ends of the earth ;" euibja- 
 cing Jews and Gentiles, even "every man that cometh into 
 the world." The amount of the evidence is this ; — Christ 
 saves all whom he enlightens ; — but he enlightens all univer- 
 sally ; — Thei-efore all universally shall be saved. 
 
 A great poi-tion of the plausibility of the above argument 
 is owing to the texts being detached from their connection. 
 Examine them as they are found in the Bible, and the illu- 
 sion vanishes. It will then appear that tlie minor proposition 
 of the above syllogism is unsupported in scripture. It is 
 hardly necessary to mention tliat a more correct translation, 
 probably, of John 1: 19 is '' That was the true light, which 
 coming into the world, enlighteneth every man." Certain it 
 is, that his coming into the world is recognized in all the 
 passages quoted, as the occasion of this extraordinary diffu- 
 sion of light. Its being extraordinary at his advent, is itself 
 a denial of its aiitecedent universality. At his coming, it is 
 said " the darkness is ])ast," but befoi-e he came " to tur)i 
 them fr-om darkness to light," the nations had sat for four 
 thousand years " in darkness and the shadow of death;" and 
 in this moral darkness, many millions had passed, without 
 hope or comfort, "through the dark valley and shadow of 
 
 ♦ Universalism Vindicated, pp 49, 75. 
 
 t John 6; 45, is not here nuticed, because it was more convenient to give in the 
 Qth argument the force ot the word aU on which the Universalist cause hangs . 
 
117 
 
 deatli." When lie told his followers, " The light is witii 
 you," as in the first text quoted in their I'avour, he let them 
 know, that, as it had lately come, it ^^(^uld soon disappear, 
 unless they profited by it. '' Tlicn Jesus said u.nto them, yet 
 "a little while is the ii()ht with yon: wal'v while ye have 
 " tiie ligiit, lest darkness come upon you : for he that walkcth 
 " in dai'kness, knowetli not whither he goetli. Whileye have 
 " the light ^e/icre in the light, that ye may be children oi 
 •* light.''* From this it would api)ear that e\ en after tiie ligiit 
 has come, men are liable to walk in datkncss and be chil- 
 dien of darkness; and that this will be their ciiaracter; unless 
 they believe in the light. In tiie second authority quoted in 
 their favour.f Christ promises ** to open their eyes, and to 
 "turn them from darkness to light, and trom the power of 
 "' Satan to God, that they may recei\ e forgiveness of sins, 
 *• and an inheritance among them which are sanctified by 
 *^ faith that is in me.'''' These last words deny the univer- 
 sality of this light, unless it can be shewn that all men living, 
 or at least, all men dying, are sanctijied by faith in Christ. 
 The same is taught in the context of the passage from John,i 
 " But as many as received him, to them gave he power to 
 become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name; 
 which are borUf not of blood, nor of the will of the ilesh, nor of the 
 will of man, but of God.'''' But did they all believe on him ? 
 Did they all receive him? The context says,§ "the light shineth 
 in darkness, and the darknes comprehended it iu)t." " He came 
 unto his own, and his own received him not." Are those per- 
 sons enlightened who hate their brother,^ or who refuse to 
 receive Christ and his Gospel ? "To the law and to thetes- 
 " timony : if they speak not according to this word, it is be- 
 " cause there is no light in them."** " In that day shall the 
 deaf hear the words of the Book [precious book !] and the 
 " eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of dark- 
 " ness."tf But.thissame prophet Isaiah,]:| pronounces a woe 
 upon some in his day, who, like my opponent, took *' dark- 
 ness for light, and light for darkness." To such our Sa- 
 viour says,§§ " if therefore, the light that is in thee be dark- 
 ness, how great is that darkness !" This rejection of the 
 
 •John 12; 35,36. 
 t Acts 26; 18. 
 ^: John 1; 12, IS. 
 4 Verses 5, 11. 
 i 4 John 2; 9. 
 **rsa. 8; 20. 
 
 ft Isa. 29; 18. a Isa. Sj 20. 
 
 4§MaU. 6; 25. 
 
118 
 
 light, and evil-eyed perversion of tlie truth, he declares to be 
 a subject of just condemnation, and a proper cause of eter- 
 nal punishment. »• And this is the condemnation, that light 
 *' is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than 
 "light, because their deeds were evil."* "Then said the 
 *' King to the servant, bind him hand and foot, and take 
 *• him away, and cast him into outer darkness ; there shall 
 " be weeping and gnashing of teeth."t "Raging waves of the 
 " sea, foaming out their own shame ; ^^ andering starvS, to 
 " whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.''''^ If 
 all men universally are savingly enlightened, how comes it 
 that some " are in darkness, even until now ?"§ that some 
 have " no light in them?'' that there are some who take 
 darkness for light ? some whose very light is darkness, and 
 great darkness ? How comes it tliat there ai'e some wlmse 
 condemnation is, that they have " loved darkness rather than 
 light ?" and whose punishment is, that they are to be cast 
 ** into outer darkness," and into *' the blackness of darkness 
 FOREVER ?" 
 
 NINTH UNIVERSALIST ARGUMENT. 
 
 Christ's Kingly Office. — Do not the Scriptures represent 
 Christ as destroying the works of the Devil, and trampling 
 all evil under his feet ? " For this purpose, the Son of God 
 "was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the 
 " Devil."^ " He hath put all enemies under his feet. The 
 " last enenjy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath 
 ** put all things under his feet,.'''' " Behold I shew you a mys- 
 " tery : we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 
 ^^ in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump : 
 "for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised 
 ** incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corrupti- 
 *' ble must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on 
 " immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on in- 
 " corruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, 
 '* then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, death 
 ** is swallowed up in victory. Oh death! where is thy sting? O 
 ** grave! where is thy victory ? The sting of death is sin, and 
 " the strength of sin is the law ; but thanks be to God, who 
 " giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."** 
 
 • John 3; 19. 
 
 t Matt. 22; 13. 
 
 \ Jude 13. 
 
 § 1 John, 2; 9. 
 
 n 1 John/3; 8. 
 
 *•! Cor." 15} 25—37. 51— 5r. 
 
119 
 
 <• Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy 
 ** hands ; thou hast put ali things under his/eet.''* " Thou 
 " liast put alt things in subjection under his feet. For in that 
 »* he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is 
 " not put under him. But now we see not yet all things 
 " put under him.*' 
 
 While he thus wages a -war of extermination against sin 
 of which he is not the author, does he not cease to contend 
 with the souls which he has made ? Mr. Winchester's text 
 on the universality of God's creation, postponed from my 
 fifth Universa]ist argument to this place, says, " For I will 
 "not contend forever, neither will I be always wroth; for 
 *' the spirit should fail before me, and the souls which I 
 have made.''t To this he might have added Ps. 86: 9, <* All 
 nations whom thou hast made shall come and worship be- 
 fore thee." Although he will not contend forever, he says;]: 
 " I have loved thee with an everlasting love/' As there is 
 no end to his love, so " of the increase of his government 
 and peace there shall be no end."§ " In his days shall the 
 " righteous flourish, and abundance of peace as long as the 
 "moon endureth. He shall have dominion also from sea to 
 ** sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth. They 
 ** that dwell in the wilderness shall bow before him, and his 
 "enemies shall lick the dust." "All kings shall fall be- 
 "fore him, ali nations shall serve him." " He shall re- 
 ** deem their soul from deceit and violence, and precious 
 "shall be their blood in his sight." "Men shall be blessed 
 " in him : all nations shall call him blessed."^[ 
 
 Are not the unlimited extent and the happy results of the 
 Saviour's dominion plainly revealed in Rom. 8: 19 — 24 ? 
 ** For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the 
 " manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was 
 " made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of 
 " him who hath subjected the same in hope,- because the 
 " creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of 
 " corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 
 " For we know that the whole creation groaneth and tra- 
 " vaileth in pain together until now. And not only they 
 " but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the Spirit, 
 " even we ourselves, groan within ourselves, waiting for 
 " the adoption to wit, tiie redemption of our body. For we 
 '' are saved by hope : but hope that is seen is not hope : for 
 
 ♦ Pi. 8; 6. 
 
 tisa. 57}16. :fjer. 31;3. 4 ha. 9.7. 1 Ps.72; 7— 9. 11. 14. 17. 
 
120 
 
 •• wliat a man seeth, wljy doth he yet liope for ?" On the 
 same subject, is it not sung by the myriads on high, ''And 
 •'every creature which is in Heaven, and on the earth, and 
 •» such as are in the sea. and ail that are in them, heard I 
 " saying, blessing and honour, and glory and power, be un- 
 '' to him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb 
 " forever and ever.* 
 
 In Hebr. 1: 2. he is declared to be " Heir of all things.' 
 " I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance."! He 
 himself declares " all things are delivered unto me of my 
 Father." "The Fatlier loveth the Son, and hath given all 
 •* things into his hands.*' *' Thou hast given him power 
 *' over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many 
 " as thou hast given him.'* '* And this is the Father's will 
 " which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me, 
 " I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the 
 « last day."+ 
 
 According to the tenor of this universal transfer to Christ, 
 it is written, *• AH the ends of the earth shall remember and 
 ** turn unto the Lord, and all the kindreds of the nations 
 "shall worship before thee. For the kingdom is the Lord's, 
 " and he is the Governor among the nations. All they that 
 *'be fat upon earth shall eat and worship : all they that 
 " go down to the dust shall bow before him, and none can 
 ^* keep alive his own soul."^ '• And there was given him 
 '* dominion and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, na- 
 •• tions, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an 
 " everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his 
 " kingdom that which shall not be destroyed."**** Look un- 
 " to me and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth ; ff for I 
 '• am God, and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, 
 ** the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and 
 ** shall not return, that unto me every knee shsdl bow, every 
 •' tongue shall swear. Surely shall one say, in the Lord have 
 " I righteousness and strength: even to him shall men come; 
 " and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed. 
 "In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and 
 " shall glory.":^ " Wherefore God also hath highly exalt- 
 " ed him, and given him a name which is above every name: 
 
 *Rer. 5; 13. 
 
 t Pa. 2; 8. 
 
 i Matt. 11; 27. Luke 10; 22. John 3; 35. 13; 3. 17; 2. 6:39. 
 
 ^Ps. 22;27— 2'.t. 
 
 ** Dan. 7; 14. 
 
 \\ Sec Argument 2(1. 
 
 t|lsa. 45; 22—25. 
 
121. 
 
 *' that at the name of Jesus, every knee nhould bow, of things 
 "in heaven, arnl things in earth, and tilings under the earth, 
 " And thsit even/ foiu/ue should confess that Jesus Christ is 
 •'Lord, to the glory of God the Father."* " For the Father 
 ** \m\^etli no man, hut hath committed all judgment unto the 
 " Son ; that a/l men siiouid honour the Son, even as tliey 
 ** honour the Fathcr."f 
 
 It is expressly declared that " God sent not his Son into 
 "the world, to coudemnthe world, but that the world through 
 " Mm might be saved." "I came not to judge the world, 
 "but to save the world."^" "But Israel shall be saved in 
 " the Lord with an everlasting salvation : ye shall not be 
 " ashamed nor confounded world without end."^ " No wea- 
 " pon that is formed against thee shall prosper j and every 
 "tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt 
 " condemn. Tliis is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, 
 " and their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord."** 
 
 Although the number and aggravation of their offences 
 may increase their necessities, can they hinder the mercy of 
 God? " They tli it be whole need not a physician, but they 
 *' that are sick. But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I 
 " will have mercy, and not sacrifice : for I am not come to 
 " call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.*'tf " This is 
 "a faithful sayikig and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ 
 " Jesus came into the wo'ld to save sinners, of whom I am 
 " chief." " VViio was before a blasphemer, and a persecuter, 
 "and injurious; but I obtained mercy, because I did itigno- 
 " rantly in unbelief.'*k " Come now, and let us reason to- 
 " gether, saith the Lord : though your sins be as scarlet, they 
 " shall be as white as snow ; though they be red like crimson, 
 " they shall be as wool." 
 
 In fact, the end of Christ's coming, and of the preaching of 
 his gospel is to deliver men from sin and sorrow. " And thou 
 "shalt call his name Jesus; for he shall save his people from 
 "their sins.'*x "For the law of the spirit of life in Christ 
 " Jesus, hath made me free from the law of sin and death."z 
 " The Lord hath sent me to preach good tidings unto the meekj 
 " he hath sent me to bind up the broken hearted, to proclaim 
 *' liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them 
 "that are bound."q "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty 
 
 * Phil. 2: 9—11. + John 5; 32, 23. 
 
 t John 3; 17. 12; 47. H Isa. 45; 17. 
 
 ♦• Isa. 54; 17, ft Matt- 9. 12, 13. 
 k 1 Tun. 1. 15, 13. x Matt. 1. 21. 
 
 z Rom. 8. 2. q Isa. 61. 1. 
 
122 
 
 '* w herewith Christ hath made us free, juul be not entangled 
 " again with the yoke of bondage."* 
 
 All being thus relieved from sin, they are from misery also. 
 "And in this mountain sliall the Lord of Hosts make unto 
 *'a(l people a feast of fat things, a feast of \\ines on the lees, of 
 " fat things full of marrow, of wines on tiie lees \Aell refined. 
 "And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the r(n- 
 ** erijig cast over alt people, and the vail that is spread over 
 *^ all niitions. He will swallow up death in victory; and the 
 "Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the 
 "rebuke of his people shall be taken away from ofl' all the 
 ** earth; for the Lord hath spoken it."t "And God shall 
 "wipe away alt tears from their eyes; and there shall be no 
 " more death, neither sorrow nor ci-ying, neitlier shall tlieir 
 "he any more pain: for the former things are past away."! 
 
 To the foregoing authorities which one would suppose uni- 
 versal enough, we add the following ; which, as well as those 
 already recited, are found scattered among the rubbish of my 
 opponent and other Universalist authors, some in one and 
 some in another, but in none of them brought to a focus, and 
 presented in that perfection of perversion of which they are 
 susceptible. 
 
 Our Saviour, in prospect of his crucifixion, says " And I, if 
 *' I be lifted up from the eai'th, will draw all men unto me.^"^ 
 The Patriarch Jacob said, "unto him shall the gathering of 
 " the people be.*'** "That he might gather together in one 
 " all things in Chi'ist." J f " W ho shall change our vile body, 
 " that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, accord- 
 " ing to the working whereby he is able even to subdue ail 
 " things unto himself.":}::}: " For itpleased the Father that in 
 "liim should all fulness dwell. And (having made peace 
 " through the bhjod of his cross.) by him to reconcile all Ihimjs 
 " to himself; by him, 1 say, whether they be thinr/s in earih 
 *U)r things inheavm.'^^ "Thus saith the Lord God ; 1 will 
 "also take of the highest branch of the high cedar, and will 
 " set it ; I will croji oH'iVom the top of his young twigs a ten- 
 " derone, and will plant it upon an high mountain and emi- 
 " nent : in the mountain of the height of Israel will I plant it: 
 " and it shall bring foith boughs, and be.ar fruit, and be a 
 " goodly cedar; and under it shall dwell all fowl of every witifn 
 " in the shadow of the branches thereof shail they dwell. And 
 
 • Gal. 5. I. + Isa. 25. 6—8. 
 
 X Wev. ai. 4. - 1 JoJin 12: 32. 
 
 ••Gen. 49. 10. tt Eph. 1.10. 
 
 X\ Phil. 3. 21. S Coll. 1. 19, 20. 
 
123 
 
 " all the trees of the field shall know that I the Lord have 
 " brought down the high tree, have dried up the green tree, 
 '* and liave made the dry tree to ttourish."* " He that des- 
 " Tended is the same also that ascended up far above all 
 " heavens, that iie mighty/// all thiii(fsJ'^\ *' For God hath 
 "concluded tliem all in unbelief, that he might have merctf 
 *' upon a//."| •' And the scriptui-e foreseeing that God would 
 ^'jitstifi/ the heathen thiough faith, preaciied before the gos- 
 " pel unto Abraham, saying, in thee shall all nations be btes- 
 *' aed.'^ " Now to Abraiiam and his seed were the promises 
 " made. He saith not and to seeds, as of many ; but as of one, 
 *• and to thy seed, which is Christ."§ " And I will bless 
 *' them that bh'ss thee, and curse him that curseth thee : and 
 '* iii thee shall aU families of the earth be blessed.** ** And ia 
 " thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because 
 ** thou hast obeyed njy voice."** 
 
 Thus weft see that Christ came to destroy the works of the 
 devil, so that death itself shall be swallowed up in victory. 
 He came to put all evil under his feet. He caine not to con- 
 demn the world but to save it; not to call the righteous but 
 sinners, even the chief of sinners. He came to put an end to 
 sins, and their conseciuent sorrows. He came to show mercy 
 to all; to draw, gather, and subdue all; to change.];:}: recon- 
 cile, and protect all ; to fill, justify and bless all. There 
 shall be no end to the increase of his government. He de- 
 livers the wAo/e crea/io/i from corruption. Every creature 
 in heaven and in the earth, and under the earth, all tiie ends 
 of the earth, all kindreds of mankind, all fowls of every wing, 
 all the trees of the field, all people, nations, languages, and 
 tongues shall confess and praise, worship, bow% and kneel be- 
 fore him, and honor him as they honour the Father. He will 
 cease to contend forever, but will exercise an eierlasting love ; 
 so that men shall not be ashamed nor confounded world ivith^ 
 out end. He bestows righteousness and strength, glory and 
 salvation, on all followers, servants, or chil Iren wiiom he 
 claims, and whom the Father has given him ; But the Fa- 
 ther has given him, and he claims for his followers, all men 
 
 universally; Therefore all men universally shall be 
 
 saved. 
 
 In answer to the argument just given, it may be observed 
 that the major proposition of the syllogism with which it 
 
 * Ez. \7. 22—24. t Eph. 4. 7i\ 
 
 I Rom. 11. 32, § Gal. 3. 8, 15. 
 
 ♦♦ Gen 12. 3, 82. 18. tf The Uiiiversallsts. 
 
 %\ This changing relates to the bodies of God's yieopie. 
 
124 
 
 closes, is so entirely acceptable to the most rigidly Oi'thodox, 
 that it has the appearance of being manufactured to suit their 
 taste. This is a mistake. My opponent often declares that 
 Christ came not to save men in their sins, but from their sins ; 
 they must therefore be followers, servants and children: and 
 Mr. Ballou actually quotes at large,* the passage trom Isaiah 
 giAen in the foregoing argument, in w hich it is written, 
 ♦* surely shall one Siiy. in the Lord have I rigliteousness and 
 « strength." «* In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be 
 ** justified and shall glory." 
 
 Equal justice is done to them in the statement of the minor 
 proposition, about which we diffrv. In order for them to 
 support this, and thus legitimate the conclusion, it will not 
 suffice for them to prove that Christ is King of nations or 
 the King of the universe ; this is admitted: but they must 
 prove that all men univei\sally are his willing subjects, his 
 worthy followers. If, instead of this, it should be found 
 that some of their authorities only prove Christ's universal 
 dominion over friends and foes, saved and lost; and that 
 others prove only a part of mankind, such as those who have 
 their righteousness and strength in the Lord, to be given to 
 him and claimed by him as his followers, the conclusion falls. 
 
 There is much stress laid upon Rom. 8: 19 — 24, in which 
 the w^ord creature or creation] (an extensive word) is used 
 four times. It is said that this whole creation was involunta- 
 rily subjected to vanity, and that it " groaneth and travaileth 
 in pain together until now:" but that, " in hope," it " waiteth 
 for the manifestation of the sons of God;" and " shall be deli- 
 vered from the bondage of coi'i'uption into the glorious liber- 
 ty of the children of God." It is here declared that the whole 
 creation sympathizes with man in the corruption, toil and 
 pain consequent upon tlie fall, and shall participate with the 
 children of God in their glorious emancipation. As the whole 
 human race fell in Adam, and as the Universalists say that 
 the whole human race shall be children of God, therefore they 
 say that the whole creation here means the whole human 
 race universally, and exclusive of every other sort of creature. 
 Their system depends upon this unauthorized interpretation. 
 So far from its being used for all men to the exclusion of the 
 inferior creation, in the only two instances, in w hich it oc- 
 curs in the Scptuagint,]: it means irrational creatui-es to the 
 exclusion of the human race. That the Apostle Paul did not 
 
 ♦ On Atonement p. 2U. -furrj-.j 
 
 t2Chr. 1*. 1$, Eir. 8. 21. 
 
i 125 
 
 intend it as synoniinous with the children of God is evident 
 from the express distinction which lie makes between them 
 and the whole creation, in the passage under consideration. 
 After telling us in the 22d verse, that the whole creation 
 groaneth and travaileth, he says in the 2Sd, " and not only 
 they, hut ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the 
 Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves." That he 
 did not use the whole creation to embrace every child of 
 Adam, is plain from Col. 1: 23; where he declares that even 
 in his day, the gospel " was preached in the whole creation."§ 
 In this })Iace, and in Romans 8th, it appears to signify the 
 whole earth : that earth which, according to Gen. 3: 17, 
 participated in the curse pronounced upon fallen man ; that 
 earth, which, with all its ii*rational appendages animate and 
 inanimate, yet groans and travails in pain under the abuse 
 which men have made of it; that earth which is destined to be 
 delivered from this abuse, and to rejoice, ^A ith its hills and for- 
 ests* herds and flocks, in the liberty of the children of God. 
 
 Long before this deliverance, it ig said, in Rev. 5: 13, that 
 " every creature which is in Heaven, and on the earth, and 
 under the earth, and such as are in the sea. and all that are 
 in them, heard I saying, blessing and honour and glory and 
 power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto 
 the Lamb forever and ever." By examining the context it 
 will be seen that this took place before the opening of the 
 Apocalyptic seals; that is, many hundreds of years ago. It 
 cannot, therefore, mean that every descendant of Adam thus 
 praised God, because many were not yet born. Neither can 
 it mean that all then living praised him as the children of 
 God, because the mass of mankind were then, as they are 
 yet, enemies to God. But it was true then, that" the heavens 
 declare the glory of G(»d,"t and it is yet true that " surely 
 the wrath of man shall praise thee: the remainder of wrath 
 shalt thou restrain." 
 
 In the same way that universal homage which is expressed 
 in many of the above texts, is explainec' by an inspired writer. 
 Besides other passages of the Old and New Testaments, the 
 Apostle Paul is quoted as sayingj " that in the name of Jesus, 
 every knee should bow, of tilings in heaven, and things in 
 earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue 
 should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God 
 the Father." The same Apostle has clearly shewn that such 
 declarations do not contain the doctrine of universal salva- 
 
 ♦Isa. 55. t2. ^Phil. 2: 10, 11. 
 
 fPi. 19, 1. § •* """i ■^1 »■•"'"• 
 
tiou, but thatof'a general judgment, after which he assures 
 us tliatsonie shall be punished \sdth everlasting destruction. 
 Tlie passage is in Rom. 14 : 10 — 12 " But v,hy dost thou 
 ♦* judge thy bi'other ? or m hy dost thou set at nought thy bro- 
 "ther? for Ave shall all stand before the judgment seat of 
 " Christ. For it is written, as 1 live saith the Lord, every 
 ** knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to 
 " God. So then, every one of us shall give account, of him- 
 " self to God." It would be strange indeed, for the Apostle 
 to jH'each imivers.il salvation as a motive to deter a mortal 
 from judging his brother ! Instead of titis he reminds him 
 that every tongue thus judging, must confess before the judg- 
 ment-seat of Christ, and every stiH" knee must bow there, how- 
 ever reluctantly. And let it be remembered that the Judge 
 himself has already informed us of the result of this awful ac- 
 count. " Then shall he say also, unto them on the left han<l, 
 *' depart from me, ye accursed into everlasting fire, prepared 
 " for the devil and his angels."* 
 
 It has already been shewn in the refutation of the 7th ar- 
 gument, that Chi'inVs (fathering all things related to this same 
 great consummation. In the contextf it was shew^n that at 
 that period, he should put all things, that is, his enemies, un- 
 der his feet. It was there said, that the scriptures affirm that 
 this treatment is given to enemies, both by God and man. — 
 When Joshua had conquered the five Kings of Canaan, he or- 
 dered his followers to bring them out of the cave in which 
 they had taken refuge. *' And they did so, and brought forth 
 *' those five Kings unto him, out of the cave, the King of Je- 
 ** rusalem, the King of Hebron, the King of Jarmuth, the 
 " King of Lachish, and the King of Eglon. And it came to 
 " pass, w hen they bi'ought out those Kings unto Joshua, that 
 «' Joshua called for all the men of Israel, and said unto the 
 " captains of the men of war which went with him. Come 
 " near, put your feet upon the necks of these Kings. And 
 " they came near and put their feet upon the necks of them, 
 " And Joshua said unto them, fear not, nor be dismayed, be 
 " strong and of good courage : for thus shall the Lord do to all 
 "your enemies against Mhom ye fight.":f: He does not say that 
 God will put put his feet upon their sms, but upon their necks; 
 and that not as children, but as enemies. How utterly pre- 
 posterous, then, to say, that when he speaks of putting all 
 things and all enemies under the feet of Christ, and of his 
 
 •Matt. 25, 41. 
 I F,i)h. 1, 10. 22. 2.1. t Joshua lOtli. 
 
127 
 
 dcsfroyiiKj, subduing, and suhjeitiiig tlieni, he means saving 
 them ! ! 
 
 Tliose ])assa<;es are of a different description, wliich repre- 
 sent Christ as notconiing to condenin the world, hut to save 
 the world ; not contending with men hut shewing mercy to 
 therji ; drawing, reconciling, sliadowing, filling, justifying, 
 and blessing them. And here it may not he amiss to notice 
 a very few of the apparent itu^onsistencies of my opponent 
 and other Universalist polemics. Althou- h they dispute the 
 inspiration of the Ajjocaiypse, yet if Rev. 5: 13, will sup])]y 
 n)Htter for declamation or sophistry it is used as good evi 
 dence, by my opponent,* or Mr. Ballou.f or any other. Al- 
 though they profess to believe parables mere falsehoods, yet 
 as Ezck. 17: 22 — 4, speaks of '*a//fowl of ererj/ wing," 
 and *• rt// the trees of the field," coming under the shadow 
 of the *' goodly cedar," this must be true, while they can 
 see nothing but mere fiction in the torment of the rich man 
 and otiiers whose hearts are as a cage of unclean birds ; or 
 in casting out of the garden and into the fire, those fruitless 
 trees which cumber the ground My opp»)nent denies the 
 Divinity of the Son of God, and of course refuses to iionour 
 him as he pretends to honour the Father; yet to serve a 
 turn, he blushes not to quote John 5: 28, which declares 
 *• that all men should honour the Son even as they honour 
 the Father." Universalists deny t\vA{ everlasting and/or- 
 ever denote an interminable duration : yet if God is said 
 not to contend /breier ;| if lie is said to exercise an everlast- 
 ing love,^ to bestow an everlasting joy,5f or an everlasting 
 salvation,** they receive the words in their unlimited sense, 
 without thinking any criticism necessary to prove it. So 
 inconsistent are they, that for the sake of general words 
 and phrases which may easily be perverted when detached 
 from their connection, they will (|uote passages which con- 
 tain the des])ised but essential doctrine of justification by 
 faith, and even the destruction of the wicked. 
 
 In that class of texts now under review, these general 
 expressions are the reliance of the Universalists. When 
 4/hrist is represented as drawing and reconciling, shadow- 
 ing and filling, justifying, blessing, and saving every crea- 
 ture, all men, all kindreds and nations, languages and 
 tongues, they insist upon it, without one particle of proof, 
 
 •Minutes, p. 124. t On Atonement, p. 209. 
 
 ^Isa. 57; 16. ^ Jer, 31, ,1. 
 
 Ilsa. 36. 10. **I3. 45;17. 
 
128 
 
 that all and every must be understood universally, and as 
 embracing each individual of the human race, from the crea- 
 tion of Adam to the consummation of all things. When the 
 absurdity of this interpretation is shewn by a concise ap- 
 peal to general usage, and to the terms and connexion of the 
 authorities containing these expressions, this 9th argument 
 shall be considered as answered. 
 
 Although a certain acquaintance cf the Apostle John was 
 known to but fewof the human race, and hated and slander- 
 ed by many of those who knew him, John sa^s,* ♦• Demet- 
 rious hath good report of all men." The Apostles knew 
 comparatively few, and of them a goodly little number loved 
 them. Yet our Saviour says to themf" Ye shall be hated 
 of all men,"" ye shall be hated of a// nations for my name's 
 sake." Itis required J that "supplications, prayers, interces- 
 sions and giving of thanks be made for «//men." Yet it is said,§ 
 " There is a sin unto death ; I do not say that he shall pray 
 for it." The Universalist explanation of Paul's aphorism, 
 ** all things are lawful,*' would legalize even the sin against 
 the Holy Ghost. In the universal sense, it is neither right 
 nor possible for any one, wise or simple to believe o// things 
 or every word. Yet Paul tells us^] that '• charity believeth 
 all things,'* and Solomon says** '* The simple believeth 
 every word.'* It is neither right nor possible for any one 
 to please every child of Adam universally in any thing: yet 
 Paul saysft ** I please all men in all things." God told 
 Paul:|::{: that he should be Christ's " witness unto all men." 
 Paul called the Corinthians" his epistle "known and read of all 
 men." When he said§§ that he preached Christ, ''warning cr?- 
 ry man, and teaching every man in all wisdom," did he mean 
 that he was infinitely wise, and that he imparted this wis- 
 dom to every individual of the human family ? Did our Sa- 
 viour make this the duty of any of the Apostles, when he 
 sent them to " teach all nations," and to " preach the gos- 
 pel to every creature ?''^^ What did he mean, when he said 
 " this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all this 
 world, for a witness unto all nations.'" or what did Paul 
 mean, when he told the Collosians"*^ that, in his day, the 
 gospel ** was preached to every creature which is under hea- 
 ven," and " in all the world ?" 
 
 *3 John 12. tMatt.lO;22. 24; 9.? 
 
 % 1 Tim. 2; 1. ^1 John 5; 16. 
 
 1 1 Cor 13: 7. * • Prov. 14; 15. 
 
 +t 1 Cor. 10: S3. iH Acts 22; 15. 
 
 § Col. 1:21. 11 Matt. 28; 19. Mk. I6f 15. 
 
 1; 23. 6. a 2 Cor. 3; 2. 
 
129 
 
 It was told to Christ, '* all men seek for tliee."a The 
 Scriptiircl says that many foHowedour Saviour " out of all 
 cities;'' that he "' h)oke(l round about uj)on uU things,"k 
 ** healing <irery sickness, and every disease among the peo- 
 plei'o thatt'vcn in the Apostolic day, "he maketh nianifost 
 tiie sa\»)ur of his knowledge by us in eveiy place;"'' that he 
 was '* glorified of a//;"ii and that in the first century' all 
 men glorified God.''n 
 
 Paul says* that God, "in times past, suffered all nations 
 "to walk in their own ways:" did he suffer all individuals 
 so to walk? John says.f that a certain beast "causeth a//, 
 " both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to 
 "receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads." 
 Was this intended to be undei-stood universally of all ages, 
 or even of any i)articular age? God says, concerning Mys- 
 tical Babylon " by thy sorceries \\qvq all nations deceived ;" 
 that " all nations have drunk of the wine of the wi'ath of her 
 *' fttrnication ;" '• siie made all nations drink of the wine of 
 "the wrath of her fornication."'! He says that power was 
 given to the Beast " to make war with the saints and to over- 
 " come them : and power was given him over all kindreds and 
 " tongues and nations." " And the kings of the earth, and 
 " the gi'eat men, and the rich men, and the chief cap- 
 " tains, and the mighty men, and every bond man, and every 
 " free man, hid tliemselves in the dens and in the rocks of 
 " the mountains."|| Concerning our Saviour's second com- 
 ing, he says, "And then shall «// the tribes of tlic earth 
 " mourn."q " Behold he cometh with clouds; sin(\ every eye 
 "shall see him, and they also which pierced him : and all 
 kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him."^ Here 
 also, as well as in the prophet Ezekiel, we have some men- 
 tion of what my opponents would, in this case, call parabo- 
 lical fowls. " And I saw an angel standing in the sun ; and 
 "he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in 
 "the midst of heaven, come and gather yourselves together 
 " unto the supper of the Great God; that ye may cat the flesh 
 " of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty 
 
 aMk 1; 37, 
 
 
 
 1 Mk. 6. 33. 
 
 
 k .Mk. 11. 11. 
 
 g Matt. 9. 35. 
 
 
 b 2 Coi'. 2- U. 
 
 hLuke 4. 15. 
 
 
 n Acts 4. 21. 
 
 * Acts 14. 16. 
 
 
 
 t Rev. 13. 16. 
 
 
 
 d Rev. 18. 23, 3, 
 
 , 14. 8. 
 
 
 H Rev. 13; 7. 6. 
 
 15. 
 
 q Matt. 24; 30. 
 
 R 
 
 % Rev. 1. 
 
130 
 
 "men, ami the flcsli of horses, anil ol" them that sit on them, 
 '♦ and the flesli oi' al. men, hoth free ami bond, hoth small and 
 *' great."x Well migiit Peter say, ** the end oiall things is at 
 •♦ hand.''z 
 
 Suppose for a moment that the word a/l or every must be 
 interpreted in an uiu\ersal sense. Then the above texts 
 would prove that the Apostles pleased all men, and yet were 
 hated of all; that they believed all things, and thought all 
 things lawful, jind yet preaclied to alt men universally, that 
 gospel which rejects everu thing inconsistent with truth and 
 righteousness. They prove that otir Saviour, while on earth, 
 was sought by a// men universally, from a// cities universally, 
 and that, with his hodily eyes, he looked around upon a// the 
 human race of every age of the world, cured a// their disea- 
 ses universally, and diffused among them all universally *' the 
 "savour of his knowledge," so that all univerpally, wheth- 
 er in heaven, earth or hell, dead, living, or yet unborn, did, 
 at that time, give glory to Clirist and to God. Notwith- 
 standi)ig this, the above passages prove, according to this 
 Universalist mode of interpretation, that ali men universal- 
 ly walk in their own ways; thatthey receive the mark of the 
 Beast; thatthey are deceived and made drunk by him, and 
 brouglit under his power ; tliat all men universally shall hide 
 " themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;" 
 that all universally shall mouin and wail and finally be 
 eaten up by "a// the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven:" 
 and after Paul's man who "believeth that he may eat all 
 thingSf"q univei'sally, has eaten ail these fowls universally* 
 then nothing will remain but to annihilate hirn^ and Peter^s 
 "end oi all fhinfjs'* universally sliall Jiave come to pass. 
 
 Universal ists themselves see that in each of the above pas- 
 sages, and very ma)»y others which might be mentioned, 
 these general expressions ai'e used in a limited signification. 
 So it is with the same exjH'essions in that class of texts now 
 under considei'ation. This will appear in tlie case of Gen. 
 12: 3, by sim])ly quoting the whole verse, "And I will 
 " bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curscth thee: 
 "and in thee shall all families of the eartli be blessed." Now 
 it is very well known that Balak the son of Zipimrg is only 
 one of many millions who curse the people of God. There- 
 fore Balak and many others shall be cursed of God, and must 
 
 X Rev. 19. 17, 18. z 1 Pet. 4. ~. 
 
 q Komi 14. 2. 
 g Num. 22. 6. 
 
131 
 
 be exceptions to tlic gencrsil promise given in tlie same verse, 
 that all the families oi the earth shall he hiessed in Cluistw 
 Although in Ez. 17 : 23, God promises that the goodly Ce- 
 dar shall protect "a// fowl of every wing;" yet in the next 
 verse he promises that all the ti*ees of tlie field shall know 
 that he has "hrought down the high tree" and "dried up the 
 green tree," as well as "exalted the low tree" and "made 
 " the dry tree to flourish." These that are brought down and 
 dried up, must therefore he exceptions to the geneial pro- 
 mise made in the preceding \ erse. 
 
 When Christ is said to " fill al! things," it means that he 
 will fill the church of believers with (dl necessary gospel 
 officers and oi-dinanccs. He is " the Head over all things 
 *' to the chujcli, which is his body, the fulness of him that 
 filleth all in all."« When in Eph. 4 : 10, we are told that 
 he fills all things the Apostle adds immediately, " and he 
 gave some, Apostles; and some, prophets, and some, evan- 
 gelists ; and some, pastors and teachers ; for the perfecting 
 of the saints, for the work of the minist> y, for the edifying 
 oft-.- body of Christ: till we aliu couie in the unity of the 
 faith, [an.'l not in unbelief,] and of the knowledge of the Son 
 of Go.:,unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of 
 the fulness of Christ," Is tiiere not a great difference be- 
 tween sa} ing that Christ fills his church with all necessary 
 ecclesiastical and spiiitual supplies, for their edification in 
 saviiig faith anJ know ledge, on the one hand ; and saying on 
 the other hand, as the Univcrsalists pretend, that he fills 
 with salvation hereafter all those who live and die without 
 this know ledge and faith ? 
 
 In Col. 1: 23, the Apostle informs us that if those to whom 
 he wrote belonged to the all things which God reconciled to 
 himself by Christ Jesus, as in verses 19, 20, then they would 
 prove it by their faith and perseverance : " If ye continue in 
 "the faith, grounded and settled, and be not moved away 
 *' from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and 
 " which w as preached to every creature w hich is under 
 " heaven." The w riter did not mean here that every crea- 
 ture universally had heard or believed the gospel: neither 
 did he mean that all men universally were reconciled to God, 
 but those only w ho continued in the faith, rooted and ground- 
 ed. In Rom. 11: 15, the same Apostle is so far fi*om atti'i- 
 buting universality to this reconciliation, that he informs us 
 that the reconciliation of the Gentile world was effected by 
 
 a Eph. 1. 22, 23. b That \i, the body of Christ. 
 
132 
 
 the casting away of the Jews. "For if the castin<f away of 
 " them he the reconcUiiuf of the world, what sliaU the re- 
 *' ceiviiig of them be but life from the dead?'' As m this pas- 
 sage, the world, a general word, is used to distinguish the 
 Gentiles from the Jews, so in the 32nd verse, the word all is 
 used to embrace both Jews and Gentiles generally, though 
 not universally. " For God hath concluded tliem all in 
 *' unbelief, that he might itave mercy upon all.'' This ap- 
 pears from the fact that throughout the cluipter, and particu- 
 larly in the two preceding verses, faith and mercy, unbelief 
 and rejection are used as interchangeable teinis ; from which 
 we are left to understand, that GotUvill •• have meicy upon 
 all" believers, whether Jews or Gentiles, and cast away all 
 unbelievers, whether they be bi'anches of the olive-tree or the 
 wild olive-tree. Certain it is that the Apostle James?> did 
 not think that God would " have mercy upon all" indiscrim- 
 inately, but only upon those who shew mercy to othei's. 
 "For he shall haAC judgment without mercy, that hath 
 "shewed no mercy." And notwithstanding the doidits of 
 some, these Apostles, Paul and James, spoke the same thing, 
 and by the same Spirit, both on justificatioji and condem- 
 nation, 
 
 But Mr. Ballon c seems to think that he can admit this 
 much, and yet prove universal salvation, by shewing that all 
 uniA^ersally shall be blessed with faith. For this purpose, 
 after quoting the promise that in Christ " shall all the na- 
 tio)is of the earth be blessed," he iniorms us unequivocally 
 that this blessing is justijication ihrouqh faith, and refers to 
 Gal. 3; 8, foi- his proof. " And the Scripture foreseeing that 
 " God would justify the heathen through faith, preached be- 
 " fore the Gospel unto Abraham, saying, in thee shall all 
 "nations be blessed." But suj)pose that he does justify all 
 the lieathen through faith ; is this saying that he will justify 
 all men universally through faith ? What will he do with 
 the .Jewish branches of the olive tree, concerning which the 
 same Apostle says d *" because of unbelief, they were broken 
 off?" And it is a matter of historical evidence that millions 
 of them have died in this unbelief. But observe that the 
 promise that God *• itow/i/ justify the heathen through faith," 
 ne\er m as intended to take effect to any great extent, until 
 the Christian dispensation j before which time, millions of 
 the Gentiles had died in unbelief. Mr. Ballon, instead of 
 
 b 2; 13. c On Atonement, p. 195. 
 
 d Rom. 11.20. 
 
133 
 
 dainiing for liimsclf and the rest of the heathen, the honor 
 of benig Abraliiuii's seed, and heirs according to the promise, 
 ougiit to reincmber that our Saviour said to such vain pre- 
 tenders ; " If ye were Abraham's chihiren, ye would do the 
 v\ orks of Abrahiim.''e That many perform not the uorks of 
 Abraham in ikis life is too plain from Scj'ipture and daily 
 observation; and it is declared upon infallil)le authoi'ity, 
 that ** there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wis- 
 dom, in the grave whither thou goest." If thereit)re, salva- 
 tion depends upo)i Abraham's faitli and work, and if there 
 are some wlio neither believe nor work here nor hereafter, 
 there are some who are lost in this world and theworld to come. 
 When my opponent reminds us that our Saviour canxe not to 
 condemn the w orld, hut to save the w orld, it would be well 
 to recollect also that he has said, and has commanded his ser- 
 vants to say, "he that believeth and is baptised shall be saved, 
 but he that believeth not shall be damned."/ 
 
 In those very passages which speak in direct terms, of the 
 Father giving ail things to the Son, the context proves that 
 all men were not given to him as his follow ers, neither does 
 he claim them as such. In Luke 10: 22, he says " all things 
 are delivered to me of my Fatiier." But no farther back 
 than the preceding verse, he had thankedthat Father, that in 
 his sovereignty, he liad hidden tlie things connected with 
 salvation, from the w ise and prudent, and revealed them un- 
 to babes:^ In John 3: 35, he says, "the Father loveth the 
 Son, and hath given all tilings into his hand." But no 
 farther on than the next verse he says, " He that believeth on 
 " the Son hath everlasting life : and he that believeth not 
 " the Son shall not see life ; but the WTath of God abideth 
 " on him." In John 17: 2, he says, " Thou hast given him 
 " pow er over all flesh that he should give eternal life to as 
 " many as thou hast given i»ini." Yet in the next verse he 
 tells us that this eternal life is connected with that saving 
 know ledge, for the lack of which an inspired prophet h tells 
 us that many are destroyed. In verses 6 — 9, we are ex- 
 pressly taught that tliis knowledge is manifested not to the 
 tvorld universally, but to those whom the Fatlier liad given him 
 out of the world ; and by them it was believingly received. 
 
 To prove that Christ does not lose one of the human race 
 which they say is universally given to him, they quote John 
 6: 39j "And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, 
 
 e John 8. 39, f Mk. 16. 16. 
 
 g See also ?Iatt. 11 ; 25. 27. h Hosea. 4: 6. 
 
134 
 
 " that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing, 
 " but should raise it up again at tlie last day." But the 
 very next verse proves that none but be[ie> ers are raised to 
 everlasting life. " And this is the will of him that sent 
 " me, that every one which seeth the Son, and be- 
 ** iieveth on him, may have everlasting life : and I will raise 
 '*him up at the last day." To sliew that all men were not 
 possessed of this faith, through which some receive eternal 
 life, our Saviour says, in tiie 64th verse, "But there are 
 ** some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the 
 *• beginning, who they were that believed not, and who should 
 " betray him." Tlie Universalist position which we are 
 now discussing, says that " the Father has given him, and 
 he claims for his followers, all men universally." But 
 the 66th verse of this same 6th chapter of John, says, 
 " From that time many of his disciples went back, and walk- 
 ed no more with him." Here then are some who, after hav- 
 ing been his professed followers^ became offended at his 
 heavenly doctrine; followed him no longer ; and thus fell short 
 of that eternal life which is connected witli faith. 
 
 The only remaining authority under this head is John 13: 
 S, in which Jesus is represented as " knowing that the Fa- 
 ther had given all things into his hands." But to his own 
 family he says in the 10th verse, " ye are clean but not all." 
 Now withont holiness no man shall see the Lord. In John 
 6: 64, just now quoted, it is intimated that Judas the traitor 
 was one of those who "believed not:" he therefore was this 
 unclean person. In the verse immediately preceding the 
 authority now in hand, and in a subsequent verse of the 
 same chapter, *it is said that the devil put it " into the heart 
 of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray" Christ; and 
 that for this purpose, " Satan entered into him." As 
 one cannot serve two masters, and Judas had undertaken 
 the service of Satan, and was therefore an unclean unbeliever, 
 he was notsi follower of Christ. But in the 35th verse, our 
 Saviour announces a rule which evidently leaves many others 
 in the same disgrace. " By this shall all men know that ye 
 are my disciples, if ye love one another." 
 
 Let it be remembered that the argument under discussion 
 
 is as follows; Christ saves all his followers whom the 
 
 Father has given him; Butthe Fatlier has given him all 
 
 men universally as his followers; Therefore all men uni- 
 versally shall be saved. After an examination of the au- 
 
 •John 13: 2.27. 
 
135 
 
 Uiorities advanced in support of the minor proposition of this 
 syHogism. it apjjeai's from the context and the whole tenor 
 of God's word, tliat the Father has not given to Christ a* his 
 followers^ all men universally, but only those who repent, and 
 believe, obey and love. The argument therefore falls to the 
 ground. 
 
 TENTH UNIVERSALIST ARGUMENT. 
 
 Christ- s Priestly Office. Do not the scriptures give us 
 frequent assurances that the High Priest of our profession 
 atones and intercedes for all men? In 1 Tim. 2: 1, he re- 
 quires us to pray for alt men: Will he then pray for a part 
 only ? No wonder that he would exercise this function of 
 his priestly office in behalf of all, when he gave his life for all. 
 In 1 Cor. 15: S, it is said that " Christ died for our sins ac- 
 cording to the sci'iptures." Now when we refer to these 
 scriptures as in Dan. 9 : 24, do we not find that instead of 
 some remaining under their sins forever, the atonement makes 
 an end of all sins ? '• Seventy weeks are determined upon 
 " thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgres- 
 "sion, andto make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation 
 ** for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and 
 " to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most 
 ** Holy." " Thou shaft call his name Jesus, for he shall save 
 " his people from their sins."* " He shall redeem theirsouls 
 " from deceit and violence :"t That is, from sin and punish- 
 ment. " But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was 
 *' bruised for our iniquities : the chastisement of our peace 
 " was upon him, and w ith his stripes we are healed. A II 
 "we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one 
 " to his own way ; and the Lord hath laid on him the ini- 
 " quity of us all. He shall see of the travail of his soul and 
 " shall be satisfied : by his knowledge shall my righteous ser- 
 "vant justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities."]; 
 "For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ 
 " died for the ungodly.''''^ " For Christ also hath once suf- 
 «ered for .sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring 
 « us to God."^ " Who died for us that whether we wake or 
 « sleep, we should live togetlier with him."a " God is no 
 ** respecter of persons."^ *' For therefore we both labour and 
 « suffer reproach because we trust in the living God, who is 
 « the Saviour of all men ; especially of those that believe."c 
 
 • Matt. 1: 21. fPs- 72: 14, |;Isa. 58 : 5, 6. 11. 
 
 ^ Rom. 5: 6. 11 Pet. 3; 18. a. 1 Theas. Sj 10. 
 
 b Acts. 10 J 34. c ITvai. 4; 10. 
 
136 
 
 »' For the love of Chiist consti'aineth us ; because we thus 
 *\\\\i]g('. that it' o/te died for all, then were all dead : and tliat 
 '* he died for all, tliat thev which live should not henceiorth 
 *• live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them and 
 <' rose again."* " The Father sent the Son to be the Sa- 
 *'viour of the ivorld.^'f '* For God so loved </te tt7oW</ that 
 *' he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever belicveth in 
 " him should not perish but have everlasting life. For (Jod 
 **sent not his Soji into the world to condemn the ivor/d, hut 
 " that the luorld through him might be saved.":|: " Behold 
 " the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the ivorkW^ 
 *' And he is the propitiation foi* our sins : and not foi* ours 
 "only, but also for the sins of the whole wor/d.^''^ " For the 
 '* grace of God tliat bringeth salvation hatli appeared unto 
 "a// men.^''^ *' But we see Jesus who was made a little low- 
 *' er than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with 
 '* glory and honor, that he by tlie grace of God, should taste 
 *' death for every man.''^ • Wlio gave himself a ransom for 
 ** all, to be testified in due time."<= He "delivered him up 
 " for us «//."'! " For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ 
 " shall all be made alive."* *' But not as the offence, so also 
 " is the free gift. For if thi'ough the offence of one many 
 '* be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by 
 ** grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath aboun- 
 *♦ ded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so 
 "is the gift; for the judgment was by one to condemnation, 
 ** but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. 
 ** For if by one man's offence death reigned by one, much 
 "more they which receive abundance of grace and of the 
 •' gift of righteousness, shall reign in life by one. Jesus 
 '•Christ. Therefore as by the offence of one, judgment 
 " came upon all mer) to condemnation, even so by the righ- 
 "teousness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto jus- 
 *' tification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many 
 *' were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many 
 " be made righteous. — Moreover the law entered that the 
 " offence might abound : but where sin abounded grace did 
 <• much more abound ; that as sin hath reigned unto death, 
 " even so migbt grace reign through righteousness, untw 
 '• eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord."i 
 
 ♦ 2 Cor. 5; 14, 15. t 1 John 4; 14. ^ John 3; 16, 17. 
 
 % John 1: 29. 1 I .John 2; 2. a Tit. 2; 11. 
 
 bHeb. 2;' 9. -- c I lim. 2; G. d Kom, 8. 32. 
 
 e 1 Cor. 15; 22. f Rom. 5; 15—21. 
 
137 
 
 Do not these passages prove that Christ, in his A.tone- 
 ment, takes away our sins and makes an end of them ? that 
 he redeems the soul from deceit and violence, so as to giveus 
 peace for his chastisement, and healins: by his stripes? Is 
 it not declared tliat through his condemnation and death, he 
 procures for us, justification and eternal life? And is it not 
 affirmed by great strength and variety of expression, that 
 he is a ransom for all, the Saviour of evertj man, of the 
 loorld, aud of the lohole ivorldi And as he spared not his life 
 can he withhold his intercessory prayers ? especially as he 
 commands us to pray for all ? May we not therefore reason 
 that — Christ saves all for whom he dies; — He dies for all 
 men universally ', — Therefore all men universally shall be 
 saved ? 
 
 On this subject Mr. Ballon i^easons as follows, viz. " God 
 " would not have given his Son a ransom for all, if it were 
 " not his iw7/that a// should be saved ; and if it be God's will, 
 ** it ought to be ours, therefore it is right to piay for all. If 
 " the ransom were paid for all, it argues, that it w as the in- 
 " tention of the Ransonier, that all should be benefited. What 
 " would have been the astonisiiment of tlie world after the 
 ^' immortal Washington had caused to he paid a ransom for all 
 ** the American prisoners who were in Algerine slavery, if 
 " he had told the Dey that he did not w ant more than one 
 *•' quarter of those captives sent liome to the land of liberty 
 "and to the enjoyment of their families, for wliich they had 
 "so long sighed in bondage ; and that he might wear out the 
 "rest witli fatiuue and whips ? But the good man's soul was 
 '* never satisfied until tliey all came home, and with songs of 
 "joyous liberty hailed the land of their nativity ! And bles- 
 '•' sed be the Captain of our salvation ; he, also, shall see of the 
 " travail of his soul and he satisfied, when all tlie ransomed of 
 "the Lord shall return and come to Zion, with songs and 
 " everlasting joys upon their heads, when they shall obtain 
 "joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.^'* 
 
 My opponent also quotes Isa. 53 : 11. "He shall see of 
 " the travail of his soul and be satisfied." He then speaks as 
 follows, viz. "I think there is no christian but will aj^ree 
 " with me that this is spoken in relation to the salvation by 
 " Jesus Christ. Then I ask will the Messiah, Clirist, thft 
 *• Son of God, be satisfied with coming short of what he came 
 " into the world to do ? And for what did tlie Redeemer's 
 
 ♦ Ballou on Atonement, p. 205. 
 
 vS. 
 
138 
 
 '' soul travail ? Wliat did he come into the world to do ? His 
 *' soul travailed for the spiritual birth of the world. He 
 ''* came into the world to save it. Il\ then, this is not done, 
 ^* will he be satisfied ? But * he shall see of the ti'avail of his 
 " soul'. Tlie word, travail, here means labour, sorrow and 
 ^* trouble ; and Jesus was a man of sori'ows, and acquainted 
 "with grief, I dare say there are many in this assembly 
 " who know the full meaning of the metaphor without far- 
 "ther explanation; and to bring the matter home to them, 
 " may I not be permitted to apply it in a natural sense, and 
 *^ modestly ask this question, is it possible that any thing 
 *^* short of the birth or deli^cra«ce of all for whom the soul 
 "travaileth should give satisfaction ? If two or more were 
 '* the cause of the labour, would such a soul be satisfied with 
 '* the birth of one ? Certainly not. Just so it is, in relation 
 "to the ti'avail of the Redeemer's soul : and if this travail, 
 ** this labour, toil, and bloody sweat be undertaken for all 
 
 " mankind, and who can say it was not, must not 
 
 " all men be born again, and consequently be saved, before 
 ** the Redeemer's soul is satisfied ? Yes, my hearers, for he 
 "never can be satisfied with any thing short of it."» 
 
 A disciple of Winchester, might strengthen the argument 
 by the folloAAing view of the passages already quoted. 
 
 1. They prove the incompetency of man to his own salva- 
 tion. In 2 Cor. 15: 14, it is said that "if one died for all, 
 then were ail deacV^ In Rom. 5: 6, it is said that " when we 
 were yet without strength, Christ died for the ungodly." 
 Ungodly sinners who are cdl dead, and without strength, can- 
 not save themselves. 
 
 2. They prove the design of Christ in suffering, and the 
 design of the Father in sending him. He came to " save 
 his people from their sins ;" — " that he might bring us to 
 God;'* — "that whether we wake or sleep, we should live to- 
 gether with him ;" — " The Father sent the Son to be the 
 ^Saviour of the world ;" — " that the world through him might 
 be saved," 
 
 3. They prove that Christ actually tasted death as a sub- 
 stitute for sinners ; for substitution is the force of the word 
 huper,^ for, in several of the passages adduced. He tasted 
 "death, huper, fur every man;"'^ that is, as the substitute of 
 every mail. " For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the 
 just, huper^ for the unjust;^ that is, as the substitute of the 
 
 • Minutes, pp. 290, 291. b c^ne 
 
 c Hcbr. 2: 9. d 1. Pet. 3; 18. 
 
139 
 
 unjust " For when wc woi-c without strength, iii^due 
 tiiiie, Christ died, /uiper, for the ungodly. F«»r scarcely, 
 huper,for a riglitcous man \Nill one dicj yet perad venture, 
 huper, for a good man some would even dare to die ; but 
 God commendeth his love toward us, in that while we 
 were yet sinners, Christ died, hupevj for us.'** On this 
 last verse Doddridge, wlio is by no means a Universalist, 
 quotes a note of Raplielius from Zcnophon, after which 
 he remarks that Raphelius " has abundantly demonstrated 
 that fiuper hemon apeiltane^' signifies he died in our room 
 and stead: nor can I find that apitthauein huper finos^^ 
 has ever any other siguilicatiou than rescuing the life of 
 another, at the expense of our own; and tlte very next verse, 
 (i. e. verse 7.) shews, iudependeutly of any other authority, 
 how evidently it bears tiiat sense here, as one can liardly 
 imagine how any one would die for a good man, unless it 
 were to redeem his life by giving up his own." 
 
 In 1 Tim. 2: 6, the word rendered ransom, contains the 
 idea of substitution as clearly as the preposition which ac- 
 companies it. '• Who gave himself a ransom for all, antUu- 
 tron huper panton.'^'^ On this subject, Turrettin, who was 
 far from Ui.iversalism, says, " The word lutron might 
 "admitof ([nibbling, but nothing can be more express than the 
 « word (intmtron. it denotes not meiely a price, but such a 
 « price as is perfectly equal to the debt which it pays j this 
 ** is the force of tlie preposition anil which expresses sub- 
 « stifution. Aristotle, who surely understood the Greek lan- 
 "guage, uses the word antilutron in the 9tU book of his 
 « Ethics, and 2d chapter to denote the redemption or pur- 
 « chase of a life by substituting another life in its room." 
 
 4. This supposed disciple of Winchester, might urge, 
 moreover, from tlie foregoing authorities, that in virtue of 
 this substitution, men are not merely brought into a state of 
 salvahUity, but a state of salvation. Paul does not say that 
 Christ mail be the Saviour of all men, but that he " is the 
 Saviour of all men.''e He does not say that grace may bring 
 salvation, and may appear to all men ; but " the grace of 
 God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men;''f 
 and *« where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.'g 
 He does not speak of a possible, but of a positive justification. 
 " The free gift came upon alt* ^nen xmio justification of lifc^^i^ 
 
 a Rom. 5* 6 8. > ' >i^ ^.uirv an-.5«M c «)ro5«viivi!3-if nvej 
 
 d»vTi>.uT(ov Jn-ie vxvrjut e 1 Tim. 4; 10. f Tit. 2j 11. 
 
 g Rom. 5; 20, h Rom. 5; ISl. 
 
140 
 
 He speaks as positively of their resurrection and glorificatiok. 
 *' As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive^'' 
 " Tliat as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace 
 "reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus 
 ** Christ our Lord."* 
 
 Now let me ask if our being ungodly or without strength, 
 can ruin those for whom Christ intercedes ? When he came 
 to save the world, and when the Father sent him to be the 
 Saviour ofthe world, was either of them disappointed? Will 
 God claim satisfaction to Ins law and justice from the indi- 
 vidual offenders, when he has already received, by covenant, 
 a vicarious satisfaction, through the meritorious substitution 
 of our approved Surety ?f After his stripes have healed us, 
 shall we be wounded again ? Shall not his Father give unto 
 him the travail of his soul, until he shall be satisfied ? Can 
 he be the Saviour of all men, and yet some men not be 
 saved ? Can those be condemned to death, upon whom he 
 has bestowed justification of life, a glorious resurrection, 
 and a happy immortality? 
 
 A conscientious answer to these interrogatories, as in the 
 presence of the Judge of all the earth, to whom we are 
 responsible for the manner in which we handle his word, 
 shall commence my reply to this argument relating to Christ's 
 priestly office. It is my sincere opinion that Christ's prayers 
 are always answered, and that all for whom he intercedes are 
 saved ; — that the Father and the Son are not disappointed in 
 their designs of salvation, with regard to a single indivi- 
 dual ; — that the atonemoit of Christ is a vicaiious satisfac- 
 tion to all the demands of God's law and justice, and that the 
 father will not again require this essentially requisite satis- 
 faction from any for whom it has once been rendered by 
 Clirist our substitute ,• — that he will never again wound those 
 who are healed by his stripes ; — that he will give to our Sure- 
 ty the full amount of the travail of his soul until he is perfect- 
 ly satisfied ; — that all for wliom he died, shall be really and 
 not nominally saved; — that they shall really enjoy justifica- 
 tion of life, a resuri-ection in Christ, and immortal glory. If, 
 therefore, it be the design of the Holy Trinity to save all uni- 
 versally ; — if the atonenient and intercession of Christ be for 
 all universally^ he will save all universally. The major pi'o- 
 position of the Universalist syllogism given some time since, 
 I admit to be established from Scripture, that Christ saves all 
 for whom he dies. If tlie word of God will establish the mi- 
 
 *1 Cor. 15; 22. Rom. 5; 17. 21. t See Hebr. 7; 22. 
 
141 
 
 nor proposition, that he died for all men universally^ then I 
 admit the conclusion that all men universally shall be saved. 
 As I believe that salvation is certainly and irreversibly con- 
 nected with an interest in Christ's priestly office, my objec- 
 tions shall Ise made only to the univei'sality of its exercise : 
 and shall consist chiefly of a fair exananation of Univcrsalist 
 authorities in their connexion in the Bible. Preparatory to 
 this I would mark the following points. 
 
 1. There are some for whom Christ was not a sacrifice, and 
 who shall not be profited by his death. To the judaizing 
 Galatians, the Apostle said, " Behold, I, Paul, say unto you, 
 that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing." 
 Again, *• Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of 
 you arc justified by the law."* Now it is an undeniable 
 fact that millions did then and do still look to the law 
 foi' justification, and receive religious ordinances on that foot- 
 ing. These, according to the Apostle, have fallen short of 
 that grace which bringeth salvation. Christ profits them no- 
 thiny ; he is of /to effect unto them. This is as much as to say 
 that they have no interest in his priestly office, which is 
 the ground of justification to all who are saved. 
 
 In Hebrews 10: 26 — 29, the same Apostle says, ** for if we 
 •* sin wilfully, after that we have received the knowledge of 
 ^^ the truth, there rcmaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a 
 " certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indigna- 
 " tion, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised 
 *• Moses' law, died without mercy, under two or three wit- 
 " nesses ; of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he 
 " be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of 
 " God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant wherewith 
 " he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite 
 " unto the Spirit of grace ?" As in the former passage, the 
 Galatians were, in their own esteem, justified by the law, so 
 in this passage, some of the Hebrews were, in their own es- 
 teem, sanctified by the blood of the Covenant. Yet these 
 Hebrews afterward counted this blood an unholy thing, and 
 did despite unto the Spirit of grace. Therefore, as Christ did 
 not profit the Galatians, and was of no effect to them, so, for 
 these Hebrews of a particular description,f there remaineth no 
 more sacrifice for sins. As the Galatians fell short of justifica- 
 tion through the grace of God,so theseHebrews incurred a much 
 sorer punishment than that temporal death which Moses in- 
 flicted, without mercy, upon the violators of his law ; even 
 
 * Gal. 5; 2. 4. t Those who had committed the unpardonable sin. 
 
14^ 
 
 that etcniiil judgment andjierrj indignation which shall devoui' 
 the adversaries. Tliat this means a condemnation to eternal 
 fire aftpr the general judgment, is evident from its being here 
 contrasted with the most fearful temporal punishment, and 
 represented a much sorer punishment ; and from its being re- 
 presented in chap. 6, vei'se 2, as an " eternal judgment," suc- 
 ceeding the resurrection from the dead. 
 
 Here then are Jews and Gentiles, who are determined to 
 follow their own way of justification and sanctification. Some 
 sin through the guile of false teachers, and others sin wilful- 
 ly and knowingly. It is declared that Clirist is of no effect 
 to either of them; that neither the sacrifice of Christ, nor 
 any other sacrifice shall profit them ; but that aftei- the re- 
 surrection of the dead, they must expect to be adjudged to 
 eternal fire. Were the Father and the Son disappointed in 
 their fall ? No more than in that of rebel angels. Without 
 either the one or the other, the Holy Jesus shall be satisfied, 
 in receiving the full amount of the travail of his soul. 
 
 2. There are some from whom their ow n debt will be ex- 
 acted to the utmost. This immaculate Redeemer speaks a 
 very intelligible language on this subject, in his sermon on 
 the mount. " Agree with thine adversfiry quickly whilst thou 
 " art in the way with him; lest at any time, the adversary dc- 
 " liver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the of- 
 " ficer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily 1 say unto you, 
 "thou shaltby no means, come out thence, till thou hast paid 
 " the uttermost farthing ;" " the very last mite."* When the 
 Apostle tells the Galatians that on account of their reli- 
 ance on circumcision, Christ should profit them nothing ; 
 that is, he should not pay their debt, he informs them 
 that in consequence of their self-righteousness, they 
 should be held accountable themselves. "For I testify 
 " again to every man that is circumcised, that he is 
 *< a debtor to do the whole law." Like the debtors men- 
 tioned in Luke 7: 41. 42, one owes five hundred pence 
 and the other fifty, and they have nothing to pay: for our Sa- 
 viour says, " without me ye can do nothing," and these 
 debtors have rejected him to depend upon themselves. 
 Now here are persons deeply in debt, and perfectly insolvent, 
 while running at large, in this world, and they are sentenced 
 by an infallibly righteous Judge, to imprisonment hereafter, 
 until the uttermost farthing is paid ; and paid not by our 
 Surety, whom they have rejected, but by themselves. If the 
 
 * Matt. 5j 25. 26. Luke 12; 59. 
 
143 
 
 debt had been paid by the Surety, justice would have pro- 
 cured their release. They would not only have been pre- 
 served from tl||p eternal prison, but delivered from the chains 
 of unbelief in this life. Their being confined by infinite jus- 
 tice, as debtors to do the whole law, is a proof that Christ, 
 who is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that 
 believeth, did not satisfy the law, as the Surety of these par- 
 ticular debtors, any more than of fallen angels. It was 
 in Christ's priestly office, that he paid the debt of believers by 
 satisfying the law in their behalf: but here are unbelicA^ers 
 who are held personally responsible for the last mite. Ihey, 
 therefore, can have no interest in his meritorious substitution, 
 and must be exceptions to those general expressions, in which 
 he is said to be the Saviour of a// men. As they have reject- 
 ed Christ, and can do nothing without him, their insolvency 
 is irren»ediable, and their confinement, of course, eternal. In 
 this awful, but righteous dispensation, the Holy Trinity is 
 not disappointed in any of its plans. The design of tlie Atone- 
 ment is fully answered in the salvation of those for whom 
 it was made In their regeneration to holiness, and resur,- 
 rection to gloiy, the Redeemer " siiall see of the travail of 
 his soul, and shall be satisfied.'' 
 
 To Mr. Ballou's illustration of this subject I can see no valid 
 objection. General Wasliington could not be satisfied with 
 the return of a less number of Algerine captives, than he had 
 ransomed. But when he was fully satisfied in the return of 
 all his ransomed countrymen, there remained behind, and 
 there yet remain, many pi'isoners who are doomed to that se- 
 vere servitude, until they shall pay the last mite of their own 
 ransom. Does not this prove that they had no interest in 
 Washington's ransom ? — that it was not intended for them ? 
 but only for his own countrymen ? This may appear a cen- 
 surable partiality in Washington : Godwin may condemn 
 him for loving his countrymen more than foreigners, as he 
 has censured parents for a peculiar attachment to their own 
 children, and as many censure Christ for a peculiar regard 
 to his sheep, in laying down his life. Although I apjjrove of all 
 these attachments, it is not theu' morality that is now before us. 
 The question is, did Christ ransom all men universally, or on- 
 ly such as he shall actually deliver from condemnation, cor-- 
 ruption and punishment ? Did he ransom those, who, ac- 
 cording to his solemn declaration, shall be kept in prison, un- 
 til they pay their own debt, to the very last mite i No more 
 than Washington ransomed those unhappy Europeans who 
 
144 
 
 arc still in Algeririe boiulage. But those whom Christ ha» 
 lelt in hopeless punishment, are his eneinies : and if any 
 American in Algieis had manifested that iwicorous and 
 traitorous hostility to his counti*y\s President and constitu- 
 tion, which Mr. Ballon and my opponent have evinced to- 
 ward Christ's Divinity and Atonement, Washington would 
 either have left him in \frica, or brought him hi)me to th« 
 enjoyment of thati-ope which he had prepared for Arnold. 
 
 3. It has been proved in the refutation of the 9th Universa- 
 list argument, that general tei-ms are a- ery often, if not gene- 
 rally, used in a limited signification. A dissertation was 
 given on the word a//, a word which frequently occurs, and 
 on which much stress is laid, in the texts brouglit to support 
 this 10th argument. The evidence there adduced, show$ 
 that in the passages here cited, this word may be used in a 
 limited sense, but in some of these texts it proves not only 
 that it mmj he, but that it is thus used. In one of them,* 
 Paul exhorts that " supplications, prayers, intercessions, and 
 giving of thanks be made for all men;" and Mr. Ballon in- 
 sinuates that this is a proof of the universality of Christ's 
 priestly office. Now it is a well known fact, that the Scrip- 
 tures deny a universal intercession, both in his case and in 
 ours. In John 17 : 9, he says, " I pray not for the world, 
 but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine." 
 And although in the passage from I Tim. we are exhorted 
 to pray for all men generally, vet in 1 John 5: 16, we are re- 
 lieved from praying for the unpardonable sin. This, then, 
 establishes a matter of criticism, the meaning of the word 
 all ; and a matter of doctrine, the objective ex tent of Christ's 
 priesthood. It is here asserted by himself, that he inter- 
 cedes for none but those whom the Fathei- has given him, 
 and these are contrasted with the world, as coustituting a 
 part and not the whole of mankind. And would he die for 
 those whom the Father, in divine sovereignty has not given 
 him, and for whom he will not pray.^ I might rather ask, 
 will not the Holy Trinity conspire to bestow every benefit 
 upon those from whom it has not withheld Heaven's great- 
 est blessing 1 " He that spared not his own Son, but deli 
 vered him up for us all, [that is, for believers like Paul; all 
 whom the Father had given him ; for lie gave us to him, and 
 him to ?«;] how shall he not with him also freely give u$ 
 all things ?"b Thus it appears that he imparts every neces- 
 sary blessing to those for whom he died ; — But there aro 
 
 a 1 Tiro. 2; 1. b Bona. 8.32. 
 
145 
 
 ,*ome from whom he withholds the benefit of his interces- 
 sion, which is essential to their welfare; — Therefore there 
 are some for whom he did not die. To show that his sa- 
 rrifice and intercession, (both sacerdotal functions,) are co- 
 extensive, and that they are effectual to tlie salvation of all 
 for whom they are made, we cannot easily invent plainer 
 words than Paul uses in Rom. 8: 34. " Who is he that con- 
 *• demneth? It is Christ that died, yea, rather that is risen 
 « again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also 
 •* maketh intercession for us.'' Here it is said concerning 
 the same class of mankind, that Christ died and rose again, 
 and intercedes in Heaven for them. This class is denoted 
 by the pronoun us, the same us to whom, in the preceding 
 context, he promises every good thing, because he had de- 
 livered up Christ for them. The question is, does this US 
 embrace the world universally, or a part of mankind, who 
 are given to Christ out of the world ? Our Saviour has not 
 more unequivocally limited his intercession, than his Apos- 
 tle, in this 8th chapter, from first to last, limits his atone- 
 ment. In the very first verse these us are described as be- 
 ing in Christ Jesus, and walking after the Spirit. In verse 
 9th he says, " now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, 
 he is none of his." How many have another spirit in them I 
 He says that they sutler with him.a How different from those 
 who trample on his blood! They are saved by hope :^ where- 
 as many die in despair. They piay by the aid of the Spi- 
 rit. How different from those who blaspheme, or who pray 
 denying the Son and the Spirit ! They love God« whereas 
 in verse fth, there are some who hate God. Tuese loving, 
 praying, hoping, suffering souls, who are in Christ, and have 
 Christ and his spirit in them ; these are the very all and 
 the very us for whom, as in verses 32. 34, Christ was deli- 
 vered up ; and for whom he died and arose again, and in- 
 tercedes at the right hand of God. These characteristics do 
 not belong to all men universally : neither do the atonement 
 and intercession of Christ. 
 
 Returning to the point of criticism now in hand, it may be 
 observed that the word world, and the phrase, the whole world, 
 found in some of the texts to be examined, are generally used 
 in a limited sense. 1. The Roman Empire in the Augustan age, 
 " There went out a decree from Cesar Augustus, that all the 
 
 a Verse 17. c Verse 28. 
 
 b Verse 24. 
 
 T 
 
U6 
 
 ** twor/c? should be taxed.''a 2. A multitudeiuA certain age or 
 " country. " The Pharisees therefore said among tiieinselves, 
 ** perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? Behold! the wund 
 " is gone after iiini."i' 3. The churdies generally in the 
 " first Century. " I thank my God, through Jesus Christ, 
 '* foi' you all that your faith is spoken of th?-oughout (/te 
 " wiiole worlfVc 4. Believers in general. " For the bread 
 ** of Grod is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth 
 "life unto the world:** that is to believers, as the whole 
 " chapter proves ; in w hich he says ** I am the bread of life : he 
 " that come I h to me shall never hunger ; and he that beiieveth 
 " on me shall never thrist." ** I am the living biead 
 " which came down from heaven." " If any man eat of this 
 ** bread, he shall live forever : and the bread tliat I will 
 "give is my flesh, which 1 will give for the lifeof </<« world,''- ^ 
 6. Those who ai*e not given to Christ. "I pray not for the 
 " world, but for them wliich thou hast given mc."« 6. For 
 those whom the Father has given him, and for whose redemp- 
 tion he was slain, butparticulai'ly of the Gentiles, as distinct 
 from the Jews. ** Now if the fall of them [the Jews] be the 
 " riches of tlie world, and the diminishing of them, the riches 
 '• of the Gentiles, how much more their fulness !"f " And he 
 " is the pi'opitiation for our sins : and not for ours only, but 
 for the sins of the whole world.''' ? Does he mean that he is 
 the propitiation not only for the sins of believers, but for the 
 sins of unbelievers ? not only for the penitent and obedi- 
 ent, but for the incorrigibly impenitent and disobedient? 
 Would not this make men indifferent to faith and holiness, 
 and would it not teach that Christ became a propitiatory sacri- 
 fice for those whose cause he would not advocate in heaven 
 as their interceding High Priest. That he wrote to excite 
 an abhorrence of sin, and to teach that Christ's intercessiou 
 and propitiation were coextensive, is evident from the prece- 
 ding verse. "My little children, these things I write unto 
 "you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an ad- 
 " vocatc with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." For 
 whom is he an advocate ? "I pray not for the world, but for 
 ** them whom thou has given me." For their sins then, he is 
 a propitiation. These arc called the whole worlds as Paul in 
 tlie first sense given above called Gentile believers the world, 
 in contradistinction from the Jews, who thought that they were 
 
 a l.ukc2. 1. d John 6. 33. 35. 51. 
 
 b John 12. 10. e John 17. 9. 
 
 c Uom. 1. S. f Rom. 11.12. 
 
 g 1 John 2. 2". 
 
147 
 
 forever to monopolize the benefits of revealed religion. The 
 Apostles themselves relinciuished this prejudice with great 
 reluctance, even alter the ascension of our Lord and tiie des- 
 cent of the Holy Ghost. When Peter's pertinacity was over- 
 come by the grace of God, accompanied with extraordinary 
 visions, and communications, and effusions of the Spirit, 
 " then Petei' opened his mouth, and said, of a truth I perceive 
 ^*that God is no respecter of persons:" that is, he has not 
 now that exclusive love for tlie Jews, a mistaken apprehen- 
 sion of winch made me unwilling to visit this Gentile family; 
 but I find that he is a respecter of all men alike. How ? Has 
 he an equal respect for believers and unbelievers ? Let Pe- 
 ter speak for himself. " Of a ti'uth I perceive that God is 
 " no respecter of persons: but in every nation he that year. 
 " e<A him, and wor^e^A righteousness is accepted of him." a 
 The Apostle John contended witii the same prejudices and dif- 
 ficulties, and he comes to the same conclusion. "He is the 
 ''propitiation for our sins ; [that is, for the sins of us belie- 
 "ving Jews,] and not for ours only, but for tiie sins of the 
 *' whole world :" that is for all in every nation, who fear 
 ^* God and work righteousness. That he was slain for the 
 *' redemption of such and such only, the same Apostle has 
 " declared in Rev. 5 : 9. " For thou wast slain, and has re- 
 " deemed us to God by thy blood, out of every kindred and 
 ** tongue, and people and nation." When therefore, we are 
 " told that Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole 
 " w^orld, we are to understand, (himself being judge,) that 
 ** he redeems believers out of every nation: as when he tells 
 "us, that in the day of judgment, " all kindreds of the earth 
 " shall wail because of him," ^ he means that unbelievers, 
 out of all kindreds shall be condemned and punished. Thus 
 it appears that these general expressions are often used in a 
 limited signification, and that theii' limits are defined by the 
 writers who use them. 
 
 4. Before engaging in a fuller examination of the texts 
 brought to support a universal atonement, one more point 
 seems to claim our attention. While the purchase of the 
 Redeetner is often denoted by general expressions with a 
 limited significahon, the boundaries of his blood-bought fa- 
 mily are also frequently defined by limited expressions in an 
 exclusive sense, feuch a fact should relieve us from all dif- 
 ficulty in the explanation of texts relating to this subject. 
 
 a Acts 10 : 34. 55. b Rev. 1; 7. 
 
148 
 
 The church invisible is pointed out in Scripture under the 
 denomination of sheep and people, friends and brethren, 
 children, bride, and body. In the day of judgment the 
 sheep shall be placed on his right hand, and the ^oafs on the 
 left. But the Judge himself said, during his humiliation, 
 " I lay down my life for the sheepJ**^ Thegoats then are ex- 
 cluded from his atonement, as they shall be from his glory. 
 He received the name of Jesus, because " he shall save his 
 people from their sins."** There are many peo/j/e unwilling to 
 the last, to receive him as a Saviour from sin. To the ex- 
 clusion of these, it is said, *H\\y people shall be willing in 
 the day of thy power, in the beauty of holiness.*'^ Many 
 of this sort of people^ whom God had determined to make 
 willing, were in Corinth in Paul's day ; for God told him, 
 "I have much joeo/j/e in this city.*'*^ Did this embrace the. 
 heathen population universally ? Not unless they were uni- 
 versally willing to renounce sin and follow holiness, through 
 the spirit of a holy Saviour. Although Christ died for his 
 enemies, it was only for those whose enmity was to be des- 
 troyed. In John 13: 14, he speaks of dying for his /Wen</s 
 to the exclusion of those, concerning whon? he shall say in 
 the great day, *'But these mine enemies^ which would not 
 that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them 
 before me."*^ There are some who are ashamed of Christ 
 in this crooked and perverse generation. Of these he has 
 said that he will be ashamed before his Father and the holy 
 Angels. To the exclusion of these, therefore, he says of 
 some, that ♦' he is not ashamed to call them brethren.'' This 
 is only two verses after Hebr. 2: 9, where it is said that "he 
 3hould taste death for every man:" or as it might be more 
 consistently translated. *' for every brother,''^ from verse 11th; 
 or " for every child," from verse 1 Sth : for let it be remem- 
 bered that this is the evident meaning of the writer, since 
 the word ?na7i is only given him by our translators, and he 
 actually mentioned brethren and children as the exclusive 
 subjects of the atonement. This observation concerning 
 children is confirmed by the inspired words of Caiaphas, 
 who " prophecicd that Jesus should die for that nation, and 
 not for that nation only, but that also he should gather to- 
 gether in one, the children of God that were scattered a- 
 broad.^f These children of God have thus far been a sparse 
 
 aJohnlO;15, oPs. 110. 3. d Aots 18. 10. 
 
 b Matt. 1. 21, e Luke 19. 27. 
 
 f John 11; .11. 52. How this regembles 1 John 2- 3,inexprestion«ndmeaniogr! 
 
population, buttliey arc destined one day to fill tlie earth. 
 They are the travail of the Redeemer's soul, with which he 
 shall be satisfied. " When thou shalt make his soul an ot- 
 ferine for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, 
 and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in hishand^ « In- 
 stead of confusing the spiritual seed with the Wof theser- 
 pent, which embraces incorrigible offenders, the Scriptures 
 contrast them. To the serper.t God says, " 1 will put enmi- 
 ty between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and 
 \i^vseedr If he had intended to embiace both in the promise 
 to Abraham, « and in thy seed shall all the nations of the 
 earth be blessed."" he would have given us the word m the 
 plural and not in the singular number. « Now to Abraham 
 and his seed were the promises made : he saith not, and to 
 seeds, as of many, but as of one, and to thy seed, which is 
 Christ:"'= that is, Christ mystical, embracing all the mem- 
 bers of that one body of which he is the head ; for "Christ is 
 the head of the church, and he is the Saviour of the body. >' 
 Does this bodi> include that Man of sin, the son of perdition, 
 who opposeth'and exalteth himself above all that is called 
 God, or that is worshipped ? Does this « church of God which 
 he hath purchased with his own blood,"e include the syna- 
 gogue of Satan ? The inspired illustration of the context, 
 makes it as palpable that it does not, as language can make 
 it " Husbands love your wives, even as Christ also loved 
 the church and gave himself for it.'"' Here, then, we have the 
 extent of the atonement plainly defined. Our Saviour proves 
 from the very creation of one pair in the beginning, that the 
 connubial attachment should be exclusive. He has thei-e- 
 fore pronounced judgment upon every roving emotion ot the 
 heart. The more we confine this affection, to its proper ob- 
 iect, the more we resemble the Lamb of God in his love to the 
 heavenly bride.^ Would this be the case if he had had an in- 
 discriminate attachment to his own church and the synagogue 
 of Satan?— if he hscA given himsef, that is, if he had made an 
 atonement, for the man of sin and his own body indifferently ? 
 As, then, his atonement is, in infinite and adorable sovereignty, 
 made for men to the exclusion of devils, so is it made for his 
 own church invisible, to the exclusion of the devil's church 
 among men. It is made for his sheep to the exclusion of the 
 goats; for his people friends and brethren, to the exclusion of 
 
 alsa. 53;10. d Eph. 5. 23. 
 
 b Gen. 22; 18. c Acts 20. 28. 
 
 c Gal. 3; 16. See J9inie«on'8 Sacred History, 
 f Eph. 5. 25. % Re^- 21. 9. 
 
150 
 
 those who remain enemies, and aliens fi'om the commonweaItU 
 of Israel, and Hti'angers to the covenants of promise; for his 
 seed, children, bride, and body, to the exclusion of the seed 
 of the serpent, tiie generations of Amalek, and those who per- 
 severe in loA ing the ( reature moi-e than the Ci'eator. 
 
 The discussion of the above four particulars was intended 
 to facilitate and curtail the explanation of the authorities ad- 
 vanced for a uniAersal atonement. In its progress several 
 of those texts were partly, and some sufficiently cleared. The 
 first of those which remain, was, if I mistake not, nsed by Dr. 
 Chauncey, that great champion of Univci'salism, from whom 
 many of the others also were taken. It is 1 Cor. 15: 3, 
 ** Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures." 
 Whose sins are these ? They are the sins of us', and in what 
 was said in Rom. 8th, in the 3rd head above, it will be recol- 
 lected that tlic us for whonj Christ died, was composed of 
 believers. In this case the same thing a])pears from the 
 verse immediately preceding. " By which also ye were 
 saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless 
 ye have believed in vain." By putting these 2d and 3rd 
 verses together, we find that Christ's dying for our sins, is 
 the meritorious cause, and faith the instrumental cause of our 
 salvation. 
 
 But this is said to be according to the scriptures; that is, 
 of the old Testament : for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit 
 of prophecy, and Moses w rote of him. There, the redemp- 
 tion of Christ is usually adumbrated by a temporal redemp- 
 tion. " What nation in the earth is like thy people, even like 
 Israel, whom God went to redeem for a people to himself ?"a 
 This temporal redemption, however, was from God's pecu- 
 liar love to Israel, to the exclusion of other nations, and at 
 their expense. This is attested by the law and the prophets. 
 Moses says " I will put a division, (Engl, margin and Hehr. 
 a redemption,) between my people and thy people.""^ Isaiah 
 says, "Thus saith the Lord your Redeemer, the Holy One of 
 " Israel; for your sake I have sent to Babylon, and have 
 " brouglit down all their nobles and the Chaldeans whose cry 
 « is in the ships." " For I am the Lord thy God, the Holy 
 « One of Israel, thy Saviour. I gave Egypt for thy ransom, 
 « Ethiopia and Seba for tliee. Since thou wast precious in 
 ** my sight, thou hast been honourable, and I have loved thee; 
 " therefore will I give men for thee, and people for thy life."e 
 
 • Ex. 15.13. b Ex. 8. 23. 
 
 9 lia. 43. 3. 14. See Jamieson's Sacred Historj'. 
 
151 
 
 Tliis love of God to Israel caused liim so to redeem them, that 
 this redemption served as a division or distinction between 
 them and oilier nations. It is so pecuiiar that other nations, 
 witli their men and people, are said to be given for the ran- 
 mm of the Israelites. 
 
 In \ Cor. 5 : 7, Paul plainly alludes to the Old Testament 
 history, in such a way as to shew us what he meant by say- 
 ing that ** Christ died for our sins according to the Scrip- 
 "tuies." "For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for 
 '* us." This is our Passover, the Passover of us ; which us 
 he speakes of in the next verse as keeping the ordinance 
 " witii the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth," and as 
 differing very widely from some who had the old leaven of 
 malice and wickedness, like the Egyptians of old, between 
 whom and the Israelites, God niade the typical Passover a re- 
 demption or mark of distinction. He said to Moses, *' It is 
 '• the Lord's passover. For I will pass through the land of 
 '* Egypt this night, and will smite all the first born in the 
 *'land of Egyt, both man and beast: and against all the 
 " Gods of Egypt I will execute judgment. I am the Lord. 
 " And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses 
 " where you are: and when 1 see the blood, I will pass over 
 "you, and the plague shall not be upon you, to destroy you, 
 " when I smite the land of Egypt.'' » For whom was this 
 typical passover sacrificed ? Was it for all men universally? 
 It was for the Israelites alone, to the exclusion of those stub- 
 born foes who sank to the bottom of the Red Sea. For 
 whom is Christ our antitypical Passover sacrificed ? For 
 whose sins did he die according to the scriptures ? For the 
 spiritual Israel who believe in his name, and not for those 
 incorrigible enemies, who sink, in just judgment, to the bot- 
 tomless pit. 
 
 The next passage which claims our attention is Dan. 9: 
 24. " Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and 
 " upon thy Holy City, to finish the transgression, and to 
 '* make an end of sins, &c." Its being said here that the 
 Messiah comes to finish transgression, and to make an end 
 of sins, is considered evidence of universal salvation, be- 
 cause there can be no state of eternal sin and misery, after 
 all transgression and sin shall have been finished and brought 
 to an end. But according to their explanation, this text 
 not only proves that there will be no sin nor punishment af- 
 
 a Ex.12. 11—13. 
 
152 
 
 fcr death, but that there has been no sin nor pjinishtneiit 
 for near two thousand years past; for it was then that 
 the Messiah came and fulfilled this prophecy. The word 
 here translated finish^ is, in one of the Psalms,h correctly 
 rendered refrain* " I have refrained my feet from every 
 " evil way, that I might keep thy word." My oi)poiient 
 himself will admit that David did not mean that he had 
 Jinislied his feet by annihilation, or that he had obtained a 
 perfect deliverance from sin and sorrow in this life. In 
 other places a it is rendered stay or restrain. *• Therefore 
 " the heaven over you is stayed from dew, and the earth is 
 ** stayed from her fruit." " So the people wei*e restrained 
 " from bringing work for the offering of the sanctuary." 
 Would my opponent understand from these passages, that 
 the heavens and the earth and the people Vfevejinished by an- 
 nihilation ? Neither did the Messiah come to Jimsh trans- 
 gression in this sense, but to restrain it, as our translators 
 have rendered it in the margin of the text under considera- 
 tion. What is meant by his making an end of sins, or sin- 
 off eritigs as it is elsewhere rendered, ^ is made clear in the 
 close of the chapter, where it is said, " he shall cause the 
 ** sacrifice and the oblation to cease." These typical sins or 
 sin offerings were of no farther use, after God had '* made him 
 ** who knew no sin, to be sin or a sin offering for us, that we 
 " might be made the righteousness of God in him." c To 
 say that he made an end of sins, so that no sin should be af- 
 terward committed or punished, is not only contradicting the 
 scriptures, but contradicting palpable matter of fact, d 
 
 Other passages are in the writings of John, where Christ 
 is represented as " the Lamb of God which taketh away the 
 **sinof the world :"e that is the sins of believing Gentiles; 
 whereas the typica^ lamb was slain for Jews only, and 
 that not to cleanse the conscience. In this sense the same 
 wi'iter tells us that " the Father sent the Son to be the Sa- 
 " viour of the world."f Whether this embraced stubborn 
 unbelievers, our Saviour himself declares. '* For God so 
 " loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that 
 ** whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have 
 "everlasting lifc."g This is as much as to say that the 
 Father gave the son to die for those who should believe. 
 
 a Ex. 36 6. Hag. 1. 10. d See Dr. Wylie's numbers on UniTersalisnii 
 b LeTit. 4. 3, 25. 29. in the Presbyterian Magariate. 
 
 e 2 Cor. 5. 21. e John 1. 29. 
 
 h 119. 101. f 1 John 4. li. 
 
 g John 3. 16; 
 
153 
 
 A few passages of Paul's writings yet remain, which con- 
 tain the same doctrine. One rejiresents God as the" Saviouii 
 of all men, especially of those that believe.'^* Tlus shows that 
 there is a salvation poruliar to believers. It is true, God is 
 the Saviour of unbelievers who forget him : but he is only 
 their Saviour from temporal calamities, such as the bondage 
 in Egypt. Tlie Psalmist ^ says that tlie idolatrous Israelites 
 "forgat God their Saviour, which had done great things in 
 Egypt" But although God saved them from the tyranny of 
 Pharaoh, he says concerning some of them, « so I sware in 
 my wrath, they shall not enter into my rest" « And to 
 ♦*whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but 
 ''to them that 6«/i!«?;erf not.' So we see that they could not 
 enter in because of unbelief:' c Although they had harden- 
 ed their hearts through the deceitfulness of sin. God was 
 still theii- Saviour, Deliverer, Preserver. But in the same 
 sense, the Psalmist says, " Lord thou savest man and beast"d 
 This is a literal translation of the original and the Septua- 
 gint Although God was the Saviour of the godly and un- 
 godly, believers and unbelievers, Paul makes a great distinc- 
 tion between them. He says, concerning those who believed 
 the gospel, " there remaineth, therefore, a rest to the people 
 of God :" Whereas " they to whom it was first preached, en- 
 tered not in because of unbelief. "e This is a comment upon 
 the same Apostle's declaration that " God is the Saviour of 
 all men, especially of those that believe." But we have a simi- 
 lar comment in the context of the passage itself: where he 
 says " godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise 
 of the life that now is, and of that which is to come." Thus 
 God is the Saviour or preserver of all men in this life, but es- 
 pecially of those that believe, because they are preserved and 
 blessed forever. 
 
 The context will also explain the general expressions used 
 in 1 Cor. 15: 22. "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ 
 shall all be made alive." The next verse says, " But every 
 man in his own order : Christ the first-fruits,- afterward they 
 that are Christ's at his coming." The all that are made alive 
 in Christ are here said to be " i\\iiy that are Christ's," that 
 is, all who belong to Clirist Now does not the same Apos- 
 tle tell us that none belong to Christ but those who have his 
 Spirit? "Now if any man have no^'ie Spirit of Christ he is 
 
 a 1 Tim. 4. 10. d 36. 6. 
 
 b 106. 21. eHeb.*:6.9. 
 
 Hebr. 3; 11. 18. 19. 
 
154 
 
 none of his.*'" Although tliere is to be hereafter a general ef- 
 fusion of the Spirit, it is so far from bein.s; universal in ali 
 ages, that some Avho liaA e enjoyed its miraculous gifts, and 
 who have even been personal acquaintances and profess- 
 ed disciples of Christ, shall be pronounced none of his. 
 ^' And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you : depart 
 ** from me, ye that work iniquity."i> As, therefore, the work- 
 ers of iniquity, who are destitute of the Spirit of Christ, do 
 not belong to him, and never did, they shall not be made alive 
 in him ; wherefore the word all must here be understood ia 
 the sense which is limited by the subject to which it is applied. 
 The meaning of the passage is simply this. " As in Adam ali 
 [that belong to Adam] die, so in Christ, all [that belong t« 
 Christ] shall be made alive." 
 
 The last passage to be noticed inthelatter part ofRom. 5, 
 in which it is said that " the free gift came upon ali me* 
 " unto justification of life," and " by the obedience of one 
 "shall many be made righteous." We have already seem 
 that the word all is often used for a part of mankind, and 
 the younger Edwards <i has proved, in opposition to Dr. 
 Chauncy, that the same thing may be said of the word many, 
 cThe whole chapter shews that these a// mew who receive 
 justification of life, and these many who are made rigliteouSf 
 are justified and made righteous through faith. The chap- 
 ter begins, " Therefore being justified by faith, we have 
 " peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ ,• by whom 
 " also we have access by faith into this grace wherein wc 
 " stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God." He lets 
 us know that these all men are the same pious us of which he 
 speaks so often. Besides that faith and hope already at- 
 tributed to them, he says in verse 5th, ** the love of God is 
 "shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is give» 
 unto ws." In verse 4th, they have patience and experience. 
 In verse 1 0, they are reconciled to God. No wonder then, 
 tliat in verse 17, they are said to have " abundance of grace 
 " and of the gift of righteousness." Are all men universal- 
 ly patient and experienced christians ? have all men faith 
 hope, and love ? Are all universally reconciled to God ? la 
 the Holy Ghost given to all men ? Not so. But let it be re- 
 membered that Paul says in this same epistle, "if any man 
 *' have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Christ 
 himself has declared that lie that believeth not shall be damn- 
 
 kRorn. 8. 9. e i* trt^^ti d Of his writines and hig iktber's* fret «•• 
 
 b Matt 7: 23. is made ia this diicatwon. 
 
155 
 
 ed, and that his enemies, who love him not, shall be slain he- 
 fore him. Surely if all men universally enjoyed jus^t/ica- 
 Hon unto life, our infallible judge would not condemn* some 
 to be slain. 
 
 What makes it evident beyond a reasonable doubt, that 
 these all men are believers, is, that the 1 8th verse, in which 
 they are said to be justified, is inti-oduced by therefore, as an 
 express inference from the irth, in which they are said to 
 receive a6wnrf«Mce of grace, as well as tiie gift of righteous- 
 ness : and in verse 2nd they are said to *' have access by 
 ^ faith into this grace.'*'' His promises in verse 17th are con- 
 cerning believers, and are therefore particular. This calls 
 for a particular and not an universal conclusion. As he 
 does not draw any of those lame conclusions of which my op- 
 ponent's friends and the enemies of God accuse him, his in- 
 ference in verse 18th must be confined to believers, which 
 were contemplated in the promises. And Dr. Chauncy's 
 fear that this interpretation would confound the antithesis 
 maintained from verse 12th to the close, is entirely without 
 foundation, as his great antagonist has shown. Is there no 
 antithesis in saying that as the world of sinners transgressed 
 and died in the first Adam their federal head, so the world of 
 believers are justified and saved in the second Adam, their 
 federal Head ? This is the doctrine of the chapter, of the 
 epistle, and of the scriptures. 
 
 The argument from the extent of Christ's atonement is 
 considered the citadel of Universalism. The result of the 
 examination which it has now received is, that there are some 
 who are not profited by Christ's atonement, but must be 
 sent to prison until they satisfy for themselves, which they 
 can never do. Many plain authorities have been advanced, 
 which shew that Christ died exclusively for those who shall 
 be saved ; for his sheep and people, brethren and friends, 
 children and bride, body and cliurch. It has also been shewn 
 by the context of Universalist authorities that the sacred 
 writers mean believers, even where they use such general ex- 
 pressions as many, all, every, the world, and the whole world, 
 in relation to this subject. We conclude therefore, that un- 
 believers must perish. 
 
 In the course of this discussion my opponent has been re- 
 presented as an enemy to the Atonement. The word occurs 
 in our translation of Rom. 5: 11. In his Lecture on this pask 
 sage, he says, " if this word had been correctly translated, 
 
 a The meaning of the word damn. 
 
156 
 
 ** the word afoncmenU and of course the doctrine of atoae- 
 ** ment, as it is now understood, would not have been found, 
 " (as it is not contained) in the New Testament, Neitlicr is 
 " the doctrine of atonement, i. e. in the sense of making sa- 
 *' tisfaction to divine justice, by the means of a suflering vic- 
 '*tim, any where to be found in the Bible." Soon after, in a 
 note, he makes a similar remark concerning "the commonly 
 received doctrine of atonement by vicarious sufferings.''^ For 
 farther information, he refers us to the article atonement^ in 
 Priestley's History of the Conniptions of Christianity, a work 
 which he earnestly recommends to the attention of liis read- 
 ers. Of this work, its own author in the last century, pro- 
 fessed to give a compend in this desk ', in w hich he says, " I 
 *' regard w ith horror such doctrines as those of transubstan- 
 *' tiation, the trinity, atonement, and other corruptiojis of 
 *' Christianity.^^ Here then, is the consistency of my opponent 
 and his Universalist and Unitarian friends. They quotie 
 scripture to prove their point, although in this very work of 
 Dr. Priestley's, recommended earnestly by my opponent, 
 the inspiration of the Scriptures is as unequivocally 
 denied as in Thomas Paine's Age of Reason. They 
 urce an argument from the extent of Christ's atonement, 
 which presupposes his >dcarious satisfaction, and is per- 
 fectly nugatory without it; yet they dare, in the face of 
 high heaven, to express as blasphemous an abhorrence of the 
 atonement and its author, as could be expected from devils 
 incarnate, Yet this is the man who calls me brother.b After 
 thus impiously insulting my Divine Master, he gives the 
 sacred name of brother to his unworthy servant. Worthless 
 as I am, I desire no such confraternity. ** O my soul! come 
 " not thou into their secret ; unto their assembly, mine honour 
 be not thou united." 
 
 a See Lectures, pp. 105. 106. 
 
 b. Minutes p. 256. " But my brother, — yes, I say my brother, though he ia ity 
 opponent in this debate,— says &e." 
 
PART SECOND. 
 
 Tlius much concisely concerning the arguments of the Uni- 
 yei-salists. My own evidence for the Orthodox opinion may 
 now be expected. Preparatory to this, allow me to say a few 
 things concerning the true statement of the question, and the 
 sources frjom which tliis evidence shall be drawn. Nothing but 
 the subtlety of Universalist writei-s makes it necessary, for- 
 mally to declare that these sources are the inspii-ed oracles 
 exclusively. Mr. Balfour insinuates that we consider the Bi- 
 ble rather scarce' of proof, and that on this account, we resort 
 to uninspired Jewish authority. The doctrine of theTargums 
 which he has proved to be on our side, appears to grieve 
 him. He also shews that the Apocrypha which Mr. Winches- 
 ter had quoted against us,* is really in our favour: and it is 
 Tery remarkable that they generally denote the state of eter- 
 nal torment by that word ^ w hich is used in the account of the 
 rich man and Lazarus.*' Although he gives us Josephus and 
 Philo also, we lay but little stress on such ^vrite^s, in doctrin- 
 al matters. If however, my opponent is driven to the hard ne- 
 cessity, of resting an affair of criticism upon uninspired Jew- 
 ish authority, it would surely be more reasonable to resort 
 to them, than to that Hebrew Professor whom he is so often 
 calling upon in this debate. Instead of comparing Spiritual 
 things with Spii-itual, and determining the meaning of Scrip- 
 ture words by scripture usage, he is perpetually appealing to 
 my fi'iend the learned Professor, an uninspired Hebrew, for 
 an ultimate decision onthe meaning of the words of inspirar 
 tion. So anxious is he to have him for an umpire between us, 
 
 a In his 4th Dialogue he quotes Wisdom xi. 23—26, xii. 1, 2. 16. xv. 1. 2. 
 b "JiJ Hadei. 
 
 e 2 Esdnis, ii. 29 iy. i. Tiii. 53. Tobit xiii. 2. Wisdom xviL 14, EccIbSi 
 xji. re. n. 5,0. Song of tfw three ehiltfrm, verse SB. 
 
158 
 
 that he calls upon him no less than four times in the same hall" 
 hour. In the last of these instances he says, **I now once more 
 *' call upon my opponent to submit to the determination of this 
 *• point depending on tlie meaning of these words to the decision 
 ** of the Professor, and if he will not consent, I appeal to the 
 *• Professor myself, or to any other con)petent person w ho 
 " may now he present, to tell me if I am wrong.'^a Thus 
 my opponent who unjustly accuses us of servile regard to 
 human autliority, actually goes begging for some Fatlier 
 Confessor, either Jew or Gentile, to tell him whether he is 
 right or wrong: and while he professes not to know wliat 
 opinion the umpire may express, he promises submission to 
 his determination in matters of doctrine and criticism. We 
 might as well decide the question by lot. He has been long 
 challenging the clergy " to discuss this important subject 
 with him." Is this decision by unknown and uninspired ar- 
 bitrators what he means by a discussion ? In ascertaining 
 the meaning of words, we should look for higher authority 
 than the mere assertion of any man living ? yet in an affair of 
 this sort, my opponent gives Dr. Campbell of Aberdeen and 
 a gentleman of this city, who is really a greater man, as 
 paramount authority. Says he " I give them as my authori' 
 *'ty for not using these words according to the common ac^ 
 *' ceptation."b Ihcse gentlemen are really in my favour ; yet 
 the Bible itself is my authority. 
 
 With regard to the christian church in general, and in 
 every age, my opponent is much more modest and more cor- 
 rect. He appears to know that his system has never been 
 considered a part of their religion, In his article on the 
 word Universaiists, in the spurious edition of Buck's Theo- 
 logical Dictionary, he says, " The sentiments of the Univer- 
 " salists were embraced by Origen in the third century, and in 
 "more modern times by Chevalier Ramsay, Dr. Cheyne,Mr. 
 " Hartley and others:" Although I could not, with Bishop 
 Hoi*sley, deny Origen's credibility in matters of fact, the 
 whole Christian world will admit that a diminution of his 
 heathenish eccentricities, would have been a great addition 
 to his Christian character. His follies were many : yet a 
 total denial of future punishment, a doctrine which my op- 
 ponent has borrowed from Mr. Huntingdon, and which he 
 advocates in this debate, is not acknowledged to be among 
 the articles of Origen's creed. The above extract is, how- 
 
 a Mioatei pp. 161. 163. 164.3 isc. 
 b Mia«t«> pp. les. 179. 
 
ever, an indirect confession of a remarkable fact, that Uni- 
 versalisni in any shape, had no footing whatever in the church 
 of Christ,"until Origen, and very little since his day. Clemens 
 Roinanus who probably heard some of the Apostles preach, 
 says, " All souls are immoi-tal, even those of the impious ; to 
 *V whom it would be better not to be incorruptible. For as 
 "they are punished by ine\tinguishable hre, with an eternal 
 *• punishment, and do not die, they can obtain no end to their 
 " great evil." With this testimony Justin Martyr and Iren- 
 aeus agree. When Oi'igen swerved from this Scriptural doc- 
 trine, he taught that the wicked were subjected to an eternal 
 alternation of misery and happiness. This is represented by 
 Augustine as one of Origen's dogmas which the church did not 
 receive ; one which is inexcusable and indefensible ; and one 
 
 which is to be VEHEMENTLY ABHORRED BY EVERY CHRIS- 
 TIAN, WHETHER LEARNED OR UNLEARNED. As his OWn 
 
 belief and that of the scriptures and the church, he tells us, 
 ** that Christ shall appear in the consummation of the world, 
 »* to judge it, and that he will raise all the dead, and will 
 ^* give to pious men eternal life and perpetual joys ; but will 
 "condemn impious men and devils, that they may bepunisk- 
 *• ed without end." He shortly adds ; ** and we condemn 
 *' the Origenists, who pretended that there will be an end of 
 the future punishment of condemned men and devils:"* From 
 the time of Christ to the present day, this doctrine of Augus- 
 tine has been the creed of all Christendom, w ith the exception 
 of Hobbes, Spinosa, Priestley, and Huntingdon, with tliose 
 Atheists, Deists, Unitarians, and Universalists who choose 
 txj follow them. 
 
 Among their devoted followers my opponent occupies, at 
 present, a conspicuous station. He has debated and lectured, 
 preached and pi'inted largely in their defence. For his pub- 
 lications he claims murh of your esteem, because as he has 
 told you, they have not yet been censured, although sent to all 
 tlie Universities and Colleges in the United States, foi- their 
 critical examination, and respectfully submitted to the whole 
 body of \merican clergy of every sect and denomination. 
 He forgot to tell you that be had requested them to pay the 
 postage of their remarks. Their refusirig to do this, he takes 
 for a certificate of approbation. This is quite an easy way 
 of becoming famous. It must be because my opponent is 
 
 » See Lampft's Philelojico — theological Dissertation on Uie Eternity of PiinisU* 
 ment. 
 
160 
 
 extraordinarily modest, or because he is saturated ^ith apr 
 j)lause, tliat he has not procured the same renown among the 
 ck'rgy and the colleges of Europe. And if refusing to write 
 remarks upon every trifle, and transmit them by mail at 
 their own expense, be considei'ed a favourable attestation, 
 there is no doubt that Captain Simms's Lectures on the prac- 
 ticability and importance of penetrating to the centre of our 
 globe through a supposed opening at the north pole, might 
 soon receive the respectful, though silent approbation of all 
 the literary and ecclesiastical establishments on the surface 
 of the earth, and even of those interior regions which he 
 wishes to explore. 
 
 But how comes it to pass, that after having vauntingly 
 submitted his books to unlimited investigation, and chal- 
 lenged all America to discuss with him the subjects of whick 
 they treat; — how comes it to pass that after these steps, my 
 opponent should object to my noticing these very books, in a 
 debate which arose from the acceptance of his challenge ? 
 You have heard him make bitter complaints of my referring 
 to those works which he has brought into question : and al- 
 though he has heretofore boasted that they contained an un- 
 answered and an unanswerable defence of that doctrine which 
 he here advocates, he has now become so much asliamed of 
 them as openly and repeatedly to declare in your hearing, 
 that " they have no bearing upon the point whatever.*' Again, 
 he says, '* Now I would ask, what has the writings of your 
 " speakei" to do with the question before us for discussion?"* 
 What strange literary phenomena must these books be ! ! A 
 Universalist Version^ or to speak more properly, a Universal- 
 ist Perversioft of the New Testament, adoined with Unita- 
 rian notes, and yet having nothing to do with the Universalist 
 question now under discussion ! " A series of Lectures on the 
 " Doctrine of Universal Benevolence, delivered in the Uni- 
 <* versalist Church," by a Universalist preacher, and yet they 
 have no bearing on the point now in hand ! It is not wonder- 
 ful that he should deny the bearing of my arguments : It is 
 natural enough for such a character to deny that even the 
 case of the rich man and Lazarus has any relation to the 
 question : But must he not have incurred a doleful dizzines* 
 in the dust of debate, before he could say this of his own ela- 
 borate and boasted productions, which were written professed- 
 ly in defence of Universalism ? If, however, his report be 
 
 a Mintitef, pp. &7. K. 
 
m 
 
 t*ue, that his works on Universalism say nothing to the poiut, 
 it is easy to account for the silence of the Ainoncan literatim 
 Witii the exception of a few Unitarian establishments, wliich 
 are in the habit of dealing in such wares, no College to wiiom 
 the} were sent, would think theni worth the postage. 
 
 Worthless as they are, I shall still take such notice of them 
 as r would of the works of Dr. Priestley, Thomas Paine, or 
 any other infidel They all bear testimony against their 
 authors. Although my opponent, in den) ing the inspiration 
 of certain books of Scripture, endeavours to sliield himself 
 under the name of Dr. Lardner and the Improved Version, 
 any person of understanding, who reads his quotations from 
 them in his New Testament, will see t!iat he is responsible 
 for the sentiments there expressed. Although he has, of his 
 own motion, in your presence, taken an awful oath *' before 
 that God who is the searcher of all liearts," that he maintains 
 an " unbounded faitli in the volume of Revelation,"^ he 
 still adheres to that earnest recommendation which his Lec- 
 tures give of that work of Dr. Priestley, in which the inspira- 
 tion of that volume is denied in the roundest terms. How can 
 these two things be reconciled ? It is only a less learned and 
 a less witty Voltaire, taking tlie sacramental obligation of 
 the Lord's Supper. When, in the call of Providence, I have 
 rowed an adherence to the Scriptures, it was done sincerely. 
 Whether, therefore, in tliis debate, I quote my opj)onent or 
 any other writer, on either side, I shall still treat the Bible, 
 with the whole of its sacred contents, as the only infallible- 
 rule of faith and practice. 
 
 It is of importance to have well defined views of the real 
 question to be supported by such authority. In this respect 
 justice is seldom done to the orthodox. " Is the punishment 
 *' of the wjc^erf absolutely eternal ?" Instead of this ques- 
 tion about the punishment of the wicked, my opponent would 
 persuade you that I have undertaken to prove that the grea^ 
 ter part of the universe will be destroyed. His words are 
 the following, viz. « But my opponent would have you be- 
 ** lieve that the adversary, or devil, if you please, that goeth 
 " about as a roaring lion, is heir to most of the creatures 
 " whom God hath made." In another instance he would in- 
 sinuate that, according to my doctrine, God will " doom the 
 " greater poi-tionof his helpless offspring to never ending tor- 
 ** ment" •» I have never promised nor attempted to prere 
 
 a Minutes p. 76. 
 
 b Minutes pp, 123. 179. 
 
 w 
 
162 
 
 such a thing. My object is to prove that God will doom tlie 
 wicked to eternal torment. If these einhrace tlje greater 
 part or the whole of his ci'eation *' though hand join in hand, 
 *' the wicked shall not be unpunished."' But what evidence 
 have I, or what evidence has my opponent that this charac- 
 ter w ill fit " the most of tl>e creatures w hom God hath made ?" 
 Doeseitlier of us know what proportion of the angelic throng 
 fell from the happiness of heaven? Can either of us tell 
 what proportion of the human race shall be regenerated and 
 saved through Jesus Christ ? Thus far it is true, " many be 
 " called but few chosen :" but when we consider the vast ac- 
 cession which the church is to receive from tlie incalculable 
 population and the general piety of the millenial day, we 
 know not that the wicked shall bear a greater proportion to 
 the righteous, that our convicts in prison do to the citizens 
 at large. "And I belield, and I heard the voice of many 
 " angels round about the throne, and the beasts and the elders: 
 " and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thous- 
 *'and, and thousands of thousands.'* "After this I beheld, 
 " and lo ! a great multitude which no man could number, of 
 "all nations, and kindreds, and people and tongues, stood 
 " before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed w ith white 
 ** robes and palms in their hands ; and cried with a loud 
 " voice, saying salvation to our God, which sittethupon the 
 *'^throne, and unto the lamb." a 
 
 The question is not whether we wish all men saved, or 
 whether we hate the wicked, or love sin, but whether God 
 has determined that incorrigible sinners shall be eternally 
 punished. Yet Mr. Ballou would charge the orthodox with 
 the above evils. While charitably representing them as the 
 Prodigal's elder brother, as the " grumbling" labourers who 
 bore the heat and burthen of the day, and as the murmuring 
 Scribes and Pliarisees, he asks, " Is it hard to see that my 
 "opponent lias made a very fair and full profession of his 
 " love to sin in room of his love to God ; and a strong 
 " desire to injure his fellow men, in room of serving them in 
 *' love ?" ** At what do my opposers rage ? At what are 
 " they dissatisfied ? Not because I exclude them from any 
 ** privilege or blessing of the gospel. What then ? I am 
 " sorry to name it It is because I extend those blessings 
 ** farther, and liope they w ill do more good than what suits 
 "them!"b To this it may be answered that Universalism 
 
 ft Rev. 5; 11, 7; 9,10. b On Atonement pp. 223, 224. 
 
163 
 
 is an attempt to exclude us from the truth, which is an essen- 
 tial privilege and blessing of the gospel. Without rage, we 
 are dissatisfied at this attempt. We hate falsehood and ini- 
 quity ; and, through grace, we love God and our fellow 
 creatures. Labours foi' the general dilfusion of {gospel bles- 
 sings are certainly one mai'k of this love. The ortliodox 
 have been enabled to do something in this way. But Mr. 
 Ballou says, "I extend those blessings farther." 
 Vain man ! What has he ever done for the extension of the 
 Redeemer's kingdom ? Does he suppose that his mere word 
 can raise the dead ? Oi' that his pen can wi-ite their names 
 in the book of life ? And yet the arrogant asgumption of 
 these prerogatives of Heaven, is the amount of Universalist 
 exertions for the salvation of sinners. While, for this pur- 
 pose, tlie Orthodox risk every expense and danger, and are 
 instrumental in saving millions, not only in word but in deed, 
 their enemies deride their pious labours, and continue crying 
 peace peace, when there is no peace. They deny our moral 
 malady, and of course will not apply the remedy. " The 
 •* whole head is sick and the whole heart faint From the 
 ^' sole of tlie foot even unto the head, there is no soundness 
 *' in it ; but wounds and bruises and putrifying sores : they 
 *' have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified. 
 ** with ointment." The Orthodox see mankind to be in this 
 condition, and, like the good Samaritan, they endeavour to 
 apply the oil and the wine. For this service of love, they are 
 reviled and opposed by the whole Iscariot band. Yet these 
 Universalist and Unitarian priests and Levites, who passed 
 by on the other side, boast of tlieir superior skill, industry, 
 and success in the healing art. After they have, in their 
 own conceit, banished all disease from the earth, by a blast 
 of their nostrils, and, with a dash of their pen, pronounced 
 all men perfectly sound, they flap their triumphant wings, 
 and proclaim to the world, " We extend the blessings of 
 ** health farther than it suits the good Samaritan to do." 
 There is no better way of answering such empty and invidi- 
 ous boasting, than in the words of Job. a " But ye are forgery 
 ** of lies, ye are all physicians of no value." 
 
 While \i suits the lovers of truth to preach the gospel to 
 every creature, saying, " he that believeth and is baptized 
 ^* shall be saved," itsmVsthem to say moreover, "he thatbe- 
 "lieveth not shall be damned." And it is this unbeliever, 
 one who lives and dies in a state of corruption and coiiUem- 
 
 a J3; 4. h p. 58. 
 
164 
 
 nation, that is meant by tlie wicked, in the question now un- 
 der discussion. " Is the punishment of the wicked absolute- 
 *' \y eternal ? or is it only a temporal punishment in this 
 '• w orld, for their good, and to be succeeded by eternal hap- 
 •• piness after deatli ?" It has already been shewn that these 
 two pi'opositions exhibit the two sides of one and the same 
 question. The latter clause, which was designed to present 
 the negativ e of the main question in a peculiar form, my op- 
 ponent has undertaken to support. In his 4th Lecture,'* he 
 says, *' My evidence will be derived from two sources : first 
 " from the law of reason ; and secondly , from the law of the 
 ••scriptures." To shew you how perfectly unnecessary it is 
 to meet him on the ground of reason, I will give you only 
 one instance of his skill in this way, where he has made sad 
 work of the attributes of God, as well as of the human consti- 
 tution. The follow ing are his own words, viz. " In a Phi- 
 " losophical sense, there is not full power, so long as the ef- 
 " feet is not produced ; for all that we know of power is by 
 "the effect."'* It is easy to see that this principle would 
 prove not only our own inability to procure, but the inabili- 
 ty of the Creator to bestow, any blessing, cerporealor spiri- 
 tual, temporal or eternal, which has not already been ob- 
 tained. And this he calls philosophy ! 
 
 CONFIRMATION. 
 
 To prove that the punishment of the wicked is absolutely 
 eternal, my evidences shall be brought from the word of God. 
 The importance of the subject and the necessity of giving it 
 a candid and devout attention have already been urged. My 
 proofs shall be given under five heads. 1. This doctrine 
 shall be fairly inferred from the scriptural account of the 
 attributes of God, and the character and condition of man- 
 kind. 2. Several scripture texts shall be produced, which, 
 in various forms of expression, imply this doctrine. 3. It 
 shall be shewn that the scriptures point out such a contrast 
 between the righteous and the wicked, as to their character, 
 standing, and future destiny, as can be satisfactorily explain- 
 ed, only by admitting the eternal punishment of the wicked. 
 4. Its eternity shall be proved by negative expressions of 
 scripture, in which its termination is plainly denied. 5. It 
 shall be proved by ])assages of scripture, in which the doc- 
 trine is affirmed. Thus you have my division, under the de- 
 nominations of inference, implication, contrast, negation and 
 
 a p. 85. b Presbvt— ra verses Presbyt— m, p. 15. 
 
165 
 
 affirmation. These terms, ysed for convenience, were ikt 
 best that I could procure. The two first appear synonimous: 
 though it will be found that the first is a deduction from ge- 
 neral doctrines, and the second from particular figures of 
 expression. 
 
 FIRST ORTHODOX ARGUMENT. 
 
 INFERENCE. 
 
 This doctrine shall be fairly inferred from the scriptural 
 account of the attributes of God, and the character and con- 
 dition of mankind. As these are topics to whicli both parties 
 resort, the impartial consideration of the divine attributes, 
 postponed from the 5th Universalist argument, was promis- 
 ed in this place. These we propose to treat of in two classes; 
 which, from the appearance of things, and for distinction's 
 sake, we will call the milder and the severer attributes of God. 
 The various subjects embraced under this first argument, 
 shall with divine assistance, be considered in the following 
 order. I. God's goodness, love mercy and grace, 2. In 
 connexion with these, the scriptural plan of salvation. 3. 
 God's justice and righteousness, holiness and truth. 4. In 
 connexion with these, the scriptural account of sin. 5. The 
 helplessness of sinners. 6. In connexion with this, the scrip- 
 tural account of the character, influence and dominion of 
 that society to which the curse has exposed and Subjected 
 them. 
 
 I. The milder attributes of God, such as goodness, love, 
 mercy, and grace. To shew what we are to expect from 
 these, my opponent quotes such as the following passages. 
 " For great is thy mercy toward me ; and thou hast deliver- 
 ed my soul from the lowest hell." " Tiiey shall abundantly 
 '* utter the memory of thy great goodness^ and shall sing of 
 " thy righteousness. The Lord is gracious, and full of com- 
 " passion; slow to anger, and of great mercy. The Lord is 
 *' good to all ; and his tender mercies are over a/I his works.'* 
 " Thou openest thy hand and satisfiest the desire of every 
 " living thing." " That ye may be like your Father which 
 "is in Heaven ; for he maketh his simto rise ontlie evil and 
 "on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and unjust."* On 
 this subject, Mr. Winchester, in his Fourth Dialogue, asks 
 his friend the following question. "If you had as nnichpow- 
 " er as good will, would you not bring all to bow tothescep- 
 "tre of grace, and to be reconciled to God through Jesus 
 
 a Ps. hcntTi, 13. cxlv. 7. 8, 9, 16. ?IaU. v. 4.'. Mintites pp. 121, 17f>,lS(i. 
 
166 
 
 •• Christ?" In order to prove that God's goodness will im- 
 part happiness and salvation to all whom he knows and 
 governs, that is, to the universe, Mr. Ballon says, " If God 
 "be inlinitely good, his goodness is commensurate with his 
 " power and know ledge ; then all beings, whom his power 
 '* produced, are the objects of his goodness ; and to prove 
 '• that any being w as destitute of it, would prove that 
 " Deity's knowledge did not comprehend such being."* 
 
 If these men have spoken truly, and handled the Scriptures 
 aright, they have proved several very strange things! 
 
 1. As we are, in this, as well as in the future world, the sub- 
 ject of God's knowledge and power, and as he exercises infi- 
 nite goodness toward all the subjects of his infinite knowledge 
 and power, therefore we must enjoy a perfect exemption from 
 all pain, and the full satisfaction of all our desires, in this 
 world as well as that which is to come ! Men who can, by 
 so plain an implication, deny the suffering condition of this 
 groaning and travailing creation, under the omniscient in- 
 spection of Almighty God, are ready, with Berkeley, to deny 
 the existence of matter, and with Hume, to deny the existence 
 of mind. 
 
 2. The use which they have made of Matt. v. 45, shews 
 that they do not think faith and holiness necessary to our ac- 
 ceptance with God ; but that he is equally favourable to the 
 evil and the good, the just and the unjust, not only in sending 
 temporal blessings, such as the sun and the rain, but in be- 
 stowing salvation. That this doctrine does encourage sin- 
 ners to live in unbelief, and in the exercise of the most awful 
 presumption, cannot be concealed from the knowledge of 
 Universalists themselves. Here we need not recount facta 
 which have occurred in our own country, or in this city. We 
 shall be satisfied with one which came under Mr. Winches- 
 ter's own observation. In his Fifth Dialogue he says, *' A 
 " Reverend Divine^ whom I knew, (living not long since) had 
 " encouraged this wickedly presumptuous disposition, so far 
 ** as openly to say, God cannot damn me ; he can as soon cease 
 " to be God, as he can cast me off', even thoutjh 1 should sin 
 "ever so much. If I should kill a man, he could not damn me ; 
 " nay if I should kill all the men in the world, he cannot damn 
 "me.''* Although Mr. Winchester had taught that God's 
 good will and power were commensurate in their applica- 
 tion ; — the very doctrine which the above blasphemer ap- 
 plied to his own case; his eai's are so stuniied by the hissings 
 
 « On Atonement p. 182. 
 
1()7 
 
 •f his own brood, that he is obliged to condemn and expose 
 the fruit of his own labours. He says, "At length the dis- 
 " pleasure of the Almighty coming visibly upon him, this 
 •'rhapsodist changed his tone, and exclaimed that God had 
 ^forsook him !" He then proceeds to " advise all men of that 
 *♦ bold, presuming, self confident spirit, to read and consider 
 « well those words in Jer,xxii. 24. * As 1 live, saith Jehovah, 
 " though Coniah, the son of Jelioiakim, King of Judah,were 
 « the signet upon my right hand -, yet would I pluck thee 
 '•thence.' " 
 
 3. If the principles and authorities advanced by my oppo- 
 nent, and Messrs. Winchester and Ballou are relevant, they 
 not only prove the present and eternal salvation and uninter- 
 rupted happiness of men and devils, believers and unbelievers, 
 but of the irrational creation universally. They quote Ps. 
 cxlv. 16. " Thou openest thy hand, and satisfiest the desire 
 of every living thing," By this passage I understand that the 
 daily provisions of the young lion, the raven, and the spar- 
 row come from God, and that not one of these creatures falls 
 to the ground without his knowledge. But many do fall to 
 the ground and perish, with their desires satisfied or unsatis- 
 fied. So Providence sends all the comforts which men enjoy, 
 yet many die because their wants are not supplied, and many 
 perish forever because their wicked desires are satisfied. 
 " For the wicked boasteth of his heart's desire, and blessetll 
 " the covetous, whom the Lord abhorreth." '* So they did eat, 
 « and were well filled ; for he gave them their own desire : 
 " they were not estranged from their lust. But while their 
 " meat was yet in their mouths, the wrath of God came up- 
 " on them, and slew the fattest of them, and smote down the 
 " chosen men of Israel." '* And he gave them their request, 
 <• but sent leanness into their souls." "The desire of the 
 *' wicked shall perish.''^ 
 
 The view which the Orthodox give of the attributes of 
 God is reasonable and scriptural. They never pretend to 
 measure the perfections of God by the objects upon which 
 they are exercised ; for if they were, they must either find 
 an infinite creation, or a finite Creator. Are the milder at- 
 tributes of God less than infinite, because he has pronounced 
 and inflicted a curse upon the inferior creation in conse- 
 quence of Adam's fall ? Are these perfections diminished 
 because '<man is born unto trouble as the sparks fly up- 
 ward ?" God foreknew, foretold, and brought to pass the 
 
 a Pb. X. 3. IxxTiii. 5J9. eyi. 15. Cxii. 10. 
 
168 
 
 destrnction of Jenisalem ; in which tender mothers wer£ 
 impelled by the phrenzy of ifMsa^iv/iW hunger, to eat the de- 
 sire of their eyes. Did these sufferings, or did the ineffable 
 anguish of the Divine Redeemer, when bearing the curse due 
 to our offences, tarnish the infinite lustre of tlie divine good- 
 ness ? As infinite power has created a finite universe, so has 
 infinite sovereignty made a limited application of divine 
 mercy. 
 
 That this application of mercy is more limited than our 
 finite creation, will ap])ear from plain declarations of Holy 
 W rit. She season of its exercise is there spoken of as a 
 time of light, a day of graee, of salvation and of visi- 
 tation, of God's presence, to open the eyes of sin- 
 ners, and make their hearts tender and fruitful. The ex- 
 press limitations of this season of mercy may now be given 
 in the following particulars. 
 
 J. Die scriptures speak of a time of light, which, with re- 
 gard to some, lasts for a limited period, and is followed by 
 darkness. " Then Jesus said unto them, yet a little while 
 " is the light with you. Walk while ye have the light, lest 
 *' darkness come upon you ; for he that walketh in darkness, 
 "knoweth not whither he goeth. While ye have the light, 
 "believe in the light, that ye may be children of light, "a 
 
 2. There is a limited day of grace, after which sinners are 
 hardened. " Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith, to day if 
 " ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the 
 " provocation, in the day of temptation, in the wilderness.^' 
 "But exhort one another daily, while it is called to day; 
 " lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of 
 " sin."b 
 
 3. God has ordained an accepted time, and appointed a 
 limited day of salvation and of visitation. '* Thus saith the 
 *' Lord, in an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day 
 " of salvation have I helped thee.*' " For he saith. I have 
 "heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation 
 " have I succoured thee : Belmld ! now is the accepted time, 
 ** behold now is the day of salvation." "And when he was 
 ** come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it : saying, if 
 " thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the 
 ** things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid 
 ** from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that 
 ** thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass 
 
 a John Mi. 3i 38-. b H«br. iii. 7, 8, f S". 
 
169 
 
 *' thee round, and keep thee iir> on every side, and shall lay 
 « thee even with the giound, and thy children within thee; 
 « and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another ; 
 "because thou knewest not the time of thy visiiutlonP 
 "Seek ye the Lord while he may be iotmd, call ye upou 
 " him wliile he is near." " For this, shall every one that is 
 *• godly, pray unto thee in a time when thou mayest be found. 
 "Surely in the floods of great waters they sliall not come 
 *' nigh unto iiim:" " Then shall they call upon me, but I 
 " will not answer ; they shall seek me early, but they shall 
 ^' not find me-"^ 
 
 4. 'I'here is a time when those who walk in the darkness 
 ef depravity, and harden their hearts, and blind their eyes, 
 and refuse to se^k the Lord, or call upon his name, shall, like 
 barren trees, be cut down, and cast into the fire, and thus de- 
 prived forever of that mercy which tliey here despised. 
 *' Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, behold ! these 
 *• three years \ come seeking fruit on this fig-tree, and finding 
 " none : cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground ?" " And 
 " now also, the axe is laid unto the root of the trees ; therefore 
 " every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit, is hewn 
 *• down, and cast into the fire." And there w^e are plainly 
 told they shall lie, and never be able to rise again. *' If the 
 " tree fall tow ard the south or toward the north ; in the place 
 « where the tree falleth, there it shall be." " There are the 
 " workers of iniquity fallen : they are cast down, and shall 
 " not be able to rise." *' Because 1 have called, and ye refus- 
 "ed; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded; 
 " but ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of 
 ** my reproof : I also w ill laugh at your calamity : I will 
 " mock when your fear cometh : When your fear cometh as 
 " desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind ; 
 " when distress and anguish cometh upon you : Then shall 
 " they chI! upon me, but I will not answ^cr; they shall seek 
 **me eariy,hut they shall not find me : for that they hated 
 " knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord : They 
 "would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof: 
 " Therefore shall they eat of the fr'iit of their ow n w ay, and 
 " be filled with their own devices : For tlie turning aw ay of 
 " the simple shall slay them, a^^d the pros])crity of fools shall 
 *^ destroy them." >Ve need hardly mention that Paul calls 
 this, being "punished ^xih. everlasting destruction,''^^ Thus 
 
 a Isa. xlix. 8. 2 Cor. Ti.2. Luke xix. 41 — 44. Isa. Iv. 6. Ps. xxxii. 6. ProT. 
 i. 28. 
 b Luke xiij. 7. Matt. iii. lO.Eccles.xi. 3. Ps. 36. 12.1ProT. i. 24—32. 2 Thess. \. % 
 
 X 
 
17© 
 
 shall stubborn unbelievers have judgment without mer- 
 cy. 
 
 II. Having shewn that the eternal punislmient of the wick- 
 ed is faiily interred from scriptural limitations of divine mer- 
 cy to those who embrace this mercy by faith, (a doctrine which 
 has, in one shape or another occupied our time from tbe com- 
 mencement of tliis debate,) much bas, of course been antici- 
 pated, in proof that the scriptural plan of salvation infers the 
 eternal punislmient of incori'igible offenders. God has shewn 
 plainly the channel through wbich exclusively liis salvation 
 is conveyed to lost siuners. It is tlirough the love of God, 
 the mediation of Christ, the operations of his Spirit, the dis- 
 pensations of his Providence, the revelation of his will, and 
 u corresponding subjugation of our will to his. All who arc 
 saved, must, according to tbe scriptures, be saved in this way. 
 That there are some sinners wbo are not saved in this way, 
 and must, of course, be eternally lost, may be concisely shewm 
 by an induction of particulars. 
 
 1. The love of God. B'rom what was said above, of God's 
 milder attributes, such as his goodness, love, mercy, and 
 grace, it appears, that there are some whose day of ligbt and 
 grace, of \asitation and salvation, shall be succeeded by dark- 
 ness and despair, banisbment and everlasting destruction. It 
 was proved that they sliould have judgment without mercy, 
 and divine wrath instead of love. Before Rebecca's chil- 
 dren were yet born, or had done good or evil, God said 
 " Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." » Their lives 
 corresponded with their respective destinies : and there is not 
 an iota of evidence that God's love shall ever be withdrawn 
 from pious Jacob, or his hatred removed from wicked Esau. 
 "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with 
 " God ? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have 
 '* mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have com- 
 ** passion on whom I will have compassion." There are 
 thousands who are so much engaged in making laws for their 
 Creator, and passing judgment upon his actions, that they 
 fall short of that repentance to which his goodness might 
 otherwise lead them. " Desj)isest thou the riches of his 
 "goodness and forbearance and long suffering; not knowing 
 '•that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance ? but 
 " after thy hardness, and impenitent heart, treasurest up 
 " unto thyself, w ratli against the day of wrath, and revela- 
 
 a R««i. 9; !»— 1 5. 
 
171 
 
 *• tion of the righteous judgment of God, who will render tp 
 *' every man according to his deeds."a 
 
 2. The mediation of Clirist. In what was said of Christ's 
 offices, under the 8th, 9th, and loth Universalist ai-giiments, 
 it was proved that althougli he was the light of the world, 
 there were some who loved daikness rather than light, and 
 who should be cast into the blackness of darkness forever, 
 
 that although he was the universal sovereign, some of hi» 
 
 subjects would continue rebellious, and should be slain be- 
 fore liim ; and that although he was a successful High 
 
 Priest for Jews and Gentiles, without respect of persons, it 
 was only for those among them who feared God and wrought 
 righteousness, only for those whom the Father had given 
 him. For the lost part of mankind he refuses to pray. Nay, 
 he prays against Judas, and his spiritual children who have 
 since canonized that Avdx Traitor. " Add iniquity unto 
 " their iniquity, and let them not come into thy righteousness. 
 *'Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be 
 " written with the rigliteous." " Set thou a wicked man 
 ** over him, aiul let Satan stand at his right hand. When ho 
 "shall be judged, let him be condemned, and let his prayer 
 " become sin." " Let there be none to extend mercy unto 
 ** him ; neither let tliere be any to favour his fatherless chil- 
 **dren.*' *' Let this be the reward of mine adversaries from 
 "the Lord, and of them that speak evil against my soul." 
 These are the words of the Spirit of Christ, and these ar« 
 the scriptures which were fulfilled, when the son of i>erdition 
 went to his own place. ^ 
 
 3. The operations of the Holy Spirit. " If ye live after 
 " the flesh, ye shall die : but if ye, through the Spirit do mor- 
 ••' tify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as 
 '* are led by the Spirit of God, they are the Sons of God." 
 ** Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none 
 " of his." "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, 
 " he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." But there are 
 some concerning whom God has said, " My Spirit shall not 
 *' always strive with man." "But they rebelled and vexed 
 ** his Holy Spirit : Therefore he was turned to be their ene- 
 '* my, and he fought against them." *• Whosoever speaketh 
 " against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, 
 *' neither in this world, neither in the world to come."c 
 
 Vi Rom. 2: 4 — 11, 
 
 b John 17; 12. Acts 1; 16—20,25. Ps. 69; 27,28. L09: 6—20. 
 « Rom. viiL 13. 14. 9', John jii. 5. Ge». yl 3. Isa. Ixffi. 19. Matt, xii. 32, 
 
172 
 
 4. The dispensations of Providence. "All things work 
 *' together for good to them that love God, to them who are 
 *' the called according to his purpose." In the reception of 
 sanctified mercies and sanctified afllictions, they glow in 
 knowledge, grace, and usefulness. That it is not so with 
 the wicked, is attested by those who have seen them in pros- 
 perity and adversity. " I was envious at the foolish, when 
 " I saw the prosperity of the wicked. For there are no 
 " bands in tlieir <leath ; hut their strength is firm. They 
 " are not in trouble as other men : neither are they plagued 
 " like other men. Therefore pride compasseth them about 
 " as a charm : violence covereth them as a garment. Their 
 "eyes standout with fatness; they have more than heart 
 "could wish. They are corrupt, and speak wickedly con- 
 " cerning oppression ; they speak loftily. They set their 
 *• mouth against the heavens, and their tongue walketh 
 "through the earth." "They shall fret themselves, and curse 
 " their King and their God, and look upward." " And men 
 *' were scoi'ched with great heat, and blasphemed the name 
 "of God, which hath power over these plagues : and they 
 " repented not to give him glory. And the fifth angel 
 *• poured out his vial upon the the seat of the bea.st; and his 
 " kingdom was full of darkness ; and they gnawed their 
 *' tongues fur pain ; and blasphemed the God of Heaven be- 
 " cause of their pains and their sores, and repented not of 
 « their deeds.'"^ 
 
 5. The revelation of the will of God. "This is life eter- 
 *' nal; that they might know thee the only true God, and 
 *' Jesus Chiist whom thou has sent." " By his knowledge 
 ** [by the knowledge of him,] shall my righteous servant 
 ••Justify many." *' The law of the Lord is perfect, convert- 
 ** ing the soul : the testimony of the Lord is sure, making 
 " wise the simple : the statutes of the Lord are right, rejoic- 
 •• ing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, en- 
 *' lightening the eyes." " Wherewithal shall a young man 
 *• cleanse his way ? By taking heed thereto, according to 
 «' thy word." " From a child, thou hast known the Holy 
 '* Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salva- 
 " tion, through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All .scrip- 
 "ture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for 
 <' doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in 
 "righteousness : that the man of God may be perfect, tho- 
 « rfjughly furnished unto all good works." " Behold the days 
 
 b Bom. viii. 28. Ps. Ixxiii. 3—9. Isa. Tiii. 21. Rev. xri. 9— U . 
 
173 
 
 '• come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in 
 " the lan<l ; not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, 
 " but of liearing the words of the Lord; and they shall wan- 
 *' der from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, 
 " they shall run to and fro, to seek the word of the Lord, 
 •' and* shall not find it." '♦ And the word of the Lord was 
 •^precious in tliose daysj there was no open vision." 
 •• Where there is no vision the peoi)le perish ; but he tliat 
 **keepeth the law, happy is he "'^ These authorities shew 
 that in the salvation of sinners, the scriptures are an im- 
 portant and necessary means, of which many are left desti- 
 tute in divine sovereignty, and without which, divine justice 
 permits many to perish. 
 
 6. The subjection of the heart to the law of Christ. " Kiss 
 "the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, 
 "wlienhis wrath is kindled but a little." "Except ye r-e- 
 *' pent, ye shall all likewise perish." "Except a man be 
 " born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." " Hethat 
 " believeth not is condemned already "—shall be condemn- 
 ed at the day of judgment;— and "shall go away into ever- 
 lasting punishment." In relation to this subject we might 
 quote all that the Scriptures say of the necessity of regene- 
 ration, repentance, and faith ; justification, adoption and 
 sanctification. Yet how many are there, who, instead of re- 
 ceiving Christ's yoke which is easy, and his burthen which is 
 light, have "sent a message after him, saying, we will not 
 " have this man to reign over us !" Iiow many still retain that 
 temper " which is not subject to the law of God neither 
 "indeed can be!'* Concerning every such character, the 
 Judge has declared that he *' will appoint him his portion 
 " among unbelievers.'''* 
 
 It will be observed that the above six pai-ticulars all con- 
 verge in the cross of Christ. "Neither is there salvation in 
 "any other: for there is none other name under heaven 
 " given among men, whereby we must be saved."c 
 The love of God sent a Saviour, who willingly undertook the 
 mediatorial work. The Spirit and Providence and word of 
 God present and convey a Saviour ; and, blessed be God, the 
 hearts of his people, through grace, receive a Saviour. That 
 there are many who forever reject this salvation, cannot rea- 
 
 aJohnxvii. 3. Isa.liiin. Ps.xix. 7. 8. II. ix. 9. S Tina. iii. 15— 17. Amos 
 ■riii. 11. 12. 1 Sam. iij. 1. Prov. xxix. 18. 
 
 b Ps. ii. 13. Luke xiii. S. John iiL S. II. Mati. xxT.4l. 4fi. Luke xis. U. 
 Bom. riii. 7. Luke xfi. 46. 
 
 e Aati IT. 13. 
 
174 
 
 sonably be denied, and is in fact admitted by Winchester 
 himself. Theii' salvation then is an efiect without a cause. 
 They have no interest in the love of God, which is the procur- 
 ing cause of salvation ; — in the mediation of Christ, which is 
 tlie meritorious cause ; — in the gi'ace of his Spirit w hich is 
 the ethcacious cause ; — no improvement under his providence, 
 which is the accidental cause; — nor under his word, %\hich 
 is the instrumental cause on the part of God ; nor do they 
 exei cise that saving faith, out of a new heaii, wliich is the 
 instrumental cause on the pai't of man.^ Now, accoid- 
 ing to the Scriptures, these are the only possible causes of 
 salvation.— But there are confessedly some on wliom they do 
 not, and never shall oj)erate. Therefore, there are some wlio 
 never shall enjoy that salvation which is the efi'ect of these 
 causes. 
 
 It was asserted above, that Mr. Winchester admits the 
 minor proposition of the syllogism just now repeated; that 
 there ai'e many, who forever reject this salvation. This was 
 said on the authority of the Rev. Elisha Andrews,b who quotes 
 from his works tlie follow ing words, viz. "They who lived 
 *• and died in rebellion against God, will be eternally depri- 
 " ved of the glories and honours of the kingdom of Christ." 
 As he advocated a limited punishment in the future w orld, it 
 is his well-known sentiment that some have lived and died in 
 rebellion aguinsl God, and " will be condemned in the day of 
 judgment and punished in the lake of fire.'"^ To the same 
 amount Mr. Andrews** quotes another passage from Mr. 
 Winchester, in tlie following words, viz. " The sin against 
 " the Holy Ghost is an offence of that kind, that, either ow ing 
 ** to its uncommon malignity, as is most likely, or some other 
 " cause, exposes the guilty person to tlie age of judgment from 
 ** which he cannot escape by repentance, pardon, and sprink- 
 ** ling of the blood of Christ, as other sinners may." Thus 
 does Mr. Winchester admit that there are some sinners who 
 are " eternally deprived of the glories and honors of the 
 ** kingdom of Christ" and " cannot escape by repentance, 
 *' pardon, and sprinkling of the blood of Christ." Those 
 who believe that there is no salvation in any other,^ will 
 conclude that these sinners can never be saved. 
 
 Mr. Winchester has generally passed himself off for a firm 
 
 a See Lampe's Philologico-th«ologieal Dissertation on the Eternity of Punish- 
 meRtB. Part 1. Section 31. 
 
 b See his Candid Kxamination of the Moral Tendency of the Doctrine of Ulu- 
 versal Salvation, as taught by its advoeates, p. 78. 
 
 • Dialogue 5tt). d p. 77. e AcU 4 : 13v 
 
17$ 
 
 believer in the divinity and atonement of Christ. l!fiilcss 
 these professions were swelling words of vanity, he must 
 have considered him not only the Saviour of minor offenders, 
 but of the most desperate transgressors that shall ever se€! 
 heaven. Yet how diffirent is the representation given in 
 the above extracts ! Does he believe that some who are 
 saved, shall nevertheless be " eternally deprived of the glories 
 *^ and honors of the kimjdom of Christ ?" Is it because Christ 
 will frown upon any of his own purchase? No; but be- 
 cause their sins are of such " uncommon maligniti/^' that tliey 
 *' cannot escape by repentance, pardon, and sprinkling of the 
 " blood of Christ.'* He would have us believe that there 
 are sins of too deep a dye to be w ashed away in that blood 
 " that speaketh better things than that of Abel." He would 
 persuade us that Christ, whom God, Jiath " exalted witii his 
 " right hand, to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repen- 
 " tance to Isi'ael, and forgiveness of sins," cannot impart 
 ** repentance and pardon" to such gross offenders. They 
 must therefore perish forever, or find a Saviour whose blood 
 can cleanse them from sins of such " uncommon malignity." 
 Who this transcendant Saviour is, will appear from the fol- 
 lowing extract from the same author, and througli the same 
 channel* viz. " As they have lived and died in sin, their 
 *' destruction or misery is certain, and there is no remedy 
 *' that can prevent their experiencing the consequences of their 
 ** crimes, and suffering the just punishment which shall be 
 " inflicted upon them, according to their different deserts.^* 
 From the pen of a christian, this language would evidently 
 convey the doctrine of eternal punisliment. This was far 
 from Mr. Winchester's meaning. He is here speaking of 
 persons whom he vainly expects to reach heaven at last, tjp- 
 on what ground ? Because Christ suffered, the just for the 
 unjust 1 No 5 they cannot escape by the sprinkling of the 
 blood of Christ ; this will not do for sins of such uncommon 
 malignity ! How then would Mr. Winchester save them ? 
 He would have them save themselves, by meeting the de- 
 mands of the law in their own persons, and " suffering the 
 "just punishment which shall be inflicted upon them, accor- 
 "ding to their different deserts." One would suppose that 
 it is not now difficult to tell what Mr. Winchester means by 
 saying that such a man will be eternally deprived of tlie glo- 
 ries of Christ's kingdom. Would that man who, after com- 
 mitting crimes of uncommon malignity, had, in his own per- 
 
 * Andrews p. 74. 
 
176 
 
 sou, breasted the storm of divine vengeance, and made fuH 
 satisfaction to the law of God. without any need of repen- 
 tance, pardon, or vicarious sutferings; would that man 
 
 be satisfied with tlie glory of a Saviour whose blood was in- 
 adequate to an atonement m hich he had effected in his own 
 person ? Is it not easy to see that he would assume as great 
 a pre-eminence over the church and its Divine Head in th« 
 other world, as such cliaracters generally do in this world ? 
 Such is the profane conteuipt which Universalism, even in 
 the hands of thisspecious impostor, throws upon the only Re- 
 deemer of lost sinners. 
 
 III. The several attributes of God, such as his justice and 
 righteousness, holiness and trutli. On these subjects I shall 
 give plain scripture authority, which goes to shew that these 
 attributes of God require the punishment; and the eternal 
 punishment of the wicked. "And they cried with aloud 
 •* voice, saying, how long, Lord Holy and 1'ruk ! dost 
 **thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell 
 " on the earth ?" *• And the third angel poured out his vial 
 " upon the rivers and fountains of water, and they became 
 " blood. And I heard the angel of the waters say, thou art 
 "RIGHTEOUS, O Lord! which art and wast and shalt be, 
 " because thou hast judged thus. For they have shed the 
 "blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them 
 " blood to drink ; for they arc worthy:'' " And after these 
 ** things, I heard a great voice of much people in heaven, say- 
 "ing, Alleluia! Salvation, and glory, and honor, and pow'er 
 " unto the Lord our God : for true and righteous are his 
 ^'judytnents: for he hiith judged the great whore, which did 
 ** cori-upt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged 
 " tlie blood of his servants at her hand. And again they said, 
 " Alleluia I and her smoke rose up for ever and ever J^ '" See- 
 ding it is a RIGHTEOUS thing with God. to recom])cnse trl- 
 " bulation to them that trouble you ; and to yo(j who are 
 " troubled, rest with us, w lien the Lord Jesus sliall be re- 
 " vealed from heaven, with liis mighty angels, in flaming lire, 
 *' taking vengeance on them that know not God, and tliat 
 **ohey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Chri=!t ; who shall 
 *'* be punished witfi everlasriny destruction from the presence 
 " of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; when he 
 « shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired 
 " in all them that believe, (because our testimony among yon 
 " was believed,) in that day."* 
 
 « RcT. 6; 10. IC; 4—6, 19: 1—3. 2Thesi. 1; G— 10. 
 
177 
 
 In these passages God is said to judge i\w wicked, — his 
 decisions are caWQdjudf/menls ; — • — they arc Haul to be pro- 
 nounced in that day, when the Lord Jesus shall be ret eai'ed 
 
 from heaven xviih his mighty angels ; the punishment is 
 
 everlasting exen forever and ever; — it is inflicted because the 
 wicked are tvorthy according to the strict principles of jus- 
 tice; — because it is a righteous thing with God to recomj)ense 
 tribulation to them ; — because God is the *• Lord Holy and 
 ** True," and *•' True and Righteous are his judgments.'''' 
 These authorities shew tliat divine jws/fc« and trutii require 
 the everlasting punishment of tlie wicked, and that their he- 
 being imprisoned until they pay the uttermost farthing of 
 their debt, in a confinement to an absolute eternity. They 
 prove that those avIio have vainly depended on their own suf- 
 ferings to make satisfaction to justice, will be awfully disap- 
 pointed ; and it has already been shown in the two foregoing 
 heads, that it will be then too late to escape through the vi- 
 carious satisfaction of Christ. 
 
 Butthere is another way of trying to evade the force of this 
 argument. Lanipe, in his " Dissertation on the Eternity of 
 " Punishments," =* tells us of certain characters "who admit 
 " that God has threatened those punishments in his word, 
 " although, as Supreme Legislator, he is at liberty to dis- 
 " pense with the execution, and to grant some mitigation, 
 " though unknown to us. That there were some, even in 
 " Chrysostom's time, who held this sentiment, I gather from 
 " his Homily on the resurrection. * How,' says he, * shall I 
 " persuade y<ni ? When I say their worm shall not die, their 
 " fire shall not be quenched ; Mdien I say they shall go 
 " into eternal fire ; when I set before yon the rich voluptua- 
 " ry now wailing in the flames, you say, these are only threats. 
 '* This is the satanical doctrine i> which renders the grace 
 " given to you useless, and makes you unfruitful.' Of the 
 *' same stamp were those of whom Augustine, in his City of 
 " God, 21: 24, says, ' This holds good against those, who in 
 *' pleading their owai cause, attempt, under pretence of great- 
 " er compassion, to contravene the words of God, asserting 
 "that tliey are true only in as far as theyshew wliat^men deserve 
 " to suffer, not what they actually shall suffer.' " To come 
 nearer home. Dr. Huntingdon has adopted the same mode of 
 interpretation, in the following words, viz. " That the wis- 
 " dom of God saw fit, for a time, to leave man in such ignore 
 
 a Part 2 Sect. 8. b Satanicum hoc est verbum. 
 
17» 
 
 " ranrc and darkness of mind, that he should mistake that 
 " which ^va.s spoken only as the voice of justice, for a decla- 
 " ratio)i of very fact." If our interpretation be a mistake^ 
 as he here represents it, then the scriptures do not reaily 
 tiircaten eternal punishment, hut only appear to <lo it, on acr 
 couat of our •' ignorance and darkness of mind." AV hat shall 
 we tliinkthen, when Dr. Huntingdon himself confesses that 
 this is no vain appearance, hut a solid reality. The follow- 
 ing question and answer are in his own words ; viz. *' Now 
 " does the bible plainly say, that sinners of mankind shall be 
 " dannied to interminable punishment ? It certainly does, 
 ** as plainly as language can express, or any man, or even 
 '* God himself can speak." » His assertion therefore, that 
 God will not execute a threat which he has made, " asplain- 
 * ly as language can express," is a denial of his truth ; is a 
 contraveniion of the words of God, as Augustine represents 
 it, and of course, a satanical doctrine, as Chrysostom calls it. 
 It (Reserves, to be classed with those rules of interpretation 
 by which they first assert that the language is parabolical, 
 or popular, and then conclude that it is false. 
 
 Among the many cases which are cited against the vera- 
 city of heaven, we need mention only two which appear to 
 be chit fly relied upon. The first is in Gen. ii: 17. " But of 
 " the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not cat 
 *' of it : for in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt 
 *' surely die." The second is in Jonah iii. 4, *' And Jonah 
 •* began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried 
 ** and said, yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown." 
 These threatcnings, it is declared, never were executed, and 
 never will be, either in the actual transgressors, or their 
 Substitute or Surety. " The argument," says Lampe^ " upon 
 *• whicli they chiefly rest their opinion, is this ; that threat- 
 " enings do not produce the same obligation which promises 
 " do: since he who threatens, assumes the character of a cre- 
 "ditor, whilst he against whom the threat is denounced, be- 
 *' comes a debtor. On the contrary, he who promises be- 
 " comes a del)tor to him to whom thfe promise is made. Now 
 *' it is perfectly competent to a creditor to remit a debt, 
 *♦ whereas a debtor is bound to all that he has promised." 
 This theory has at least, as much evidence in Revelation, as 
 the vortices of Cartesius have in nature. It is a profane 
 figment, invented to account for that which was not under- 
 
 a Andrews pp 32, 33. 
 b Part 2d, Sect. 8. 
 
179 
 
 atood : and it, doubtless came from the same stupid irrerej:- 
 cnce, which has so often chai'ged the Almiglity vv itu neglect- 
 ing to fulfil his promises, as well as his menaces. « There 
 " shall come in tiie last days scoffers walking after their own 
 « lusts, and saying, where is the promise of his coming ?" 
 For cliarging God with a breach of promise, lie made the 
 Israelites wander fortv years in the wilderness.* 
 
 The Bible says that God "doth not affl ct willingly, nor grieve 
 ^' the children of men :''*' yet, according to the above tlieory, 
 all the sufferings of the creation in time and eternity are in- 
 flicted, not because the honour of God requires the execution 
 of justice, but because he afflicts willingly and gratuitously. 
 The distinguishing love of Christ, in taking upon him our 
 nature, instead of the nature of fallen angels, is highly cele- 
 brated in the Scriptures : yet, according to this theory, his 
 sufferings were unnecessary, as there was nothing in divine 
 truth and justice, to hinder the salvation of men and devils 
 without a Mediator. 
 
 But what saith the scripture about the faithfulness of God 
 in the execution of his threatenings ? " Hear this word that 
 " the Lord hath spoken against you, O Children of Israel ! 
 " against the whole family which I brought up from the land 
 " of Egypt, saying, you only have I known of all the families 
 " of the earth : therefore I will punish you for all your iniqui- 
 " ties." " As I live, saith the Lord, though Coniah, the son 
 " of Jehoiakira, King of Judah were the signet upon my right 
 •* hand, yet would I pluck thee thence." *' And also the 
 " strength of Israel will not lie nor repent : for he is not a 
 « man that he should repent.''^ On the two first of these texts 
 Winchester speaks well. Take a part of his remarks on the 
 second. " Consider first, who speaks. Jehovah : He not 
 "only speaks, but confirms his threatening with an oath ; and 
 " because he can swear by no greater, he swore by himself, 
 "by his own life : * As I live, saith, Jehovah, though Coniah, 
 "thesonof Jehoiakim,King of Judah;' though he isof thefami- 
 " ly of David, with whom I have made an everla-^ting coven- 
 " ant, ordered in all things, and sure ; and tiiough he is 
 " anointed King over my people; I will not spare him: yea 
 " though he * vvere the signet upon my right hand, yet 
 " would I pluck thee thence.' " In another place he says, 
 " I as much believe as you or any other man can do, that all 
 
 a 2 Pet. Jii. 3. 4. Num. xiv. 3. 34. 
 
 b Lain. ili. 33. 
 
 Amos iii. 2. Jcr. xxii: 24. 1 Sam. xv. 29. 
 
ISO 
 
 •• the threateuings will be fulfilled upon the finally inapeni- 
 ** tent "a Although Bishop Newton was an Universalist, he 
 speaks on this subject in the following manner, viz. ** If God 
 *• will not execute as well as threaten, why doth he threaten 
 " at all ? Is it not more suitable to the character of a God of 
 " truth, and becoming the simplicity and sincerity of a divine 
 " revelation, to declare the truth, and nothing but the truth, 
 ** and leave it to work upon men as it can, rather than de- 
 ** nounce, in the most solemn manner, w hat w as never in- 
 ** tended, and what shall never come to pass; and so en- 
 " deavour to alarm them with false fears, and to work upon 
 *' them w ith false persuasions, which have nothing to answer 
 ''themr'b 
 
 That the theory which we are opposing does impeach the 
 veracity of the Almiohty, as the Bishop here intimates, is 
 evident from the third text quoted above, from 1 Sam. 15 : 29- 
 In the preceding verse, the prophet Samuel said to king 
 Saul, " The Loi d bath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee 
 *' this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine that is 
 *' belter than thon." Although this, like other predictions, 
 is given in an historical form, it is evidently a threat. Saul 
 repented not of sin, but, as he had seen much of the forbear- 
 ance of the God of Israel, he was tempted to hope that he 
 would repent of his threatening, after the manner of earthly 
 parents, who, through a sinful infirmity, neglect to inflict a 
 threatened punishment. Samuel, aware of this, intimates 
 unequivocally, that such a suspicion would virtually give the 
 lie to his Maker. He therefore adds in the very next words 
 to the threatening, " And also the strength of Israel will not 
 " lie nor repent : for he is not a man that he should repent." 
 
 What does the prophet mean by saying that God " is not a 
 ** man that he should repent ?" Do not the scriptures fre- 
 quently ascribe repentance to God ? T es, but not man's sort 
 of repentance. When man repents of a threatening, or ne- 
 glects to execute it, we may account for it on the ground of 
 caprice, corruption by bribery, or conviction of error; on 
 the ground of forgetfuloess or fickliness, fear, favour or 
 feebleness. But none of these causes can justly be attribu-^ 
 ted to that God who is infinitely wise and powerful, steadfast, 
 holy and upright. He has no such pusillanimous fears, nor 
 personal partialities as would move him to pass by sins for 
 which there is no atonement. His is the repentance of God 
 
 a Uia1og;uc 5th. AndreTTs p. 74. 
 b Andrews, p. 27. 
 
181 
 
 and n(»t of man. He never repents of Iiis threatenings 
 against the finally impenitent, and whenever a man repents of 
 sin, God never tails to repent of his previous threats against 
 him. " At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, 
 "and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, 
 " and to destrov it ; if that nation against whom 1 havepro- 
 " nounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil (hat 
 " I thought to do unto them. And at what instant 1 shall 
 " speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to 
 " build and to plant it; if it do evil in my sight, that it obey 
 " not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I 
 " said I would benefit them.''a These are the gospel princi- 
 ples, in the maintenance of which, Jeremiah threatened the 
 house of Israel. To these principles Jonah yielded a reluc- 
 tant accordance when threatening the Ninevites. " Was not 
 " this my saying when I was yet in my country? Therefore 
 " I fled before unto Tarshisb ; for I knew that thou art a gra- 
 " cious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kind- 
 *' ness, and repentest thee of the evil."^* From Jonah or from 
 Jonah's God, the king of N'neveb had learned the same doc- 
 trine : for which reason he proclaimed a fast, and said " Let 
 " man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mighlily 
 " unto God : yea, let them turn every one from his evil way. 
 " and from the violence that is in their hands. Who can tell 
 " if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce 
 " anger, that we perish not."c 
 
 These passages are abundant evidence in the question 
 whether the threatening against Nineveh vpas absolute or con- 
 ditional. If Jonah believed it to be absolute, why did he 
 complain of that grace and mercy through which God remits 
 the threatened punishment on condition of repentance and 
 faith? If the Ninevites considered it absolute, why did thev 
 repent and believe, with the express hope that on these con- 
 ditions, God would " repent and turn away from his fierce 
 " anger that we perish not P If God intended it to be abso- 
 lute, why did he publish, as an invariable rule of his universal 
 government, that if a nation repented of the sin, he would 
 repent of the evil ? These things shew that the menace was 
 really conditional ; that it was so intended on the part of 
 tjrod, and that it was so understood by the prophet and those 
 to whom he addressed it. They were to be destroyed in forty 
 days unless they repented ; — but they did repent ,•— there- 
 
 aJer. II: 7—10. 
 
 fc Jonah 4:2. c Jonah 3 ; 8, 9. 
 
182 
 
 ibre the threat did not call for the immediate destruction of 
 tlie identical offenders, but was accomplislied without it. 
 
 ^^h ether the same principle w ill apply to the threat against 
 Adam for eating the forbidden fruit, need not now be dis- 
 cussed. " For in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt 
 su-ely die." Suffice it to say, that if this threat, like that 
 against Nineveh, loft room for the interposition of the seed of 
 the woman, and if Adam laid hold of this gracious plan of sal- 
 ration, as did the Ninevites, then there was no call for his 
 destruction. In such a case it was not the intention of the 
 Almighty that the punishment should be inflicted upon the of- 
 fending individual, but upon that Saviour whom his faith 
 embraced. If, by a living faith, he did receive the promise 
 offered to him diicctly after his fall, then he was immediate- 
 ly justified ; and in receiving forgiveness through faith, his 
 sins were transferred by imputation to " the Lamb slain from 
 the foimdation of the world;"* in whom he died vicariously, 
 as Isaac is said to have died and arisen again figuratively, in 
 the ram which God sent to die in his place, as a type of his 
 divine Surety.b 
 
 But even supposing that Adam did not receive the offered 
 n\ercy, does the language of the threat necessarily imply tliat 
 he should expire within twenty -four hours of his transgres- 
 sion ? Let it be remembered that this whole theory rests up- 
 on a restricted, and I might say, arbitrary interpretation of 
 a monographical Hebrew particle. But this particle which 
 is here used in connexion with day, and translated '* in the 
 day,''* is; in Numb.*xxviii. 26, used in connexion with weeks, 
 and as correctly translated, " after the weeks.*'''^ Even if the 
 threat had been executed a thousand ye^rs after that day in- 
 stead of jw that very day, the Apostle has told us that "one 
 day is with the Lord as a thousand yeai's, and a thousand 
 years as one day." This declaration is made by Peter for 
 the very same purpose for which it is quoted hcie ; to prove 
 that " the Lord is not slack concerning his promise as some 
 men count slackness.''^^ 
 
 The truth is that the prophetic Scriptures often, if not usu- 
 ally, speak of a thing as being done on the day in which a de- 
 cree is published that it shall be done. Of this description is 
 
 a Rev. xiii. 8. 
 
 bUebr. xi 19. 
 
 cThis fact, though'mentiolierl by Parkhurst, never occurred to me, until auf^- 
 !»e»tc(l by a Physician of this place, to whose kindness I «ra ranch indebted, in 
 common with many of my Ministerial brethren. 
 
 d '2 Pet. iii. 8. 9. 
 
183 
 
 that thi'eatening which Samuel uttered against Saul, when he 
 so forcibly assured him of the divine veracity in tlie extcutioii 
 of his tncnaces. " The hoid hath rent tiie kingthmi of Israel 
 " from {Jice this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of 
 " thine tluit is better than thou. ' In respect of the date this 
 threat is as express as that against Adam. The stiipling who 
 slew Goliah had not yet left his father's (locks. According 
 to the theory now befoie us, the transfei of the kingdom fioin 
 Saul to David is to take place this dai/, or the threatening is 
 not fullilled at all. Was this the meaning of Samuel? or did 
 Saul understand it thus ? Eotli of them proceed as if they 
 considered it only tlie declaration of a decree which was as 
 certainly to be accomplished hereafter, as if it liad already 
 been fulfilled on tiiit, day. Why is Clirist called " the Lamb 
 slain from the foundation of the world," when, in fact, he was 
 not literally slain until four thousand years after ? Because 
 the eternal decree of God, whicii contemplated this sacrifice, 
 was published to Adam, in the promise of the seed of the wo- 
 man to bruise the serpent's head ; and because Adam com- 
 menced immediately to make believing draughts upon those 
 resources of grace which, according to the purpose of God 
 were *• given us in Christ Jesus belbie the world began."* In 
 Paul's discourse to the people of Antioch> he shewed that 
 David in Ps. ii. 7, spoke of the resurrection of Christ. " I 
 "will declare the decree : The Lord hath said unto me. Thou 
 ** art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." Although the 
 Son of God was mysteriously and imcomprehensiblv begotten 
 of the Father fi-om all eternity (for there can be no Father 
 without a Son*^) yet was the body of Christ literally raised 
 from the dead on this day^ even the day on which David wrote? 
 No: but the prophet declared the decree on this day ; and this 
 made liis resurrection as certain as if it had already occurred ; 
 since it was the promise of that " God who quickencth the 
 *' dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they 
 ** were."d But if Hb, who is tlie author of language and the 
 judge of language, has chosen, in infinite sovereignty, to a- 
 dopt such a style of prophecy, as declares the death and re<^ 
 surrection of the second Adam to be already past, thousands 
 of years before they come to pass, is it any wonder that he 
 should speak of the death of the first Adam, as taking place 
 hundreds of years before he expired ? If, in the true, consist- 
 ent, and intelligible language of prophecy, he declared that 
 
 a 2 rim. i. 9. c Hebr. i. 8. 
 
 *» Acts x'm. 33. i Bom iy. 17. 
 
184 
 
 David a type of Christ, had supplanted Saul, a type of Satan, 
 on the very day of Saul's transgression, shall we impeach his 
 veracity, when he declares that Adam shall die on the day of 
 his transgression ? If he who is seized with a mortal disease, 
 or capitally condemned by the civil court, may say with 
 truth, " I am a dead man," how much more emphatically may 
 this be said of one against whom the sentence of heaven is 
 past, and w hose soul and body are seized with the leprosy of 
 sin and mortality ! 
 
 If therefore., the threat against Adam subjected him to dis- 
 ease and moi tality, which is an inceptive death ; — if it was 
 pronounced in prophetic language which speaks of things 
 in distant futurity as already past, and speaks of the publi- 
 cation of a decree as its substantial accomplishment ; — if 
 moi'eover, it w as conditional, and that death which he after- 
 ward suffered was sent as a gracious blessing, instead of a 
 legal curse ; — then we say that the threat was executed in 
 that sense in which it was intended to be performed, and ac- 
 cording to the tnie import of language: wherefore, it was 
 not only uttered as a measure of divine justice, but executed 
 as an evidence of divine veracity. 
 
 "When God pronounced the sentence of death upon Adam 
 and the Ninevites, and when he says concerning all men, 
 *•' the soul that sinneth, it shall die," * how can these threats 
 be truly considered ameasureof divine justice, without being 
 executed ? Justice is a disti*ibution of rewards and punish- 
 ments, according to our deserts. According to justice, sin 
 must be punished wherever it is found, and no being must be 
 punished without sin. As it would be unjust to punish one 
 who had no guilt, either personal or imputed, so would it be 
 unjust to permit any sin of any responsible being to escape, 
 without its legal measure of punishment, either in the indivi- 
 dual offender or an adequate substitute. That the plan of re- 
 demption is not only a glorious illustration of divine grace 
 and mercy, but an equally glorious vindication of divine ti*uth 
 and justice, is manifest from the whole word of God, and 
 sometimes most conspicuously from those passages which 
 are obtrusively urged against this docti'ine. In the case of 
 the Ninevites we do not find Jonah dreading their forgive- 
 ness under an apprehension that God was deficient in truth 
 or justice, but he says " I knew that thou art a gracious 
 " God and merciful." In the case of Adam we find that 
 
 SI Ez. 18: 4:. 
 
185 
 
 mercy and grace are revealed through the Seed of the wo- 
 man. From a Jatci- writer we leain that this seed of the 
 woman " is tiie end of the law for rigiiteousness to every one 
 " that helieveth." a The end of the iaw ! For what end was 
 the law made ? For obedience or disobedience? If the for- 
 mer then Christ, in becoming the end of the law, obeyed the 
 Jaw. Was the law made for the end that it might be pros- 
 trated, or that it might be satished i If Christ fulHlled all 
 righteousness ; if lie magnified the law and made it honora- 
 ble, b then, in becoming; the end of the law, he satisfied all its 
 demands preceptive and penal. Tiiis he did for the foren- 
 sic justification of believers; for he became the end of the law 
 for righfeoHsnss, (or justification,) to every one thathelie- 
 veth," whether in the tiaie of Adam or Jonah, or John the 
 Baptist or John WickliflTe; " For all have, sinned and come 
 "short of the glory of God ; Uc'mg justijied freely, by his 
 " grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus ; whom 
 "God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his 
 " blood." As this redemption or propitiation was effected 
 long after the time of those ancient transgressors, one might 
 be tempted to question the righteousness of the most High, 
 in the remission of these sins wfiich were committed so long 
 ago, and passed by witli impunity by the forbearance of God. 
 How can you at this time, vindicate tlie righteousness of Gt)d 
 in this procedure ? How can he be just, aiid the justifier of 
 sinners who lived and died before the atonement was made? 
 The very next words of the Apostle, to those last quoted, are 
 an answer to these en*iuiries. He represents God as setting 
 forth this propitiation, not to relax his righteousness, or to 
 shew how he can justify a sinner contrary to his justice; but 
 "to dec\sive\\is ric//iteoiisiiess for the remission of sins that 
 " are past, through the foi-hearance of God ; to declare, I 
 " say, at this time, his righteousness; that he might he just , 
 "^a-ndthejusti^er of him which believeth in Jesus." Now 
 that the claims of the law are perfectly satisfied, through his 
 one offering, in behalf of all believers in every age of the 
 world, God's faithfulness and justice, which doom the impe- 
 nitent to hell, require the salvation, of those who like the Ni- 
 nevites, embrace the atonement. " If we confess our sins, 
 " he is faithful a.n(\ just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse 
 " us from all unrighteousness." ^ 
 
 a Rom. 10; 4. c Rom, iii. 23—26. 
 
 b Matt. iii. 15. Isa. xlii. 21. d 1 John i, 9. 
 
 z 
 
186 
 
 Before my remarks on the divine perfections, as they have 
 a bearing upon future punisliment, are brouglit to a close, it 
 is right to take some notice of that incongruity wiiich the 
 enemies of God think that they see between his severer and 
 milder attributes. How, they say, can he be merciful, if he 
 must satisfy his justice by the infliction of punishments which 
 we would suppose cruel in the extreme ? Can he who re- 
 quires the condign punishment of every sin, either in the of- 
 fender or his substitute, be said to exercise any grace or for- 
 giveness at all ? and can that heart be ineffably tender, which 
 can voluntarily witness the most excruciating anguish in his 
 fallen creatures to all eternity ? Such objectors think that 
 it is impossible for God to he just, and at the same time the 
 merciful and forgiving jusiijier of the believer ; although 
 the scriptures assure us that the reconciliation of these two 
 things, in the salvation of sinners, w^as the reason w hy Jesus 
 Christ was set fortlr as a propitiation. 
 
 If it w^ould derogate from the mercy of God to inflict the 
 threatened punishment upon Adam, what shall we say of the 
 fact that through his sin, the whole world is brought into a 
 a state of sin and misery? "For the creature was made 
 '^subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who 
 ** hath subjected the same in hope." What shall we say of 
 the fact that, on account of this general and involuntary sub- 
 jection to vanity, through Adam, " the whole creation groan- 
 ** eth and travaileth in pain together until now ?"* This 
 takes place under the sovereign superintendance and the 
 omniscient inspection of that God who is infinitely merciful 
 as well as infinitely just. He is a voluntary witness of the 
 cries of nascent infancy, the agonies of mature vigoui', and 
 the groans of expiring age. In the appropriate exercise of 
 infinite tenderness of heart, he beholds his rebellious crea- 
 tures in every country, and in eveiy ])Ciiod of their protrac- 
 ted history, writhing under the pressure of sickness and sin, 
 penury and persecution. He commissions his angels to des- 
 troy them; and his own providence sends the sword and pes- 
 tilence, hurricane and earthquake, fire, flood and famine, to 
 sweep millions from a life of suffering here, to fiercer and 
 more enduring pains in another world : yet these terrible 
 things in righteousness are consistent with infinite mercy. 
 
 Even in the same human bosom we sometimes find such a 
 mixture of mercy and justice, — of lovely softness, and awful 
 sternness, as excites the admiration of mankind. Of this we 
 
 a Roin. viii. 20, ^i. 
 
187 
 
 have a memorable example in the conduct of one whose name 
 is dear to every American, and who w as no less conspicuous 
 for his love of peace, than for his skill in war. You all re- 
 collect that, under Providence, a single word from Wash- 
 ington could once have saved the life of Major Andre. With- 
 out detracting from the female character, it may be said 
 with truth, that not a bosom among my fair audience, glows 
 with more tender and unfeigned pity for suffering humanity, 
 than did the breast of Washington. Yet justice steeled his 
 heart against the united importunities of two contending na- 
 tions. The law condemns the prisoner to death. The vital 
 interests of our country demand the execution of the righte- 
 ous sentence. But can no mitigation be allowed ? Remem- 
 ber that it was not personal or political animosity, but pro- 
 fessional enthusiasm that brought him to our shores. He 
 traversed the ocean to heal a wounded heart, and seek for 
 glory in a foreign land. Whether he shall die the most dis- 
 graceful death, or die at all, is now to be decided. The 
 General's feelings, needing no excitement, have already 
 been excited by numerous written petitions. At last the 
 youthful, blooming, smiling, accomplished soldier stands be- 
 fore him. His person and his manners kindle the admiring 
 eyes of myriads of spectators. Touched with the history of 
 his life and his impending death, they turn their supplicating 
 looks toward the arbiter of his fate. Compassion revelled in 
 his bosom, glistened in his eye, and bedewed his manly cheek. 
 But justice was enthroned in his inmost soul : and although, 
 the waves of popular desire added force to the flood of his 
 own paternal feelings, they dashed against a rock which hid 
 its summit in the clouds, and its base in the centre of the 
 earth. He pitied but he pardoned not. 
 
 Hear what the God of justice and mercy says concerning im- 
 penitent [Convicts. " I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mer- 
 cy, but destroy them/'a or as the margin reads, "nor have mercy 
 from destroying them ;" that is^pily shall not make me spare 
 them, nor mercy keep me from destroying them, " But is there 
 no balm in Gilead ? Is there no Physician there ?" " Let 
 Israel hope in ih-^ Lord : for with the Lo'd there is mercy, 
 and with him is plenteous redemption." Every believer is 
 " justified freely by his grace, through the redcniptioii that 
 IS in Christ Jesus." " In him mercy and truth are nset to- 
 gether : righteousness and peace have kissed each other.^b 
 
 • Jer. xiii. 14. Lam. ii. 2. Zech. xi. 6. 
 
 b Jer. viii. 22. Ps. cxxx. ". Rom. iii. 24. Ps. Ixxxv. 10. 
 
188 
 
 Without this interposition of the Son of God to procure mer- 
 cy for us, by satislying justice for us, sinners never could 
 have been saved in consistency with the divine at- 
 ti'ibutes, and, therefore, never could have been saved 
 at all. And so far is this plan fron) not deserving the 
 name of mercif or grace^ because justice is satisfied, 
 this is the very consideration whicii enliances the lustre 
 of these perfections beyond all conception. To forgive at 
 the expense of purity or veracity, claims not our admiration; 
 to save without a sacrifice is cheap and easy, and claims com- 
 paratively little gratitude. But when God's justice, which 
 is essential to his nature, required that the sins of his enemies 
 should be fully punished either in their own persons, or in 
 his eternal Son, the only adequate substitute which the uni- 
 verse afforded ; his interposition with such a sacrifice, may 
 well excite the admiration of angels, and the contrition and 
 eternal gratitude of all his blood-bought people. The sweet- 
 est ingredient in the glorious cup of salvation, is, that when 
 immutable justice called for our destruction, "God so loved 
 •' the world, that he gave his only begotten Son [the just for 
 " the unjust] that whosoever believeth in him should not 
 •' perish but have everlasting life."a 
 
 IV. In connexion with the severer attributes of God, it 
 Was proposed to infer the doctrine of eternal punishment 
 from the scriptural account of sin, It is not my intention 
 here to discuss the question, whether there is or is not an in- 
 finite evil in everj sin. You may easily conjecture my rea- 
 son for omitting an argument which has been deemed of so 
 much importance in this controversy, by President Edwards, 
 Dr. Wylie, and other excellent writers. My remarks might 
 possibly be adopted with equal ease by them, and by their 
 brethren who deny that absolute infinity belongs to a creature 
 or any of his actions ; and who believe that there is as much 
 of an objective infinity in obedience as in disobedience. 
 As the best men that have ever lived, inspired or uninspired, 
 have had reason to pray that God would convince them of 
 secret faults, it is probable that none but the infinite mind 
 can ever see the least sin of the least sinner, in the extent of 
 its turpitude. 
 
 But let us see how universalism represents this greatest 
 of all evils. My opponent speaks in the following language, 
 viz. "As the diseases of the body are mere privations, of 
 " health, so the disorders of the mind are all merely negative^ 
 
 It John iii. 16. IPet.iiLlS. 
 
189 
 
 " a lack or want of their contrary virtues ; the same as dark- 
 " ness is nothing more than the absence or want of light. 
 *' Hence ignorance, folly, injustice, hatred, crueify, &c. are 
 " only the want of knowledge, wisdom, justice, love, mercy, 
 " &c. and therefore these are the sovereign remedies for the 
 *' mind. Yea, all the remedies for the moral maladies and 
 *' vices of the human heart, are to be sought for in their con- 
 " trary virtues."* Take notice, he declares that all sin is 
 negative; and not only so, but it is ''''merely/ negative;'' that 
 is, there is nothing positive about it: and he applies this re- 
 mark to such sins as " injustice, hatred, cruelty, &c." Now 
 is it true that a man may lie, and cheat his neighbour and 
 pollute his family and incur no positive guilt? Is there no- 
 thing more than a mere negation in swearing, gaming, sab- 
 bath-breaking, and intemperance? Does my opponent give 
 this view of sin when he is speaking of the real or supposed 
 offences of orthodox christians ? What is it that gives such 
 exquisite interest to the case of St. Augustine and his para- 
 mour, the case of John Knox and Cardinal Beatoun, and es- 
 pecially that of Calvin and Servetus ? At the very mention 
 of these subjects in an heretical circle, animation fills every 
 heart, and eloquence moves every tongue. Kvery toad in 
 the company thinks himself a pattern of purity and a giant 
 of greatness. When they turn the conversation from charac- 
 ters of such transcendant talents, piety and usefulness, and 
 contemplate the real faults of itiferior men, their criminal 
 code is revised and corrected; sin is not quite so odious : 
 and by the time they are at the bottom of the scale, among 
 Universalists and Unitarians, Atheists and Libertines, sin 
 becomes a mere negation. In a character of this descrip- 
 tion, deliberate murder would only be a want of love ! " Fools 
 " make a mock at sin -^^ and the necessary tendency of uni- 
 versalism towards this folly, shows its opposition to the Bible. 
 In that sacred volume we are taught that sin banished 
 angels of light into eternal darkness. It was sin which re- 
 moved Adam from the happy garden, and brought misery 
 and death upon all his race. It was sin which destroyed 
 the old world by water, and the fertile plain of Sodom by 
 fire and brimstone. On account of sin, these elements shall 
 melt with fervent heat ; and for sin, he who made the world, 
 and wields these elements, was made a whole burnt offering. 
 " Hereby perceive we the love of God, because belaid down 
 " his life for us.*'^ So odious is sin that it must be fully pun- 
 
 a Lestttres, p. 195, b Prov. xiv. 9, c 1 John, iii. 16. 
 
190 
 
 isbed even when found imputed to the Holy Jesus. So 
 hateful is it, be)<tMd a parallel, that the Apostle,for the want 
 of a w'oise description, called sin ''exceeding sinlul,'a be- 
 cause there was nothina else as bad as itself. The purity of 
 heaven cannot receive it ; lor " there shall in no wise enter 
 *' into it any tliinj^ that defileth, neiti)er whatsoever worketb 
 " abomination, or maketb a lie, but they which are written 
 " in the Lamb's book of life.' ^ The holiness of God cannot 
 bear it. "Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and 
 " canst not look on iniquity."*^ He requires holiness in all 
 his glorified subjects. " Follow peace with all men, and 
 " holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord. "d His 
 justice requires the punishment "even of those sins which are 
 committed while undergoing the punishment of former offen- 
 ces. "Every transgression and disobedience receiveth a 
 '•'■just recompense of reward.''^ Thus does the scriptural 
 account o( sin, in connexion with the inspired account of 
 God's holiness and justice, infer the eternal punishment of 
 the finally impenitent. 
 
 V. We infer the same doctrine from what tlie Bible says 
 of the helplessness of sinners. Here I shall undertake to 
 speak but little of a distinction which some affect between na- 
 tural and moral inability, whereby they would prove that 
 a man who can do nothing without Christ, can do every thing 
 without him. My sentiments on this subject, are those of 
 the reformation j those which Luther advocated in opposi- 
 tion to Erasmus ; those which the AVestminster Assembly 
 adopted ; those which the Presbyterians of Scotland and 
 America liave received ; those which the General Assembly 
 of our church have ratified by a judicial decision ; and those 
 which are found in the oracles of God. I believe sincerely, 
 as I professed to believe, when consenting to the Confession 
 of Faith in my ordination, that " man, by his fall into a state 
 "of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual 
 " good accompanying salvation : so as a natural man being 
 ** altogether averse from that which is good, and dead in sin, 
 *• is not able by liis own strength, to convert himself, or to 
 " prepare himself thereunto ;" that sinners '* arc utterly in- 
 *' disposed, disabled jind ma(ie opposite to all good, and whol- 
 *'ly inclined to all evil ;" that "their a'^^ility to do good 
 
 a l.'oiii. vii. 13. b ]ttv. xxi. 27. 
 
 c Haob. i. IS. (IHeb. xii. 14. 
 
 e Heb. ii. 2. 
 
191 
 
 "works is not at all of themselves, but wholly from the Spi- 
 •♦rit of Christ."" 
 
 Tliese declarations describe our condition in a state of na- 
 ture, while unconnected witii an Almighty Redeemer ; and 
 let it be remembered that Mr. Winchester admits tliat some 
 are "eternally deprived of the glories and honours of the 
 ** kingdom of Christ." According to the Scriptures, some of 
 these characters owe five hundred j)ence, and others fifty, and 
 they have " nothing to pay." Joshua says, " ye cannot serve 
 tlie Lardy Our Saviour says, ** Without me ye can do noth' 
 ing.''^ Paul says, "the carnal mind is enmity against God j 
 " for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed canbe, 
 ** So then, they that are in the flesh cannot please God.'^ 
 <* Strive to enter in at the strait gate ; for many, I say unto 
 you, shall strive to enter in, and ^hali not he able." " Then 
 " said Jesus again unto tliem, I go my way, and ye shall 
 '* seek me, and shall die in your sins. Wliither I go, ye can- 
 *' not come."" " For the grave cannot praise thee, death can- 
 ** not celebrate thee. They that go down into the pit, cannot 
 *' hope for thy truth."" Tlius there are many who are with- 
 out Christ forever; — But without Christ they haA^e nothing 
 to pay their debt ; they can do nothing ; they cannot serve 
 God; they cannot submit to his law; they cannot please him 
 by faith in his gospel, for (" without faith it is impossible to 
 please him;*') they are not able to enter in at the strait gate ; 
 they cannot come to him in Heaven ; they cannot hope in him 
 when dying, nor praise nor celebrate him among the redeem- 
 ed beyond the grave. — If they can do none of these things, 
 can tlicy be saved ? Blessed be Jehovah, God of Israel, that 
 " when we were yet without strength, in due time, Christ 
 died for the ungodly ;"' that, when we were helpless, God 
 " laid help upon One that is Mighty ;" and that although 
 Christ has said "no man can come to me, except the Father 
 which hath sent me draw him," yet he has also said, " all 
 that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that 
 Cometh to me, I will in no wise cast out." Although, as a 
 punishment of sin, we are justly doomed to spiritual death, a 
 state of powerless corruption and misery, yet it is promised, 
 '* thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power.'*'' As 
 ours is a guilty helplessness, it does not release us from the 
 obligations of the law or of the gospel, the spirit says, " work 
 out your salvation with fear and trembling :'* and to encour- 
 age sinners to look for divine assistance, it is added, "for it 
 
 aCoafessioDofFjiith, tbap. 9. sect. 3. Chap. 6, sect. I>. Ch«p. IS. lett 9. 
 
192 
 
 is God which workctli in you, both to will and to do of his 
 good pleasui'c."a 
 
 VI. In connexion with the helpless condition of sinners, 
 we proposed inferring the doctrine of their eternal punish- 
 ment, from the character, influence, and dominion of that so- 
 ciety to which the curse has exposed and subjected them. 
 It is a very plain, though involuntary acknowledgment of the 
 strength of this argument, when nniversalists, in order to 
 elude its force, deny the very existence of fallen an.i^els. 
 This is evidently done through the suggestion of the devil, 
 and to serve his purposes. When an army approaches un- 
 observed, witiiin cannon shot of our camp, while we believe 
 that they are not in existence, this is as they would have it : 
 and that traitor who had lulled us into this fatal repose, in 
 opposition to many faithful warnings, would be considered 
 their humble servant. Wnen this deceit of satan and his 
 servants takes effect, it is no wonder that sinners are " taken 
 •' captive by him at his will." "When any one heareth the 
 *• word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then 
 " Cometh the wicked one and catcheih away that which was 
 " sown in )iis heart." " The tares are the children of the 
 " wicked one. The enemy that soweth them is the devil.'* 
 " If our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost; in 
 " whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of 
 "them which believe not, lest the lightof the glorious gospel 
 *' of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.'* 
 ** He that committeth sin is of the devil, for the devil sinneth 
 " from the beginning " " Ye do the deeds of your father." 
 ** Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father 
 " ye will do : he was a murderer fi-om the beginning, and 
 " abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. 
 " W^hen he spcaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own : for be is 
 « a liar and the father of it' " O full of all subtlely 
 "and all mischief: thou child of the devil! thou ene- 
 *' my of all righteousness ! wilt thou not ceaj^e to pervert 
 " the right ways of the Lord ?" " If I, with the finger of 
 " God, cast out devils, no doubt, the kingdom of God is come 
 " uj)on you. When a .strong man armed, keepeth his palace, 
 ** his goods are in peace : but when a stronger than he shall 
 ** come upon him, and overcome him, ho taketh from him 
 
 a Matt xviji, 24. Luke vil,41, 42. Jolia xv, 5. Josh, xxiv, 19. Rom. viii> 
 7,8. Heb xi, 6. Lukexiii, 24; .John viii, 21. Isa. xxxviii, 18. Rom. 5, 6* 
 Ps. Uxxix, 19. John vi, 4*, 37. Pa. ex, 3. Phil, ii, 12, ip. 
 
19a 
 
 all his armour wherein he trusted, and di\ i.utii his spoils/'^ 
 Although the Divine Saviour, this stronger m;i:i, has deliver- 
 ed many captives, there arc still niaiiv, who, accordingtoMr. 
 Winchester's own at knowledgaieut, '♦ v. ill i)e etenialiy de- 
 prived of the glories and honours ol the kingdom of Chi-ist." 
 According to the ah(»ve Scriptures, the dcvilis a strong man, 
 and these lust and blinded sinners ai'e his capti\es; the devil 
 is a father, ami they are his children. As might he expected, 
 they resemble each other. He pei'veited the rigiit ways of the 
 Lord, and so do tiiey ; he is a sinner, an enemy of allriglite- 
 ousness, a liar and a murdci-er, and so are they. As I'hrist is 
 the only deliverer, and as these sinners have, to their own 
 eternal destruction, i-enounced any depcndance upon hinj, 
 they must continue forever, under the instruction and exam- 
 ple, donjinioiiandoppression, of this more than Egyptian ty- 
 rant. An aggravation of tlicir hopeless case is, that they 
 nuist still continue to be i-ational and responsible beings. 
 Their corruption and guilt must forever increase, and con- 
 setpiently, to all eternity, the cloud of veng-ancc must thicken 
 over them, and the pit of their suffering shall be without bot- 
 tom. 
 
 SECOND ORTHODOX ARGUMENT. 
 
 IMPLICATION. 
 
 This argument is inexhaustible : for every commandment 
 of the law i)ni)Iies a sanction ; every promise of the gospel 
 implies a threat against gospel despisers ; and every expres- 
 sion of approbation to those who repent, believe, or obey, 
 who are justified, adopted, or sanctified, implies the condeju- 
 nation of the contrary character. A few passages of Scrip- 
 ture, which come under the form of insinuation, supposition, 
 and interrogation, shall serve as specimens of implication. 
 
 I. Insinuation, Is not our Saviour's declaration against 
 hypocrites, that " they have their reward," an insinuation 
 that they have only a temporal reward ? Is not the Psalm- 
 ist's declaration concerning " men of the w orid, w ho have 
 •« their portion in this life," an insinuation that they have no 
 portion in asiother life ? When the Apostle Paul sai<l "god- 
 " liness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the 
 •' life that now is, and of that which is to conu'," did he not 
 insinuate that the ungodly were without the blessing of hca- 
 A-en here and hereafter ? When our Saviour said, •* he that 
 
 a 2 Tim. ii. 26. Matt, xiii 19, 38—43. 2 Cor. iv. 3, 4. 1 John \\\ S, in. 
 John viii 41 4i. Acts. xiii. 10. Luke xi. 20— QC. 
 
 Aa 
 
194 
 
 "believeth on me hath everlasting life," and "^he that be- 
 " licveth on me sliall never thrist," did he not insinuate that 
 unbelievers shall have their portion in the lake of fire, which 
 is the second death, and in which there is not a drop of water 
 to quench their thrist ? All these questions are plainly ans- 
 wered by a voice directed fiom heaven to an inhabitant of 
 this lake. ♦' But Abraham said, son, remember that tiiou ii» 
 " thy life-time receivedst thy good tilings, and likewise La- 
 "zarusevil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art 
 *' tormented." 
 
 When our Saviour promises mercy and comfort, satisfac- 
 tion and sanctification, a royal inheritance, and a heavenly 
 reward, to the poor in spirit, the mourners, the meek and 
 mi iriful, the pure, tlie persecuted, and the peace makers, is 
 not an opposite destiny insinuated against opposite charac- 
 ters ? W hen I'etor says by the spirit of God, '• he that fear- 
 «' eth him, and worketh righteousness is accepted with him," 
 is it not an insinuation that the presumptuous and disobedi- 
 ent shall be rejected ? AVhen Paul says that tlie gospel '• is 
 "the power of God unto salvation to every one that bclie- 
 " veth," does he not insinuate that the gospel shall not save 
 the unbeliever ? When our Saviour says, *' blessed is he, 
 " whosoever shall not be offended in me," and " he that eu- 
 " dureth to the end shall be saved," is it not an insinuation 
 that those who are offended with Christ, and turn back from 
 following him, shall not be blessed or saved ? In the doc- 
 trinal, experimental, and practical reception of Christianity, 
 there are many dangers to encounter, and many prejudices 
 and corruptions to overcome. Our Saviour says, " to him 
 ** that oveicometh w ill I grant to sit with me on my throne." 
 What does this insinuate concerning those who are led cap- 
 tive by the world, the flesh, and the devil 7*^ 
 
 2. >Suppositiou. Although all the passages advanced un- 
 der this head, arc hypothetical expressions, all of them, ex- 
 cept the last, contain almost as manifest an innuendo as 
 those which have been adduced above. " Behold I stand at 
 " the door and knock : IP' any man hear my voice, and open 
 **the dooi*, I will come in to him, and will sup with him and 
 "he with me." "If any man therefore purge himself from 
 " these, he shall be a vessel unto honor." These passages 
 imply that those who are not cleansed, and who do not open 
 the door, shall be banished fi'om Christ, and treated with 
 
 a MaU. vi. 2, 16. Luke xvi. 25. In. vi. 47,35. Rev. xx. 14. Ps. xvii. 14. 
 Matt. V. a— 12. Actt. X. .35. Rev. iii. 21. M«U. xi. 6, 10: 22. Rom. i. 16. 
 
195 
 
 contempt : and this is clscwliere called an ** everlasting con- 
 tempt." Concerning false teachers, our Saviour says, "(F 
 *' it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." Docs 
 not this imply that all others are fatally deceived ? Paul 
 says, " let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he 
 fall." If none could fall, hy mistaking tlie ground upon 
 which he stood, wliy tliis caution ? The same caution against 
 resting in a form of godliness without the power, and thus 
 falling short of real religion, is taught in the following pas- 
 sage. " Looking diligently, lest any man fail of the grace 
 "of God; LEsr any root of hilterness springing up trou- 
 " hie you, and thereby many be defiled ; les r there be any 
 " fornicator or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel 
 *' of meat, sold his birth right" The sequel proves what is 
 here implied ; that these characters, like Esau, are rejected 
 of God. " For if they escaped not who rejected him that 
 " spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn 
 " away from Him tliat speaketh from Heaven."* 
 
 My last text, which I observed, did not contain an inuen- 
 do, may be considered as amounting to positive proof, al- 
 though it contains a supposition. *' The Son of man goeth, 
 " as it is written of him ; but woe unto that man by whom 
 ** the Son of man is betrayed ! it had been good for that man 
 ** IF he had not been born." ^ 
 
 On this passage my opponent, with ^reat confidence, re- 
 peatedly challenges me to meet him. The fullowing are his 
 words, viz. "I am willing to take the person and character 
 *• of the traitor Judas, as the entire subject of the debate, to 
 *' decide the question under discussion ; and if my opponent 
 ** can prove that Judas is to be eternally miserable, I admit 
 ** that he proves his doctrine ; but if I prove from the testi- 
 " raony of the inspired writers, that there is as much reason 
 '* to believe he will be saved, as there is to believe that any 
 " of the other disciples will be saved, then he has lost the ar- 
 '* gument. [f my opponent will not meet me on this, or on 
 *' any other argument, you, my hearers, will say it is because 
 " he dare not." ** I am not ashamed to appear before this 
 " audience as the advocate for the final salvation of even 
 ** Judas, and if I am notable to prove that we have the same 
 ** reason for believing in his final and eternal happiness, as 
 " we have to believe in the salvation of Peter or oi Paul, I 
 
 a Rev.iii. 20. 2 Tim. ii. 21. Matt. xxiv. 24. 1 Cor. x. 1?. 9. 27. Heb. xii, 
 15—17, 25. Jer. iv. 4. 17. 27. 21. 12. Am. 5. 6. 
 b Matt. xxvi. 24. 
 
IDG 
 
 " must give up lo my opponent, ami acknowledge l>e lias 
 " gained his ar<;uinent. 1 must have the same hope for tlie 
 '• salvation nl .liulas as I have lor my own, or mv faith in uni- 
 "• versal salvation is without foundation. Could 1 not prove 
 " from the testimony of the scriptures that Judas is finally to 
 •' be saved, I tell you, my hearers, I could not so boldly ad- 
 " vocate the doctrine of universal redemption ; upon thesal- 
 " vation of Judas, therefore, I rest the truth of my doctrine. 
 '" Judas, we acknowledge, Mas guilty, he was a traitor ; but 
 *' show me the law which requires that he should be endless- 
 *' ly miserable, that is, punished to an absolute eternity for 
 "■ what he did."* 
 
 In the above challenges, my opponent seems confident that 
 Judas is as safe as any other Apostle, but at other times, he 
 appears to think him much safer than one of them. One 
 would almost think that he was afraid of Peter's being lost, 
 because he was so much more hard-hearted And impenitent 
 than his beloved Judas. The following are his words, viz. 
 *' There is nothing in the whole history of Judas, that should 
 '• cause us to suppose he will never be saved. It salvation 
 ** be predicated on repentance, we have the same evidence, 
 " yea, if possible, better evidence of the repentance of Judas, 
 " than we have of the repentance of Peter. The one betrays 
 '' hih master, the other denies him : but what does Judas 
 " when he finds his master is in the hands of his enemies ? 
 '■' Does he, like l^eter, cowardly deny him, with imprecations 
 " and curses i No, he comes forward to the enemies of his 
 *' Lord, and declares that he had sinned in that he ' had be- 
 '' trayed innocent blood.* He acknowledges and repents of 
 *' his guilt, and b-ars honorable testimony to the innocence 
 " of Jesus. But the priests, having obtained their end, in 
 *■' the apprehension of our Lord, care not tor this confession, 
 " but they say, ' M hat is that to us ? See thou to that.' Does 
 '* Judas rest contented, saying, well, 1 have got the money, 
 *■• and what 1 ha«-e done cannot now be undone? No, he des- 
 " pises his ill-gutteu gain ; *he cast down the pieces of sil- 
 *' ver' at the feet of the priests, and went out, and *was suf- 
 " focated with grief.' I know that our common version of 
 ••' the scri;.pture.s, stiys, *• he went and hanged himself;* but 
 '' it is the part of my opponent to prove that this is the mean- 
 " ing- of the original, which he cannot do. How is the idea 
 '' of his having hanged himself recoucileable with the account 
 *' given in the book of Aits, of the death of Judas .^ * Fall- 
 
 a Minutes, i>. p. 77, 90. ■■'' 
 
197 
 
 '^ iiig headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his 
 '' bowels gushed out.* Acts i. IS. The learned Mr. AYake- 
 ''• field, who was no Universalist, translates the passage, 
 ** ' Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple, 
 ** and withdrew : and after his departure, was choaked with 
 ''' anguish:' and that excessive grief will produce this eflect, 
 " all who know any thing of the effects of the passions on 
 " the body, must acknowledge. I would now ask, have we 
 " as much evidence of the sincerity of the repentance of those 
 " who come forward in our days, and declare themselves to 
 " be such great sinners in the sight of God and man I Do 
 *' they make restitution in those instances in which they have 
 ** injured their brother ? I do sincerely wish that we had the 
 *' same evidence of the sincere repentance of christians, in 
 *' our day, as we have of the sincerity of Judas, when ' he re- 
 '* pented him, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver 
 ** to the chief priests and elders.' Matt, xxvii. 35. Let my 
 *•' opponent, now, if he feels himself able, meet me on this 
 *' ground."* 
 
 In the above effusion, my Universalist opponent tries his 
 talents for criticism. The following effort in the same way, 
 is in his own words, viz. " The original text is ambiguous : 
 ** it is literally ' good were it for him, if that man were not 
 " born.' It will admit of the following constructions, * Good 
 ** were it for him (the Son of man) if that man (the traitor) 
 " were not born,' Or, * good were it for him (the traitor) if 
 *' that man (the Son of Man) were not born.' Or, (what is 
 *' more probably the true sense) * good were it for him (the 
 " traitor) if that man (the traitor) were not born.' Or, lastly, 
 *' (which is nearly the same in sense) * good were it for him, 
 " (the traitor) if he were not born that man.' But ' good 
 ** were it for that man (the traitor) if he had never been born,' 
 ^* (that is, never existed^ is a construction that the words 
 ** will not possibly bear. To prove this statement true, I 
 **' have only to refer to a passage where similar expressions 
 " occur in the original. It is recorded in the book of Acts, 
 '* chapter seven, that Stephen made an address to his accu- 
 " sers, in which he gives a history of all the great things 
 « which God had done for his people in former times, from 
 •' the time when he appeared unto * our father Abiaham, 
 " when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt iu Char- 
 " ran ;' when he comes to speak of Moses, he says, * at 
 
 % Minnies, p. p. 92, 95. ^^ 
 
198 
 
 '' wliicli time Moses was born, sv w xai^u sytwrfiri Mwutfiis,' 
 *' where tbe same verb, s^swYi^y], translated * was born' occurs 
 '* in the text in reference to Judas, * e» oux syswriori o av^ewn'og/ 
 " excepting that in the one, the idiom of our language requires 
 " that it should be rendered in the indicative, and in the 
 *' other, being preceded by the conjunction si If, in tbe sub- 
 '• junctive mood. Now what is the difference between these 
 " two passages? The only difference is, that tbe latter has 
 " the modifying particles £i. translated if, and the negative 
 " oux notf which, however, do not alter the meaning of the 
 " verb, which is precisely the same in both. Now if the 
 " verb sysw^^r} in the former, express tbe natural birth of 
 " Moses, by what mode of reasoning can we cause oux gy£vv»i6»] 
 •' in the latter to signify absolute non-existence ? That these 
 *"* statements are liierally true I appeal to our judges, and to 
 " all learned men. If I am wrong let me be contradicted. — 
 •* Thus, you see, ends the discussion in relation to the dis- 
 '* pute on the meaning of the passage in reference to Judas. 
 •■' Even my opponent dare not dispute the correctness of my 
 ** statement. \_Here Mr. Kennedy, the second of Mr. M''CaUaf 
 " one of the bench, arose and commenced some remarks hut 
 " was silenced hy Mr. M''CaUa.'\ You see my hearers, that 
 " his friend would have looked into the passage, but ray op- 
 "• ponent shrinks from the decision ; and you now see how 
 " we stand on the subject to which 1 have called his atten- 
 " tion, and on which I am perfectly willing to rest this dis- 
 " cussion.'-* 
 
 In the same strain my Universalist opponent speaks as 
 follows, viz. " The phrase in relation to Judas, is ' xaXov i^v 
 " ajToj £1 oux zyivvri'^r\ o ave^wTog sxsivog, good were it for that man 
 " if he had not been born.' \ly opponent says that the true 
 *' meaning is 'good were it for Judas if he had never had 
 " any existence^' Now I ask, if Judas had never had a be- 
 " ing, could any thing have been good for him ? Could any 
 " thing be good for you, my hearers, if you had never been 
 " brought into existence ? The idea of any thing being good 
 " for Judas, implies in itself that he must have had a beiug."l» 
 
 He reasons at another time in the loUowing words, viz 
 " T am willing to rest the salvation on the plain testimony of 
 " God. This testimony, it is true, declares that 'by trans- 
 " gression Judas fell, that he might go to his own place.* 
 " Acts i. 25. But my opponent must prove that this place 
 
 ft Minutes, p. p. 89, 90. 
 b Minutes, p. 78. 
 
199 
 
 " is a place of endless misery. What says Jpsus to his clis- 
 " ciples ? * ye which have followed me in the regeneration, 
 *' when the Sou of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, 
 " ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve 
 ** tribes of Israel.' Matt. xix. 28. Let the time referred to 
 *' here, be when it may, the promise was made to the twelve 
 " when Judas constituted one oi them. It will not do to say, 
 *' that the promise can be fulfilled by supplying the place of 
 " Judas by Matthias, who was elected after the ascension of 
 " our Lord. The promise was made to that twelve to whom 
 " Christ spake, *ye who have followed me,' and that the tes- 
 " timonies should be true, to them it must be fulfilled. If 
 *' my opponent feels disposed to dispute all this, he is at 
 ** liberty, and I hope I shall be able to meet his argn- 
 " ments."a 
 
 Mr. Winchester's mode of evading the force of this rigid 
 authority, differs from that of my opponent. He thinks our 
 Saviour's declaration conceniiiig Judas equivalent to those 
 of Job and Jeremiah conrei'iiing themselves. They cursed 
 the day in which they were born, thinking that non exist- 
 ence was preferable to such an existence as theirs. He un- 
 derstands this to be the meaning of our Saviour with, regard 
 to Judas; that non-existance is preferable to such an exist- 
 ence as his. This author agrees in his calmer moments, 
 with the hasty and improper decision of Job and Jeremiah, 
 that annihilation is preferable even to these comparatively 
 light afflictions which are but for a moment. He speaks 
 as follows, viz. " And who would not, a thousand times, 
 •' choose rathej* never to have been born, than even to see, 
 ** far less experience, the miseries which came upon Jerusu- 
 " lem and its inhabitants ? Would it not have been better 
 *' for mothers never to have been horn, than to have killed 
 *• and eaten their own children in the siege? and would it 
 " not have been better for the children never to have been 
 "born, than to have been food for their mothers ?" i^ He 
 might as well have asked, was not annihilation preferable 
 to the martyrdom of Ignatius and many others, who were 
 food for lions ? Surely not: because these martyrs inherit 
 that everlasting glory which Mr. Winchester vainly expects 
 for the devoted inhabitants of Jerusalem. If they were ever 
 to attain this eternal Joy, it is well for them to have been 
 born, if, between their birth and their glorification, they had 
 
 a Minntes,p. 91. 
 b Dialosue 2nd. 
 
20U 
 
 to endure ten thousand sieges of Jerusalem. The infinite 
 superiority of endless happiness over temporary pain shews 
 the rashness of the complaints and wislies of the inspii-ed 
 mourners ahove mentioned. But was our Saviour rash ? 
 Was he under the influence of ignorance, impatience, or rc- 
 sentment. when after weighing the good and the evil of this 
 tiaitor's career, he declared that anniliilation was prefera- 
 hle to such an existence I '' It had heen good for that man if 
 " he had not been born." 
 
 After having rejected our translation, and amused tiie au- 
 dience with a great variety of translations, my opponent at 
 last agrees that the passage means, ''good were it for him, 
 ** (the traitor,) if that man, (the traitor,) were not born." The 
 result, then, of his pedantic criticisms is this ; that lie has 
 given us a translation agreeing with our own, and has ac- 
 companied it with a paraphrase which establishes our inter- 
 pretation ! " Good w^ere it for him, (the traitor,) if that man, 
 " (^the traitor,) were not born." It would be good for Judas, 
 if he were not born : that is, if he were in a state of non-ex- 
 istence as he was before his birth. It is true that a state of 
 non-existence has no positive good attending it j but is it not 
 grammatical, intelligible and scriptural, to say tijat annihila- 
 tion would be comparatively a blessing to that maji. to whom 
 existence is a curse ? Yet this sort of language my oppo- 
 nent endeavours to shew is inconsistent with sound philoso- 
 phy, and the usages of Greek w riters. He would have us be- 
 lieve that the fact of Moses, being 6or«, means the same thing 
 as a supposition that Judas is not born, because the woi*d 
 horn is used in both cases. He admits thattlic one is an af- 
 firmative and the other a negative : and yet by quoting a 
 great deal of Greek, and using many grammatical terms, he 
 calculates on making you believe that a fact and a supposi- 
 tion, an affirmative and a negative, mean the same thing. 
 " Now what is the ditfcrence between these two passages?" 
 he gravely asks. I know not how to do justice to his learn- 
 ing and his powers of reasoning, better tlian by putting his 
 argument into a syllogistic, and almost a poetical form. 
 
 Major proposition, syswrj^v] Mutu(ir\£= si oux syswrjAig 6 avi^oi^oi 
 
 Minor proposition. Indicative, Subjunctive, Original, 
 Particles, Idiom. 
 
 Conclusion. Therefore, to be born, and not to be born, 
 both presuppose existence, and mean the same thing, accord- 
 ing to the philosophy of the Universal ists. 
 
201 
 
 If the mere use of the same verb in relation to Moses and 
 Judas, will authorize such a wild conclusion, then it is as 
 true, that Jonah sivaUoweU the fFhale, as that the f^Vhale 
 swalloived Jonah, because not only the same verb but the 
 saine words tln-oughout occur in both these pi-opositions. 
 
 When the Scriptures declare tliat *' by transgression Ju- 
 « das fell, that he might go to his own place," '^ my opponent 
 says tliat his own place is one of those twelve thrones on 
 which the Apostles shall Judge the twelve tribes of Israel. 
 He considers his right to this glory secured to him by the 
 unconditional promise of Christ j and that veracity requires 
 that lie be enthroned. 
 
 It is freely admitted that veracity requires the fulfilment 
 •f every projnise, as it certainly docs the execution of every 
 threat. But where do we find a promise that Judas shall 
 inherit a crown of glory, with or without regeneration, re- 
 pentance, or faith ? The promise referred to, in Matt. xix. 
 28, is so far from being unconditional, that it expressly con- 
 fines the benefits promised, to those who had forsaken all, 
 and followed him," in the regeneration." " Then answered 
 <"' Peter and said unto him, behold ! we have forsaken all, and 
 ^^ folio wed thee: what shall we have, therefore? And Jesus 
 "said unto them, verily I say unto you, that ye which have 
 ** followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall 
 « sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve 
 « thrones, judging tlie twelve tribes of Israel." Here the en- 
 quiry is made, not concerning uubelievers and traitors, but 
 concerning self-denied and faithful disciples. The promise 
 wiiich the answer contains, describes the same characters, 
 « ye which have followed me in the regeneration." That 
 regeneration is essential to entering the kingdom of heaven, 
 our Saviour has expressly declared.b That Judas was born 
 again, at the time when this promise was given, will not 
 probably be contended ; and it will soon be seen that he had 
 no saving interest in the Christian dispensation, which some 
 will understand by regeneration. That he Imd not forsaken 
 all, is evident from the reason which is given for his recom- 
 mending that the ointment be sold, and the money given to 
 the poor. "This he said, not that he cared for the poor j 
 but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what 
 was put therein."* This also makes it plain that he had 
 not followed Christ: for he could not serve God and Mam- 
 
 a Acts. i. 25. b In. iii. 3, 5. 
 
 c In. xli. 6. 
 
202 
 
 mon. That he followed the devil instead of Christ is mani- 
 fest fi'om scripture prophecy and history. Peter '^ refers us 
 to a Psalm which says, concerning him, *• let Satan stand at 
 •*his right hand." Peter, in quoting a part of this Psalm, 
 the whole of which relates to Judas, says, "this scripture 
 *' must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost, by 
 *'the mouth of David, spake concerning Judas, which was 
 " guide to them that took Jesus." As a fulfilment of the 
 above scripture, it is expressly stated that '* Satan entered 
 " into him :" ^ and our Saviour himself says to these twelve 
 Apostles, to whose persons identically and universally my 
 opponent says the promise was made ; to these twelve he 
 says, " one of you is adevil.''«5 Did he afterward pi'omise 
 that this devil should be enthroned as a judge of hispcoj)le? 
 That very scripture which was fulfilled in his diabolical pos- 
 session, declared that, instead of judging Israel, he himself 
 should be judged and condemned ; and that instead of being 
 enthroned as an Apostle, anotlier sliould take that office from 
 whicji he fell by transgression. David says, *' When he 
 " shall be judged let him be condemned ; and let his prayer 
 *' become sin. Let his days be few ; and let another take his 
 "office." After the death of Judas, and the ascension of 
 Christ, Peter says, " it is written in the book of Psalms, let 
 *' his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein : 
 '* and his bishopric let another take." Accordingly, the 
 Apostles pray God to appoint a successor, " that he may 
 *' take part of this ministry and Apostleship, from which Ju- 
 ** das by transgression fell, that he might go to his own 
 *' place." d To his own place ! Is heaven tliat place, as my 
 opponent says ? " How art thou fallen from heaven, Lu- 
 '* cifer, son of the morning !" Judas is not called a son of the 
 mojning, but heis called *' a son of perdition;" and of course, 
 perdition with Lucifer, is his own place. *' The transgres- 
 " sors shall be destroyed together c '' Judas by iransgres- 
 ** sion fell." " The wicked shall he cut oif from the earth, and 
 **i\\Q^^ transgressors shall be rooted ont ofit."f Task not 
 whether he was rooted out of the earth by involuntary suf- 
 focation, voluntary strangulation, or precipitation from the 
 top of a rock. Certain it is, as my opponent acknowledges, 
 that " falling headlong, he burst asunder, and all his bow- 
 *' els gushed out :" and it is no less certain that this was 
 
 a Acts i. 16, 20. d Ps. cix. 7. 8, Acts i. 20, 25. 
 
 b In. xiii. 27. e Ps. xxxvii. 38. 
 
 c John vi r©. f Piov. ii. 23, 
 
203 
 
 predicted as an introduction to a place of cursing and not of 
 blessing. " As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him : as 
 ** he delighted not in blessing, so let it be far from him. As 
 *' he clothed himself with cursing, like as with his garment, 
 " so let it come into his bowels like watery and like oil into his 
 " bones."a What is the proper place of a fallen star but with 
 those " wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness 
 " of darkness forever ?" b If Tophet be the proper place of a 
 thief and traitor; — if perdition be the proper place of a " son 
 " of perdition;"— and if hell be the proper place of " a devil ;* 
 —then it is plain where this most conspicuous of hypocrites 
 went, when he went " to his own place." 
 
 But my opponent says, *' if salvation be predicated on re- 
 "pentance, we have the same evidence, yea, if possible, better 
 « evidence of the repentance of Judas, than we liave of the 
 « repentance of Peter." Doubtless my opponent has read 
 Campbell's preliminary dissertation on the word repentance, 
 and has observed that the Scriptures generally use one word* 
 to signify evangelical repentance^ which is the work of the 
 Spirit of sanctification, and another word^ to denote that 
 regret which is no way inconsistent with the most depraved 
 disposition. In the Septuagint, it is used to denote the ma- 
 lignant chagrin of the Moabites, on being conquered by the 
 Israelites. *' And there was great repentance against Isra- 
 el." In the Apocryjjha, its conjugate is used to mark that 
 repentance « which devoted sinners exercised" for having once 
 performed their duty. '* As for the ungodly, wrath came up- 
 on them without mercy unto the end ; for he knew before, 
 what they would do : how that having given them leave to 
 depart, and sent them hastily away, they would repent and 
 pursue them." In the Septuagint, it is used to denote that 
 sorrow which the children of Israel felt for having left 
 Egypt. '* For God said, lest peradventure the people re- 
 pent when they see war, and they return to Egypt" It is 
 also used to point out the final and irremediable sorrow of the 
 despisers of God's word and ordinances. " And thou repent 
 at the last, when thy flesh and thy body are consumed « 
 
 That Judas' repentance was of this sort is evident from 
 the fact that his remorse was unavailing. He was condemned 
 and degraded by divine authority. « For it is written in the 
 book of Psalms, « let his habitation be desolate, and let no 
 
 a Ps.cix.17, 18. b Jude xiii. 
 
 e 2 Kgs. iii. 27, WSsd. xix. 9. Ex. xiii. 17. Prov. v. U. 
 
i!04 
 
 inau dwell therein : and his bishopric let another take." 
 Another was accordingly appointed, to "take part of this 
 ** ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgres- 
 " sion, fell.*'a If he sincerely repented, why was he thus 
 disgraced ? God has said, " If we confess our sins, he is 
 " faithful and just to for give us our sins, and to cleanse us 
 " from all unrighteousness.''^ Accordingly Peter was for- 
 given, and was never deposed from his office, either living or 
 dying. Although he is not near so amiable a character as 
 Judas, in the view of my opponent, yet before another judge, 
 he was far more lovely. Was it ever said that he fell from 
 his office by transgression, thathc might go to his own place? 
 His heart was set upon tlie place where Christ is, and thither 
 Christ had promised that he sliould go. On his repentance, 
 he was immediately forgiven, and at his death he was imme- 
 diately glorified. If Judas had repented sincerely, the same 
 would have been true concerning him. It would therefore 
 haveJbeen exceedingly good for him to have been born, if his 
 life of suffering here had been prolonged to millions of ages. 
 But now it is said, according to my opponent's translation 
 and paraphrase, " Good were it for him (the traitor) if that 
 man (the traitor) were not born." Was this ever said of 
 Peter ? or could it be said of him with truth ? It may be said 
 witii truth, that no possible degree of suffering, howsoever 
 protracted, can make it good for a man not to have beem 
 born, if that suffering be succeeded by eternal happiness ; — 
 But infallible wisdom and veracity have declared, " It had 
 been good for that man if he had not been born ;" — There- 
 fore his punishment is absolutely eternal. 
 
 Tlie evidence of Judas' condemnation to the torments of 
 hell is so overwhelming, that Mr. Winchester, however re- 
 luctantly, admitted it; although he \a\u\y supposed that his 
 punishment in hell would not be absolutely eternal. The 
 following- extract will show his sentiments, viz. " If such a 
 " man fas Job] had reason to say * wherefore then hast thou 
 " brought me forth out of the womb? O that I had given up 
 " the ghost, and no eye had seen me ! I should have been as 
 " though I had not been ; I should have been carried from 
 " the womb to the grave,' (see Job x. 18, 19,) with what 
 '* amazing propriety might Christ say of Judas, the traitor, 
 " who sinned in such a dreadful manner, and had such hor- 
 •• rible guilt on his conscience : who died in black despair^. 
 " perished in such an awful situation, in his sins, and,proba- 
 
 a Acts i 20.2.7. ), i John i. 9. 
 
205 
 
 *' biy, by his own hands, who suffered the most violent agi- 
 '* tations of mind, died under the power of the horrid sugges- 
 " tions of the great enemy of men, without one smile or hiok. 
 ^' of forgiveness, from Jesus, or even daring to seek it ; 
 " whose sorrow in this life far exceeded Job's, (for Job had 
 " no sense of guilt, treason, and ingratitude; nor was he 
 ** filled with rage, blasphemy and despair) and who mustpro- 
 " bably have his portion in the second death ; — [Well may 
 ** he say of such a character,] ' good were it for that man if 
 '* he had never been born !' even upon the supposition that 
 '* his torments are not designed to continue while God ex- 
 
 " ists."a 
 
 As my opponent has exhibited a great anxiety to refer 
 the case of Judas to a human tribunal, and as he has, with- 
 out my consent, applied to th(^ moderators for their decision, 
 what would he think of having his criticisms and arguments 
 referred to Mr. Winchester, who, as well as my opponent, 
 may be considered as receiving his ordination in an uninter- 
 rupted line, from this true Universalist Apostle. My oppo- 
 nent says that the original " words will not possibly bear" 
 the construction " good were it for that man (the traitor) if 
 " he had never been born." Mr. Winchester uses these very 
 words, " good were it for that man, if he had never been 
 " born,*' as the correct translation, and in the very meaning 
 which my opponent says " the words will not possibly bear." 
 In his day Universalism had not discovered, that a suflBcient 
 quantity of grammar and Greek would prove, that to be horiif 
 and not to be born meant the same thing. My opponent 
 would persuade you that when Judas passed through the 
 dark valley and shadow of death, he had the rod and staff of 
 his heavenly shepherd to comfort him ; Mr. Winchester in- 
 timates that he was attended by a very different character ; 
 that he " died under the power of the horrid suggestions of 
 '* the great enemy of men, without one smile, or look of for- 
 " giveness, from Jesus, or even daring to seek it." Not so 
 with Peter. My opponent would urge that the traitor died by 
 excess of pious grief; Mr. Winchester admits that he " suffer- 
 ** ed the most violent agitations of mind," and that this arose 
 from " horrible guilt on his conscience,*' but so far was he 
 from believing that this noted convict obtained relief from 
 guilt, and was filled with hope and love, he believed that he 
 was filled with ingratitude and *' rage, blasphemy and des- 
 « pair." My opponent insists that he died a true penitent, 
 
 a Dialogue 2d. 
 
W6 
 
 t-leansed from sin, without the guilt of suicide, and that he 
 went to his own throne of glory, and not to his own place of 
 torment. Mr Winchester believes that he died in " an aw- 
 •* ful situation, in his sins, and probably by his own hands," 
 " and must probably have his portion in the second death." 
 Yes, Mr. Winchester believes that this traitor lived and died 
 without an interest in Christ the only Saviour; and that he 
 probably killed himself, and that he will probably suffer the 
 punishment of his crimes in that hell which is after death. 
 When one Universalist ^a^/y denies the truth, it is pleasant 
 to hear another admit, that the truth is probably true. 
 
 3. Interrogation. This familiar tigure of speech differs 
 from a simple affirmation, chiefly in its being a more anima- 
 ted mode of expression. The doctrine of the divine omnipo- 
 tence and incomprehensibility, and of the pitiable impotency, 
 and hereditary depravity of man, are not more pointedly as- 
 serted by the most direct affirmation, than by such expres- 
 sions as the following ; " Is the Lord's hand waxed short?'' 
 " Is any thing too hard for the Lord ?** " Canst thou by 
 " searching, find out God ? Canst thou find outthe Almighty 
 " unto perfection T' " Can the Ethiopean change bis skin, or 
 ** the leopard his spots .'" "Who can bring a clean thing out 
 ** of an unclean ? Not one.''* 
 
 Awainj of the force of this argument, my opponent treats 
 it as follows, viz. " I admit the force of a statement, by way 
 " of interrogation, on subjects that are self-evident, or, arc 
 *'not disputed, but no disputed proposition, it is evident, can 
 »< be settled by this species of argument."'' This view of the 
 subject is quite original. If correct, it would make a great 
 deal of the Bible as worthless as waste paper. That the 
 views and wishes of writers and speakers, inspired and un- 
 inspired, in relation not only to axioms, but to matters of fact 
 and reasoning, can be perspicuously communicated in the 
 form of interrogation, is so obvious, and a matter of such 
 constant experience, that courts of justice have, time imme- 
 morial, intei'posed their authority to prevent attornies 
 from asking leading questions to witnesses ; because 
 these questions shew how the party wishes them an- 
 swered. But all the questions in the Bible shew the belief 
 or desire of him who asks them ; and this belief or desire is 
 communicated in the interrogative fot'm, not because it is 
 equivocal, but because it is the very contrary, and exhibits the 
 
 a Num. xj. 23. Gen. xviii. 14, Job xi, 7. Jer. xiii. 23. Job xJv.4. 
 b Minutes p. 70. 
 
» 207 
 
 sentiment with greater force. I never knew this principle 
 denied by any man of common sense, my opponent only ex- 
 cepted. Mr. Ballon, in quoting; the question,*' how can ye 
 escape the damnation of hell V declares that when our Sa- 
 viour proposed this interrogatory to his wicked audience, 
 ** he pronounced on them the damnation of hell. "a Thus, ac- 
 cording to him, and according to every man who understands 
 language, a threat or prediction, no way evident, but in- 
 volving a disputed point, may be unequivocally pronounced 
 in the form of interrogation. 
 
 In the same spirit of this denunciation of our Saviour,** 
 Peter says, "if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall 
 the ungodly and the sinner appear ?" The foi'egoing ques- 
 tion tells us that they will appear in hell ; from which the 
 impossibility of escaping is often urged. " How shall wees- 
 cape, if we neglect so great salvation I" God says by Jere- 
 miah, '* How shall I pardon thee for this?" Our Saviour 
 says, '' What is a man advantaged if he gain the whole world, 
 and lose himself, or be cast away ?" or according to another 
 Evangelist, " What is a man profited if he gain the whole 
 world, and lose his own soul ? or what shall a man give in 
 exchange for his soul ?"c 
 
 The only subterfuge which my opponent is observed to 
 use, in order to escape the last authority, is, that " the word 
 here rendered soul, is rendered life, in the verse immediately 
 preceding. ■"'1 In answer to this, let it be remarked that as 
 the soul has a death of its own, so has the soul a life of its 
 own : and this very preceding verse is directly in proof that 
 it is the life of the soul that is here meant. " For whosoever 
 " will save his [bodily] life, shall lose if, [the life of his soul.] 
 *' and whosoever will lose his [bodily] life, for my sake, shall 
 « find it, [the life of his soul.] For what is a man profited 
 *' if he gain the whole world, and lose [the life of] his own 
 '* soul ? or what shall a man give in exchange for [the life 
 "of] his soul?" That this is the meaning in a similar 
 passage of Job^ is plain. " For what is the hope of the hy- 
 « pocrite, though he hath gained, when God taketh away 
 " his soul? Will God hear his cry, when trouble cometh up- 
 " on him? Will he delight himself in the Almighty? will 
 '< he always call upon God ?" Universalism answers these 
 
 a Notes on parable 26th. 
 b Matt, xxiii. SS. 
 
 c Matt xxiii. 33. 1 Peter iv. 18. Hebr. ii. S. Jer- v. 7. Luke ix. 25, Matt, x\'r. 
 -*• d Minutes n. 55. 
 
 iC xxTii 8, 10: 
 
208 
 
 *■* questions in one way, and it is evident that God intended 
 ♦* them to be answered in another.* 
 
 THIRD ORTHODOX ARGUMENT. 
 
 CUNTllAST. 
 
 It was proposed to show that the scriptures mark such a 
 contrast between the righteous and the wicked, as to tlieir 
 character, standing, and future destiny, as can be satisfacto- 
 rily explained on no other ground than the doctrine of the 
 eternal punishment of the ungodly. As many more autho- 
 rities must be quoted here than in the last argument, time 
 forbids that my comments should be frequent or copious : 
 neither will it be of any use to repeat several passages or 
 their parallels, which have already been quoted for other 
 purposes.^ 
 
 The distinction between Mount Gerizzem and Mount 
 Ebal was not more marked, that were the condition and 
 prospects of those who were so abundantly blessed from the 
 one, and those who were cursed from the other."^ *• Behold 
 " I set before you this day a blessing and a curse : a blessing, 
 "if ye obey the commandments of the Lord your God, which I 
 "command you this day ; and a curse, if ye will not obey 
 " the commandments of the Lord your God ; but turn aside 
 "out of the way which I command you this day, to go after 
 ** other Gods wiiich ye have not known."d *' For evil doers 
 '< shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the Lord, they 
 " shall inherit the earth. For yet a little while, and the wick- 
 *'ed shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his 
 " place, and it shall not be.* But the meek shall inherit the 
 '< earth ; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of 
 ** peace. The wicked plotteth against the just, and gnash- 
 *< eth upon him with his teeth. The Lord shall laugh at 
 *Miim; for he seeth that his day is coming. The wicked 
 « have drawn out the sword, and have bent their bowj to 
 <* cast down the poor and needy, and to slay such as be of 
 *' upright conversation. Their sword shall enter into their 
 
 a Job xi. 20, 36 : 18 . Ps, xix. 6,-9. Hebr. xii. 25. 
 
 b Luke vi, 20,-26 2 Tim. ii. 20, 21. Ps. xxii. 29, Ez. xvii. 24. Gen, xii. 3. Ps. 
 xvii. 14, 
 
 c Ueut, Chapters 27 & 28. 
 
 d Deut. 11; 26—28. 
 
 e Neitlier the original nor the translation gives any countenance to the opinion 
 of my opponent or of the deslructionists, that there shall be no wicked persons 
 hereafter ; but only tliat they shall be brouq-ht to nought, by falling from a high 
 to a low condition ; by suffering the disappointment of their vain expecta- 
 tions ; — sind receiving the puniihment of their many sins. 
 
209 
 
 •^ oSvn heai-t, and their bows shall be broken. A little that 
 "a righteous man hatli, is better than the riches of many 
 '* wicked. For the arms of the wicked shall be broken : but 
 " the Lord upholdeth the righteous. Tiie Lord knoweth the 
 * days of the upright : and their inheritance shall be fore- 
 " ver. They shall not be ashamed in the evil time : and in 
 ** the days of famine tliey shall be satisfied. But the wick- 
 " ed shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord shall be as 
 "the fat of lambs : they shall consume: into smoke shall 
 "they consume away. The wicked bori'oweth and payetli 
 "not again: but the righteous shewcth mercy and giveth. 
 " For such as be blessed of him sliall i)iherit the earth ; and 
 " they that be cursed of him shall be cut off'."* " Shew 
 " thy marvellous loving kindness, O thou th.at savest, by thy 
 "riglit hand them which jnit their trust in tliee, from those 
 " that rise up against theiM." *' Arise Lord ! disapiwint 
 " him, cast him down : deliver my soul from the wicked, 
 " w hich is thy sword." " As foi- me, I will behold thy face 
 *'* in righteousness j 1 shall be satisfied when I awake, with 
 '* thy likeness.'"'* "Do they not err that devise evil? but 
 •■* mercy and truth sliall be to tiiem that devise good."** " By 
 •* the blessing of tlie upriglit, the city is exalted ; but it is 
 •• overthrown by the mouth of the wicked."«i ^* They shall 
 "be ashamed, and also confounded, all of them: they shall 
 " go to confusion together, that arc makeis of idols. But 
 " Israel shall be saved in the Lord with an everlasting sal- 
 " vation : ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded, world 
 " \\itliout end."e " He preserveth not the life of the wicked, 
 " but giveth right to the poor."f " Envy thou not the op- 
 " pressor, and choose none of his ways : for the froward is 
 *' abomination to the Lord : but his secret is with the righ- 
 *' teous. The curse of the Lord is in the house of the wicked : 
 " but he blesscth the habitation of the just. Surely he scor- 
 *' neth the scorners : but he giveth grace unto the lowly. 
 *'The wise shall inherit glory: but shame shall be the pro- 
 <' motion of fools."g " Whosoever heareth tiiese sayings of 
 " mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, 
 " which built his house upon a rock ; and the rain descend- 
 " ed, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat up- 
 " on that house, and it fell not ; for it w^as founded upon a 
 
 a Ps. xxxvii. 9—22. e Is. Ixv. 16, 17. 
 
 b Ps. xvii. 7, 13, 15. f Job xxxvi. 6. 
 
 c Prov. xiv. 22. g Prov. iii. 32 — 35. 
 d Prov. xi. 11. 
 
 Cc 
 
** rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine 
 ** and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man' 
 ** which built his house upon the sand : and the rain descend* 
 '* ed, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat up_ 
 ** on that house, and it fell ; and great was the fiill of it."a 
 *' " Who then, is a faithful and wise servant, w horn his Lord 
 *' hath made ruler oa er his household, to give them meat in 
 •' due season ? Blessed is that servant, whom his Lord, when 
 " he Cometh, shall find so doing. Verily I say unto you, 
 "that he shall make him ruler over all his goods. But and 
 *' if that evil servant shall say in his heait, my Lord delay- 
 *' eth his coming, and shall begin to smite his fellow servants, 
 "and to eat and drink witli the drunken; the Lord of that 
 " servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, 
 ** and in an hour that he is not aware of, and shall cut him 
 *' asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hyjmcrites, 
 " there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."!^ " Take, 
 " therefore, the talent from him, and give it unto him which 
 *' had ten talents. For unto every one that hath, shall be 
 "given, and he shall have abundance : but from him that 
 " hath nut, shall be taken away even that which he hath. 
 *' And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: 
 '* there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."*^ •' He an- 
 '* sw cred and said unto them, because it is given unto you to 
 **know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them 
 ** it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, 
 " and he shall have more abundance ; but whosoever hath 
 " not, from him shall be taken away even that he liath."d 
 *' As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I 
 ** hated." "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have 
 " mercy, and whom he will, hehardeneth." "Hath not the 
 ** potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one 
 "vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? What if 
 " God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power 
 ** known, endured with much long-suffering, the vessels of 
 " w rath fitted to destruction ; and that he might make known 
 "the riches of ?,his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he 
 ** had afore piepared unto glo)*y."e " Thou hast hid these 
 " things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them 
 " unto babes."f *' For the Lord knoweth the way of the 
 ** righteous : but the way of the ungodly shall perish."g " And 
 
 a Malt.vii. 24—27. d M«tt. xiii. 11, 12. 
 
 b Matt. xxiv. 45—51. e Rom. ix 13, 18, 20—23. 
 
 c Mutt. XXV. 28—31. f Matt. i. 25. 
 
 g Ps. i. 6. 
 
211 
 
 <* the afflicted people thou wilt save : but thine eyes are upon 
 '' the haughty, that thou niayest bring them tlown."a " For 
 " behold the day conieth that shall burn as an oven; and all 
 '^ the prourl, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: 
 ^* and the day that coineth shall burn them up, saith the Lord 
 •• of Hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. 
 *' But unto you that fear my name, shall the Son of rightc- 
 *.' ousness arise, with healing in his wings ; and ye shall go 
 *' forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. And ye shall 
 *' tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the 
 *' soles of your feet, in the day tliat I shall do this, saith the 
 " Lord of hosts."i> " And I will feed them that oppress thee 
 " with their own flesh, and they shall be drunken with their 
 ** own blood, as with sweet wine. And all flesh shall know 
 *' that I, the Lord, am thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, tlie 
 *' Mighty one of Jacob. "^ « Rejoice O ye nations ! with 
 *' his people ; for he will avenge the blood of his servants, 
 ** and will render vengeance to iiis adversaries, and will be 
 ♦* merciful unto his land, and to his people."d « Keeping mer,- 
 " cy for thousands ; forgiving iniquity, and transgression, 
 ** and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilt/."e 
 " " But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are par- 
 *' takers, then are ye bastards and not sons."^ " The king- 
 •* dom of heaven is like unto a net that was cast into the sea, 
 " and gathered of every kind : which, when it was full, they 
 " drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into 
 *' vessels, but cast the bad away. So shall it be at the end of 
 " the world : the angels shall come forth, and sever the 
 " wicked from among the just ; and shall cast them into the 
 « furnace of fire : there shall be wailing and gnashing of 
 " teeth."g " The wicked is driven away in his wickedness; 
 « but the righteous hath hope in his death."'^ " The Son of 
 **man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out 
 " of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do 
 •* iniquity ; and shall cast them into a furnace of fire ; there 
 "shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the 
 " righteous shine forth as the Sun, in rhe kingdom of their 
 "Father."' " The hope of the righteous shall be gladness ; 
 ** but the expectation of the wicked shall perish."J " An(l 
 
 a 2 Sam. xxii 28. 
 
 f Hebr. xii. 8. 
 
 b Mai. iv. 1—3. 
 
 g Matt xiii. 47 — 50. 
 
 Ik Isa. Ixix. 26. 
 
 h ProT. xiv. 32. 
 
 d Deut. xxxii. 43. 
 
 i Matt. xiii. 41 — i.S, 
 
 e Ex. xxxiv. 7. 
 
 j Prov. X. 28. 
 
'2L2 
 
 '' while they \vriit to buy, the bridegroom came ; and the> 
 " that wei'c ready v. ent in with liim to the marriage : atjd 
 " the door was shut. Afterward came also the other vir- 
 "gins, saying. Lord, Lord, open tons. But he answered 
 " and said, verily I say unto you, I know you not."« " I 
 " create the fruit of the lips; peace, peace, to him that is far 
 '' off, and to him that is near, saith the Lord ; and I will heal 
 " him. But the wicked are like tlie troubled sea, when it 
 " cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt. There 
 " is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked. "►' " For the 
 "preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness j 
 *' but unto us who are saved, it is the power of God."<^ »*But 
 "we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of 
 " them that believe to the saving of the soul."d <' He that 
 " believeth on the Son, hath evej-lasting life ; and he that be- 
 " lieveth not the Son, shall not see life ; but the wrath of 
 " God abideth on liim."« '* And the nations were angry, 
 " and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they 
 " should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward un- 
 " to thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them 
 " that fear thy name, small and great : and shouldest des- 
 " troy them w hich destroy tlie earth."^ " And there shall in no 
 ** wise enter into it, any Ihing that dofileth.ncither whatsoever 
 " worketh abomination, or makcth a lie, but they which are 
 " written in the Lamb's book of life.", " Whose fan is in his 
 '•hand, and he will thoioughly jmige his floor, and gather his 
 ** wheat into the garner; but lie will burn up the chaft'with 
 " unquenchable fire."^ " The men of Nineveh shall rise in 
 "judgment with tliis generation, and shall condemn it : be- 
 *' cause they repented at the preacliing of Jonas ; and be- 
 ** hold, a gi-eater tlian Jonas is liere ! The queen of the 
 " south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, 
 '* and shall condemn it : for she came from the uttermost 
 '* parts of the earth, to hear tlie wisdom of Solomon; and 
 " behold a greater tlian Solomon is here. When the un- 
 " clean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry 
 *' places, seeking rest, and findeth none. Then he saith, I 
 " will return into my house from whence I came out; and 
 " when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. 
 "Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirit* 
 '' more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell 
 
 a Matt. 25; 10—1'-'. e In. 3; 36. 
 
 b I». 57; 19—21. t" Kov. 11; 18. 
 
 c 1 Cor.' 1 ; 1 8. z •*'?''• 2» ; 27. 
 
 rl Heb. 1«; 3'J. ')» Matt. 3; 12. 
 
213 
 
 "theiv: and the last state of that man is worse than the 
 " tirst. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked genera- 
 " tion.'* " Let deal h seize upon tkem, and let tkam go 
 " down quick into hell : for wickedness is in their dwellings, 
 *' and among them. As for we, I will call u])on God, and 
 '< the Lord shall save me" ''Cast thy burden upon the 
 " Lord, and he shall sustain thee : he shall never suiFer the 
 *' righteous to be moved. But thou, O God ! shalt bring 
 " tliem down unto the pit of destruction : bloody and deceit- 
 " ful men shall not live out half their days; but I will trust 
 *' in thee."i> "Who will render to every man accord- 
 '<to his deeds; to them who, by patient continuance 
 « in well doing, seek for glory, and honor, and immor- 
 "tality; eternal life: but unto them that are conten- 
 ** tious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteous- 
 ** ncss, indignation and wratli, tribulation and anguish, up- 
 " on every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and 
 « also of the Gentile. But glory, honor, and peace, to every 
 « man tiiat worketh good ', to the Jew first, and also to the 
 '* Gentile,' for there is no respect of persons with God."c 
 " He that believeth, and is baptized shall be saved ; but he 
 *« that believeth not shall be damned."«i "Marvel not at 
 '< this; for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in 
 « their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; 
 « they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life ; 
 « and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of dam- 
 «nation.''e ** He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and 
 <^ he which is filthy, let him be fifthy still : and he that is 
 " righteous let him be righteous still : and he that is holy, 
 "let him be holy still."^ "And these shall go away into 
 « everlasting punisiiment ; but the righteous into life eter- 
 « nal."g " And besides all this, between us and you there is 
 « a great gulph fixed : so that they which would pass from 
 *< hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that 
 « would come from thence.''^ 
 
 One would suppose that Mr Balfour himself could scarce- 
 ly demand a greater multiplicity of authorities than 1 have 
 cited. That they are to the point, will appear by remai-king 
 the contrast which they note, 1. In the characters of men. 
 They are spoken of as faithful and unprofitable ; humble and 
 
 a Matt. 12; 41—45. e In. 5; 28, 29. 
 
 b Ps. 55; 15, 16,22,23. f Rev. 82:11. 
 
 c Rom. 2; 6—11. g Matt. 25; 46. 
 
 A M^. 16 ; 16. h Luke. 16; 2«. 
 
214 
 
 proud: wise and foolish; good and bad; holy and unjust j 
 lightcous and wicked ; believers and unbelievers. 2. There 
 is a contrast in their standing in the sight of their Maker 
 and Judge ; as they are written or not written in the book of 
 life ; bastards or sons ; adversaries or people ; built on the 
 sand or the rock; condemned or justified ; cursed or blessed. 
 3. There is a contrast in their future destiny ; as they perish 
 or as they are saved ; rewarded or destroyed; gathered a.s 
 heirs of salvation, or cast down, cast away, and driven 
 away, as heirs of perdition ; stored in heaven or burned in 
 hell ; continuing holy still and unjust still ; sentenced ta 
 eternal life and eternal punishment; to torment and com- 
 fort; between which there is an impassable gulph. 
 
 Now if my opponent can prove that good is evil and evil 
 good ; that bitter is sweet and sweet bitter ; that darkness 
 is light and liglit darkness ; and if he can prove in opposi- 
 tion to the above passages, that the righteous shall fall for 
 ever, then may he prove that the finally impenitent shall be 
 saved. 
 
 FOURTH ORTHODOX ARGUMENT. 
 
 NEGATION. 
 
 It is proposed to prove the absolute eternity of the sin- 
 ner's punishment by negative expressions of scripture, in 
 which the termination of that punishment is plainly denied. 
 Eternity is correctly defined by endless duration. It is by 
 such a mode of expression that the bible conveys to us the 
 doctrine of the eternity of God, the eternity of I'hrist's 
 kingdom, and the eternity of the saint's happiness. If these 
 things can be shewn, then the use of such language in rela- 
 tion to the sinner's punishment will cei'tainly prove its abso- 
 lute eternity. These particulars shall now be made out in 
 the order in which they are here mentioned. 
 
 1. Tl»e eternity of God is communicated, by denying that 
 his existence has an end. " Of old hast thou laid the ioun- 
 " dation of ti»e earth, and tlie heavens are the woi-k of thy 
 " hands. They shall perish, but thou shalt endure; yea, all 
 '* of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt 
 ** thou change them, and they shall be changed : but thou 
 '* art the same, and thy years shall have no end."a 
 
 2. The eternity of Christ's kijtgdom is proved in the 
 same way. " His dominion is an everlasting dominion 
 
 a P». cii. 25 — 27. 
 
215 
 
 ** wliich shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which 
 " shall not be destroyed." " Of the increase of his go- 
 " ernment and ptacc there shall be no end, upon the 
 " throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to 
 *' estabJisli it with judgment and with justice, from henceforth 
 *' even for ever." InMr. Ballou's Treatise on Atonement,a 
 he admits the force of these passages, m hen he says that in 
 ** Isaiah ix 6, 7, the Saviour is Prophecied of, as possessing 
 ** a kingdom, the increase of wliich shall have no end. To 
 *' the same purpose see also Dan. vii. 14 " 
 
 3. The eternity of the saint's happiness is declared by ne- 
 gative expressions. " And when the chief Shepherd shall 
 " appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory, that 
 *^ fadeth not away." Again, this is called *' an incor- 
 *' ruptible''^ crown, and " a kingdom Avhich cannol be mo- 
 " ved.'''> "He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed 
 " in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of 
 " the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Fa- 
 " ther, and before his angels.'' " For I will not contend for- 
 " ever, neither will 1 be always wroth." " And God shall 
 *' wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be 
 " no more death, neither, sorrow, nor, crying, neither shall 
 " there beany more pain."c Mr. Ballou, in the place above 
 referred to, admits the force of this last text in the fol- 
 lowing words, viz. *' How can it be said that God shall 
 '* wipe away all tears from the eyes of men, if millions are 
 " to mourn to an endless eternity ? Or, why is it said, there 
 *•' shall be no more sori'ow, crying nor pain, if sorrow, cry- 
 " ing,and infinite pain are never to cease ?" Also, the force 
 of the text preceding the last, is admitted and urged by 
 Mr. Winchester, in his 2d and 4th Dialogues. 
 
 Now if it be admitted by all parties ,• and if it be true, 
 whether admitted or not; that this sort of language is valid 
 proof of the eternity of God, of the eternity of Christ's king- 
 dom, and of the eternity of the Saints' happiness, what but 
 prejudice and unbelief, can prevent us from receiving it, in 
 proof of the eternity of the sinner's punishment? But the re- 
 levancy of such evidence, if it can be found, even in support 
 of this obnoxious doctrine, has already been implicitly ac- 
 knowledged by Mr. Winchester himself, while trying to build 
 a bridge across the impassable gulph. His words are the 
 
 a p. 200. 
 
 b 1 Pet. V. 4. 1 Cor. ix. 25. Hebr xii. 28, 
 
 R Tsa. Ivii. IS. Rev. iii. 5. xx>.4. 
 
216 
 
 following, viz. '*We cannot positively conclude against the 
 " restoration, from tliis passage of the rich niari, unless we 
 *' could find some passages of Scripture, where God has pro- 
 '* mised never to restore, or reconcile such to himself^ whom 
 " he hath once cast off."'* This is as much as to say that if 
 " we could find some passages of scripture, v^ here God has 
 •* promised [or threatened] weter to restore, or reconcile such 
 "to himself, whom he hath once cast otti' then the rich man 
 and all who die in their sins, shall be in torment to an abso- 
 lute eternity. 
 
 ** And the Lord said, my Spirit shall not always strive 
 " with man, for that he also is flesh : yet his days sliall be ait 
 *' hundi-ed and twenty years."'* The meaning of this pas- 
 sage evidently is, that the day of grace, or an opportunity of 
 salvation, shall not last always, but its utmost extent shall be 
 only during a man's life; which was usually seven or eight 
 hundred years before tlie flood, one hundred and twenty after 
 it, and is now three score and ten. 
 
 " j^ot every one that saith unto me Lord, Lord, shall enter 
 " into tlie kingdom of heaven." " For I say unto you that 
 •* none of those which were bidden, shall taste of my supper."*^ 
 " Plead with your mother, plead : for she is not my wifc» 
 " neither am I her husband :'* " and I will not have mercy 
 ** upon her children." " I will no more have mercy upon the 
 *' house of Israel :" *' for ye are not my people, and I will 
 " not be your God." '* He that made them, will not have 
 " mercy on them, and he that formed them will shew them no 
 **favour."<i **For he shall have judgment without mercy, that 
 "hath shewn no mercy." "The same shall drink of the wine 
 ** of the wrath of God, wbich is poured out without mixture, 
 " into the cup of his indignation ; and he shall be tormented 
 *< with fire and brimstone, in the presence of the holy angels, 
 " and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their 
 " torment ascendeth up forever and ever : and they have no 
 " rest day nor night, who worship the beast and liis image, 
 '* and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.'' " But 
 " if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your 
 " Father forgive your trespasses." ** Follow peace with all 
 " men, and holiness, without which, no man shall see the 
 ** Lord." "The Lord is slow to anger, and gi-eat in power, 
 " and will not at all acquit the wicked." " He shall lean up- 
 
 % Dialogue 2nrf. c Matt. vii. 21. Luke xiv. 24. 
 
 h Gen. Ti. 5. <1 Hosea ii. 2. 4. 1; vi. 9. Isa. 27; I 
 
. 217 
 
 " on liis house, but it shall not stand : he shall hold it fast, 
 •' but it shall not endure.'a " Behold ! I I'aiil say unto you, 
 "that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you notiung" 
 " Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it witli thy might; 
 "for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, 
 " in the grave whither thou gocst. ' *' 1 must v. ork the works 
 *' of him that sent me, wliile it is day : the night cometh, 
 «* when no man can work." '• He that, being often reproved, 
 " hardeneth his neck, shall he suddenly destroyed, and tliat 
 *' without remedy.'', " Therefore the ungodly shall not stand 
 '* in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the 
 '* righteous." "There is no peace saith the Lord, unto the 
 " wicked." "He that believeth not the Son, shall not see 
 "life.*' *'No murderer hath eternal life."i> "But the eyes 
 " of the wicked shall/ai/, and they shall not escape, and their 
 " hope shall be as the giving up of the ghost." *'For thus 
 " saith the Lord, thy bruise is incurable^ and thy wound is 
 ** grievous." " Why criest thou for thine affliction ? Thy 
 « sorrow is incurable for the multitude of thine iniquity : be- 
 « cause thy sins were increased I have done these things un- 
 « to thee.'' " For her wound is incurable.'' '* Because there 
 « is wrath, hew are lest he take thee aw ay with his stroke, 
 " then a great ransom cannot deliver thee." " Notie of them 
 " can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a 
 " ransom for him ; (for the redemption of their soul is pre- 
 " cious, and it ceaseth forever;) that he should still live for- 
 " ever, and not see corruption."*^ " Seek ye the Lord, and ye 
 " shall live ,• lest he break out like fire in the house of Jo- 
 " seph, and devour it, and there be none to quench it in 
 " Bethel." " But if ye will not hearken unto me, to hallow 
 " the Sabbath Day, and not bear a burden, even entering in 
 " at the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath Day : then will 
 " I kindle a fiie in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the 
 " palaces of Jerusalem, audit shall not be quenched." '*Cir- 
 " cumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take away the fore- 
 " skins of your heart, ye men of Judah, and inhabitants of 
 ••' Jerusalem : lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn 
 " that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings." 
 *' O house of David ! thus saith the Lord ; execute judgment 
 " in the morning, and deliver him that is spoiled out of the 
 
 aJas. 2;13. Rev. 14; 10, 11. Matt. 6: 15, Hebr. 12: 14, Nab. 1: 3. Jab 
 8; 15. 
 
 bGal. 5. •. Eccles. 9;10. In,9:4. Prov. 29; 1. Ps. 1; 5. Isa. 48;22. In. 
 3: 36. 1 In. 3; 15. 
 
 c Job II: 29. Jer. 30: 12. 15. Mic. 1;9. Job 36; 18. Ps. 49; 6— 9. 
 
 Dd 
 
21S 
 
 *' hand of the oppressor, lest my fury go out like tire, and 
 " burn that nona can quench it, because of the evil of your 
 " doings." " Because they have forsaken me, and have burnt 
 " incense unto other gods, that they might provoke nie to an- 
 " ger with all the works of their hands ; therefore ray wrath 
 "■shall be kindled against this place, and shall mo< be quench- 
 *' ed." '' Son of man, set thy face toward the south, and drop 
 "thy word toward the south, and prophecy a" ainst the forest 
 " of the south field. And say to the forest of the south, hear 
 *' the word of the Lord: thus saith the Lord God; behold I 
 " I will kindle afire in thee, and it shall devour every green 
 *' ti'ee in thee, and every dry tree : the flaming flame shall 
 *' not be quenched, and all faces from the south to the north 
 " shall be burned ther'^^n. And all flesh shall see that I the 
 *' Lord have kindled it : it shall not be quenched. Then said 
 *' I, ah. Lord God ! they say of me, doth he not speak para- 
 " bles?"a " If thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for 
 " thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go 
 " into hel I, into the fire that never shall be quenched ; where 
 " their woini dieth not, and the fii'e is not quenched. And if 
 " thy foot oflfend thee, cut it off; it is better for thee to 
 " enter halt into life, than having two feet to bi; cast into hell, 
 " into the fire that never shall be quenched ; wliire their worm 
 " dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thine eye 
 "offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter 
 " into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two 
 " eyes, to be cast into hell-fire, where their worm dieth not 
 " and the fire is not quenched." *' He will burn up the chaff 
 "with unquenchable Jire.^^ '' There are tlie workers of ini- 
 " quity fallen : they are cast down and shall 7iot be able to 
 ** rise." And in hell he lifted up his eyes being in torments, 
 *' and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 
 " And he cried and said. Father Abraham, have mercy 
 " on me ; and send Lazarus, that he may dip the 
 <' tij) of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am 
 « tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, son, remem- 
 " ber that thou in thy life time, receivedst thy good things, 
 t^ and likewise Lazarus evil things : but now lie is comforted 
 ,* and thou art tormented. And besides all this, between us 
 * and you there is a great gulph fixed ; so that they which 
 *• would pass fi'om hence to you cannot ; neither can they 
 '* pass to us, that would come from thence. "b 
 
 a Amos 5; 6. Jcr. 17;2r. 4; 4. 21 ; 12. 2Kgs. 22;ir. Ez; 20. 43— *8. 
 ^ Mk 9, 43 — i8. Matt. 3, 12. Ps. 36, 12, Luke 16,;23— 26, 
 
219 
 
 «' There is a sin unto death : I do not say that he shall 
 ^' pray for it." " For it is impossible for those who were 
 *' once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly ^ifl, and 
 ** were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted 
 '* of the good word of God, and the powers of the world to 
 '* come, if they shall lall away, to renew them again unto re- 
 " pentance ; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of 
 " God afresh, and put him to an open shame." " For if we^ 
 '* sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of 
 ** the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a 
 ** certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery iudigna^ 
 *nion -which shall devour the adversaries." "And whoso- 
 ** ever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be 
 " forgiven him : but unto him that blasphemeth against the 
 ** Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven." '*But he that shall blas- 
 " pheme against the Holy Ghost, hath never forgiveness, but 
 *' is in danger of eternal damnation." '' It shall not be for- 
 *' given him, neither in this world, neither in the world to 
 *' come."* 
 
 It will not do to deny or despise the above passages, after 
 giving them the name of parables : for this foil was tried ia 
 vain by the adversary, in the time of tzekiel.^ It will not 
 do to get clear of the worm that dietb not, by turning it into 
 a butterfly, as it is said Mr. Mitchel of New- York does. 
 Such objections prove nothing more than the deep depravity 
 or profane levity of those who raise them. Neither will it 
 avail, to show that God has threatened to pour out his un- 
 quenchable fury " upon man and upon beast :''** for if by per- 
 version, we apply to the irrational creation, that which is in- 
 applicable to them, then, to be consistent, we must admit 
 that beasts can sin, repent, and pray ; and that they can ob- 
 tain pardon and salvation ; and of course be liable to an ab- 
 solutely eternal punishment. This will appear from Jonah 
 iii. 8 — 10. " But let man and beast be covered with sack- 
 " cloth, and cry mightily unto God : yea let them turn every 
 " one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their 
 *' hands.'' But such interpretations I consider much of a 
 piece with that which scoffing infidels give to Isa. xxxvii, 
 36. " And when they arose early in the morning, behold 
 ** they were all dead corpses." 
 
 a 1 Jn. V. 16. Hebr. vi. 4.-6. x. 26, 27. Luke xii. 10. Mk. ui. 29. Matt, 
 xii. 32. 
 b XX. 48. 
 e Jer. Tiii 2©. 
 
Many oVthe above threats were directed against the Jewisii 
 nation. It was on that unbelieving and disobedient people, 
 that God said he would have no mercy; they were the sin- 
 ners who were to suffer in unquenchable fire. This fact Mr. 
 Winchester thinks very important to his cause; because 
 there are abundant prophecies, (some of which are uttered in 
 close connexion with the above threatenings,a) that this peo- 
 ple shall hereafter be revived. On this account be thinks 
 himself no loser by admitting that these menaces were exe- 
 cuted. His words are the following, viz. "Now these threat- 
 " enings were surely executed ; for the people did not hear- 
 " ken to G«d : he did certainly kindle a fire, and it burnt 
 *' and was not quenched, but consumed Jerusalem and all her 
 "■ palaces ; and the beautiful forests that were so much es- 
 '' teemed shared the same fate: but what person will argue 
 " that the whole city and country must be now in flames ; 
 *' and must have been consuming, from the days of Jere- 
 ** miah and Ezekiel, because of these expressions, 'the 
 " flaming flame shall not be quenched,' &c. since we know 
 " that Jerusalem, and the country round about, have been 
 '' since inhabited, and will be again, in a more glorious man- 
 ** ner than ever ^''^^ 
 
 This argument of Mr. Winchester seems to take it for 
 granted that the above threatenings were chiefly, if not sole- 
 ly directed against irrational and inanimate objects ; and 
 that when these were destroyed, the prophecy was fully ac- 
 complished, and there was no further call for divine judg- 
 ments. But did he really believe that these menaces were 
 aimed at none but forests, fields, and palaces ? Are not those 
 men who traverse these forests, cultivate these fields, and 
 inhabit these palaces, often expressly mentioned, and always 
 intended, as tlie real objects of these threatenings? Did Je- 
 hovah ever marry or divorce these inanimate creatures ? Did 
 he ever condeinn them as sinners? or was thefire which con- 
 sumed them unquenchable ? Mr. Winchester himself did not 
 believe that the destruction of buildings, trees, and fruits, 
 was a complete fulfilment of God's threatenings against ini- 
 quity. Speaking of futurity beyond the grave, he says that 
 *' all the threatenings will be fulfilled upon the finally impeni- 
 *' tent." "As they have lived and died in sin, their destruo- 
 " tion or misery is certain."*: This doctrine he draws from 
 passages in which the language is fully as figurative as that 
 
 * Hos. i. 'J. 1 0. b Dialogue 2d. 
 
 c Andrews, p. 74. 
 
221 
 
 which speaks of cities and their surrounding country. The 
 following are his own words, viz, " He saith that it is more 
 '* tolerable for the land, that is, the inhabitants of Sodom, in 
 ** the day of judgment, than for the cities where his gospel 
 *' was preached, and his miracles wrought, and yet the in- 
 •Miabitants remained impenitent: See St. Matt. xi. 24. x. 
 ♦« 15, St. Mk. vi. 11. St. Luke, x. 12. From all which pas- 
 ** sages it is evident that the inhabitants of Sodom will be 
 ** condemned in the day of judgment, and punished in the 
 " lake of tire."a To be consistent, therefore, he should have 
 told us that it was not only the conflagration of Jerusalem, 
 but this lake of fire beyond the grave, to which the objects 
 of the above threatenings were consigned. 
 
 Now did Mr. Winchester, or do any of his followers, be- 
 lieve that those murderous unbelieving Jews, who were cut 
 off in their sins near two thousand years ago, and who, ac- 
 cording to his own confession, will be sent to the lake of fire, 
 in the day of judgment ; — do they believe, that long after 
 that period, these same unbelieving Jews are to be taken 
 from this lake of fire to heaven, as a fulfilment of those scrip- 
 tures which predict the restoration of their distant posterity 
 to the favour of God, and the possession of Jerusalem ? If 
 they do not believe an absurdity, so transeendantly absurd, 
 they ought not to expect ms to do it. These promises relate 
 to the restoration of those Jews who shall hereafter live and 
 die in the faith of Christ : those threatenings condemn to 
 unquenchable fire, their remote ancestors who lived and died 
 in unbelief and rebellion. Could the destruction of their 
 city extinguish the unquenchable fury of their Almighty 
 Judge? or could the faith of their posterity avert his just in- 
 dignation? They must perish through their own sins, and 
 their posterity shall be graciously justified through that faith 
 which is the gift of God. Thus it is easy to reconcile God's 
 threats of eternal punishment against the city of Jerusalem 
 and the land of Judea, with his promises of eternal happi- 
 ness to the same city and land. The promise was connect- 
 ed with the faith of Christ, and the threat was against unbe- 
 lievers. 
 
 My opponent well knows that much stress is laid upon those 
 passages which condemn the sin against the Holy Ghost. 
 He finds one among them, which says that the perpetrator 
 of this crime is " in danger of eternal damnation." This he 
 thinks is far from deciding that he will certainly incnr this 
 
 a IJialogue stir. 
 
222 
 
 punishment. All is not lost that is in danger. But is h« 
 sure that this remark will apply here? He sometimes affects 
 a oreat familiarity with the original languages. A little ex- 
 amination will show hiin that the person here spoken of is 
 represented as not only in danger of eternal damnation, not 
 only obnoxious, liable^ subject to eternal punishment, but de- 
 serving of it, and bound over to it. That this is the force of 
 the word in this place is evident from the words immediately 
 preceding ; where it is declared that he "hath never forgive- 
 ness;'' and from the parallel passages which forbid us to pray 
 for such sinners ; which declare it impossible to renew them 
 again into repentance; that there remaineth no more sacri- 
 iice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment 
 and fiery indignation ; that " it shall not be forgiven ;" and 
 again, that " it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this 
 '* world, neither in the world to come." 
 
 Strong as this language is, it is hardly stronger than that 
 of the other passages adduced. Although they are not des- 
 cribed as having committed the unpardonable sin, yet as they 
 b^d forsaken Got/, and burned incense unto other gods; as 
 they did not hallow the Sabbath ; as they were ivorkers of 
 iniquity; and as their sins ivere increased^ and persevered in, 
 therefore their bruise, their sorrow, their wound should be 
 incurable ; their hope should be as the giving up of the ghost. 
 God would not always strive with them ; he would not for- 
 give, he would not acquit them ; he would show them no 
 mercy, no favour ; they should not seethe Lord ; they should 
 have no peace, wo rest; and yet should be able, to perform wo 
 work, no device, no knowledge no wisdom, connected with 
 salvation : they could not endure, and yet could not escape. 
 Jehovah declared that he was not their God, not their hus- 
 band ; tliat they were not his wife, not his people ; that they 
 should not be delivered, not redeemed, not ransomed ; that 
 they should not stand in judgment, not in the congregation of 
 the righteous, but with worms that should not die, and in fire 
 that should not be quenched ; on the infernal side of a gulph 
 which could not be pass(>d ; where they could not see life; 
 could not have eternal life ; where they could not taste of 
 the Master's supper; but should drink of the cup of God's 
 wrath without mixture, have judgment without mercy, and 
 destruction without remedy. 
 
 No wonder that those who, in defiance of all these scrip 
 tural negations, deny the absolute eternity of the sinner's pun- 
 isbraeot, deny also the plenary inspiration of the bible. 
 
223 
 
 :fifth orthodox argument. 
 
 AFFIUMATION. 
 
 It is proposed to prove the absolute eternity of the sinnej.s 
 punishment, by passages of scripture in which this doctrine 
 is affirjned. This aflirnjation may be in two forms of ex- 
 pression ,• the one declaring the state ofthe damned, theotlier 
 declaring the duration of their punishment. To say that an 
 Hebrew bondman had his ear boi'ed, is the same as saying 
 that he was to be a servant for life ;— to afllirm that a young 
 religieuse has taken the veil, is precisely equivalent to an af- 
 firmation that she is to be immui-ed for life,* — so, those scrip- 
 tures which assert that the wicked are cast into helK and 
 those which assert that they are bound over to eternal dam- 
 nation, are equivalent to each other. Although one class of 
 texts points out more expressly the state of the damned, and 
 the other class more expressly the duration of their punish- 
 ment, it shall, with the help of God, be shewn that they both 
 affirm the solemn truth that the sufferings of these unbeliev- 
 ers are absolutely eternal. These things may now be con- 
 sidered in their order. 
 
 I. 
 THE STATE OF THE DAMNED. 
 
 That there is a hell, and that the finally impenitent liavQ 
 their portion there, is a matter of plain revelation. " Who- 
 " soever shall say, thou fool, shall be in danger of ^c/Z-fire." 
 *• But he knoweth not that the dead are there ; and that her 
 "guests are in the depths of hellJ*' "Her house is tlie way 
 •' to hell^ going down to the chambers of death." " Her feet 
 *■* go down to death, her steps take hold on /te//." " But I will 
 **= forewarn you whom ye shall fear: fear him, which, after 
 '* he hath killed, hath power to cast into helL Yea I say unto 
 *' you, fear him." " And fear not them which kill the body, 
 ** but are not able to kill the soul : but rather fear him, which 
 " is able to destroy both soul and body in Ae//.'* '♦ God spared 
 *' not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and 
 " delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto 
 " judgment.'' " The wicked sliall be turned into hell, and all 
 '* the nations that for-get God." " Let death seize upon them. 
 " and let them go down quick into hell.*' " Therefore hell 
 " hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without mea- 
 " sure : and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, 
 ^' and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it." "* It is better 
 *' far thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands. 
 
2S4 
 
 " to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched." 
 " And in Ae//, he lilted up his eyes, being in torments ;" be- 
 tween which and the happiness of heaven, there was an iin- 
 p?.ssable gulph. Well might our Saviour then ask, " how 
 can ye escape the damnation of hell ?"a 
 
 An Universalist polemic has a ready answer to all these 
 authorities. He tells you that our translators have hei'c 
 used the word hell to render four distinct words in the origi- 
 nal, neither of which denotes a state of eternal punishment. 
 These four words Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, and Tartarus^ arc 
 so innocent in their view, that they form the scenes of their 
 niiist protracted and delightful literary excursions. On them 
 alone, Mr. Balfour has w ritten a volume of four hundred and 
 forty-one pages octavo. The size of the book does not as- 
 tonish those who have w aded through its pendantie lore and 
 tiresome tautology. By these means, and by the greater use 
 of irrelevant extracts from other autliors, (a practice with 
 which he is acquainted) he might enlarge it indefinitely; and 
 the admiration of certain readers mig;ht keep pace with its 
 growth. 
 
 It is confessed that his voluminous extracts from Dr. Geo: 
 Campbell of Aberdeen, are relevant, thougli not always cor- 
 rect. The career of this great man is not an enviable one. 
 The pride of originality, and the lust of praise led him fre- 
 quently astray. For fear of being esteemed a servile fol- 
 lower of the orthodoxy of his fathers, he became the dupe of 
 the erroneous. Under the promise of liberty, they reduced 
 him to slavery : and their subsequent treatment has been 
 like that of Pharaoh to the Israelites, or the devil to Eve. 
 Because he would not renounce every particle of the truth, 
 and shew them the hundredth favour, they would not thank 
 him for the ninety-nine. The following is Mr. Balfour's 
 character of this accommodating scholar, viz. " It should be 
 *' kept ill remembrance, that Dr. Campbell was a very cele- 
 *' brated minister of the church of Scotland, and Principal of 
 ** Marischal College, Aberdeen. The most learned, yea, the 
 '* very best of men, are liable to be influenced by the places 
 " of honour and emolument tliey occupy. There is no doubt 
 "in my mind, that had Dr. Campbell written in a situation 
 *' free of all restraint, he would have given us a very differ- 
 " ent account of Gehenna and its punishment. The doctrine 
 
 a MaU. V. 22. Prov. ix. 18. vii. 27. v. 5, Luke xii. 6. Matt. x. 28. 2 Pet, 
 ii.4. P». ix. 17. It. 15. Mk.ix.43. Lukexvi.23. Matt, xxiii. 33. 
 
225 
 
 '' of eternal misery, was a principal article in the creed he 
 " was obliged to subscribe to, and by which he lield his 
 " phice and all its emoluments : It is rather a matter of sur- 
 " prise that he ventured to write so much at variance with this 
 " doctrine, considering the time he lived, and circumstan- 
 " ces in which he was placed."* 
 
 This is the reward wliich Dr. Campbell has generally re- 
 ceived for those servile compliances, wliich he vainly ima- 
 gined, constituted the essence of independence. He is here 
 represented as an Universalist in heart, while a Presbyteri- 
 an by a solemn profession. His place of honour and emo- 
 lument is here given as his reason for being a Presbyterian ; 
 and it was only the love of filthy lucre that kept him from 
 professing an opposite system of religion. But what must 
 we think of the morality of Universalism, when we are told 
 by its champion, that "the very best of men are liable to be 
 influenced by" such motives ? And let it be remembered that 
 this is no hasty or novel concession ; for these Universalist 
 Unitarians claim Locke, Newton, and a host of worthies, 
 while allowing that they were guilty of the same inconsis- 
 tency. But must not that be the synagogue of Satan, in whose 
 eyes the avaricious and deceitful, liars and perjured persons, 
 are " the very best of men ,'" 
 
 Dr. Campbell's example and reward should be an instruc- 
 tive lesson to those who are beset with his temptations. They 
 would persuade you to deny or conceal the doctrines of origi- 
 nal sin and natural inability, and the doctrines of pai'ticular 
 election and redemption. They will then represent you as 
 in the high road to fame. The mead of flattery is pleasant : 
 they perceive that it is relished by you : they see you advan- 
 cing in error: their mouths are open for a burst of applanse, 
 upon your next step towards destruction. You make anoth- 
 er effort to please ; and completely succeed, by asserting that 
 God has uttered threats, which never were executed, and ne- 
 ver will be executed, either on the actual offender, or on his 
 surety, If they were pleased with your advocating an uni- 
 versal atonement, which according to the scriptures, would 
 secure an universal salvation ; they are more pleased with 
 your adding to this, a virtual denial of God's faithfulness 
 and justice, which would for ever secure them from the fear of 
 damnation. Although this doctrine was preached in Eden^ 
 before the fall of man, by a superhuman intelligence, your 
 seducers will give you the praise of originality, and extra- 
 
 a Chap. ii. Sec. 1. 
 
 E E 
 
226 
 
 ordinary intellectiuil vigour. You are now a manof an inde- 
 pendent spirit : you have escaped from the shackles of pa- 
 rental example ; of human authority, of sectarianism, supersti- 
 tion and higotry. By this time you have a justei- sense of 
 your own impoi'tance. You clearly ])erceive the \ ast supe- 
 riority of your attainments, over those of the Westminster 
 Assembly, the Synod of Dort, the Reformers, and Augus- 
 tine ; although in reality, not fit to be placed with the dogs 
 of their flocks. If the Rubicon is not already past, only one 
 step remains to do it : Deny all imputation ; not o))ly the 
 imputation of Chiist's righteousness to his people; not only 
 the transfer of Adam's guilt to his posterity ; but the impu- 
 tation of our sins to Christ. Quote to them the beginning 
 of Ezekiel xviii, and shew that the law does not admit of a 
 substitute. Then give up all hopes from the orthodox, and 
 " make an agreement with me hy a present, and come out 
 " to me : and eat ye every one of his vine ; and every one of his 
 *' fig-tree, and drink ye every one the waters ofhis own 
 " cistern ; until I come and take you away to a land like 
 ** your own land, a land of corn and wine, a land of bread 
 *• and vineyards. "a But if you refuse to take the two last 
 steps above mentioned, and alTthe others which are conse- 
 quent upon them ; — if you prefer remaining in that church 
 to whose creed you have sworn, — remember, that although 
 we may praise you, while living, for that portion of error 
 which you have received, we shall, after your death, place 
 you with " the very best of men," such as Dr. Campbell, 
 and Judas and Esau; all of whom sold their birthrights for 
 a mess of pottage. When such a man dies, his own flatter- 
 ers precede the Orthodox in blasting his fame. "The me- 
 " mory of the just is blessed : but the name of the wicked 
 *• shall rot."'' 
 
 But it is time to examine the amount of Dr. Campbell's 
 authority, and the use, or rather the abuse which has been 
 made of it by the Universalists. My opponent asserts that 
 Dr. Cambell has " given up all but the term Gehenna, as a 
 " place of future punishment for the wicked." He gives it 
 as Dr. Campbell's avowed belief that hades and sheol '* have 
 " no reference whatever to a state of punishment after 
 " death."c Mr. Balfour, in speaking of Dr. Campbell's ob- 
 servations upon the *' place of torment for the wicked," says; 
 *' He denies that it is called by the names iSheol, Hades, or 
 
 a Is. xxxvi, 16, 17, c Minutes, p. 176. 
 
 b ProT. X. 7. 
 
227 
 
 *' Tartarus .-yea, he denies that the Hebrew, Greek, or En- 
 *• glish languages, afford a name for this place of torment."* 
 This goes even farther than my opponent; and denies that 
 Dr. Campbell believed any of these four names, even Gehen- 
 na itself, to denote the place of torment. This may seem 
 astonishiuj^ to those v^^bo are informed, that only three pa- 
 ges before this extravagant assertion, he had quoted and 
 censured tbe Doctor's declaration to the contrary, concern- 
 ing Gehenna ; and in a distant part of the same work,'' he 
 says " that he denies that Hades is the place of eternal pun- 
 ishment j and tbat be contends for Gehenna being this 
 place." Could it be expected tbat only four pages before 
 this, he had quoted Dr. Campbell's own words, in which he 
 declared the contrary ? The passage is as follows, viz : 
 " But is there not one passage, it may be said, in which 
 the word Hades must be understood as synonymous with 
 Gehenna, and consequently must denote the place of final 
 punishment prepared for tbe wicked, or Hetl in tbe Chris- 
 tian acceptation of tbe term ? Ye have it in the story of the 
 rich man and Lazarus, Luke x>i. 23, ' In Hell, sv tw a(5*i, he 
 lifted up his eyes, being in torments^ and seeth Abraham afar 
 off, and Lazarus in his bosom.'' This is the only passage in 
 Holy Writ which seems to give countenance to tbe opinion 
 that hades sometimes means the same thing as gehenna. 
 Here it is represented as a place of punishment. The rich 
 man is said to be tormented there in tbe midst of flames.'' 
 
 Thus does the favourite autlior of the Universalists bear 
 testimony against them. He declares tbat in this important 
 passage, the woid Hades denotes " the place of final punish- 
 " ment prepared for the wicked, or Hell^ in the Christian ac- 
 " ceptation of the term :" and let it be marked, that he be- 
 lieved this Hell, this Hades, this Gehenna^ to be a place of 
 absolutely eternal punisbment; which belief is proved to be 
 correct by the passage quoted above. This point being es- 
 tablished, there is a strong probability, if not a certainty, 
 that Sheol also, signifies the place of everlasting punisbment, 
 since tbe Septuagint generally renders sheol by hades ; and 
 it is acknowldged by both parties, that they arc synony- 
 mous. In speaking of Sheol^ Campbell says tbat " in trans- 
 ** latingthat word, tbe Seventy have almost invariably used 
 "■ Hades." The same fact has been stated by my opponent 
 in the very same words.* Mr. Balfour says that *■' iSheol and 
 
 a Chap. ii. Sec; 1. o Minutes, p. 135. 
 
 b Chap. i. Scb. 3. 
 
5>28 
 
 " Hades are only the Greek and Hebrew names for the same 
 " place."a 
 
 The fact that these two words, occurring in the Old and 
 New Testaments, are synonymous, after the meaning of one 
 of thenns thus fail ly settled, proves that the doctiine of a fu- 
 ture state is common to both dispensations. This, thougli de- 
 nied by my opponent, is admitted by Mr. Baifour. The fol- 
 lowing are his words, viz : " That both future existence and 
 " the resurrection of the dead, were in some degi'ce known 
 *' under the old dispensation, we think can be proved." For 
 proof of this, he refers to several scriptures.ij He also gives 
 an extract from Jahn^s Biblical Aarchceloyy^ in which, scrip- 
 turcc is produced to prove " reception into the presence of 
 God at death. "^ The adoption of the question under discus- 
 sion, would indicate that my opponent believes in a separate 
 existence of the soul from the body, as Mr. Balfour does. 
 But in your presence, and elsewhere, he has proved himself 
 a Materialist. He not only denies that the Old Testament 
 reveals a future state, but that either the old or New Testa- 
 ment contains the doctrine of an intermediate state. It is 
 not my design, however, to notice these questions, at present, 
 except as they are merged in the argument which is now in 
 hand ; in the prosecution of which it becomes necessary to ex- 
 amine, as concisely as possible, the meaning of the inspired 
 words, Sheol, Bacies, Gehenna^ and lartarus, in the order 
 in which they are here placed. 
 
 1. 
 
 SHUOL. 
 
 Mr. Balfour has already told us that this word occurs six- 
 ty-four times in the Hebrew Bible. Those who will take 
 the trouble to examine them with the aid of a concordance, 
 will probably find the following account to be correct. 
 
 (J ) In two passages it appears to signify the grave. 
 " Like sheep they are laid in Sheol.'* Our bones are scatter- 
 ed at the mouth of Slieol.'^ 
 
 (2.) There are three passages, in which it appears to em- 
 brace the interment of the body, and the final condition of 
 the soul. Korah, Dathan, and Abiram are said to " go down 
 alive into Sheol.'"' " They and all that appertained to them^ 
 went down alive into Sheol.*' Solomon makes the robber 
 
 a Chap. i. Sec. 2. d Balfour, Cliap. ii. Sec. 6. Chap. i. Sec. 1. 
 
 b Mark xii 26, 27. Heb. xith Chap, d Pa. 49 : 14 j 141 ; 7. 
 c Hag. 2. US, Eccl, 12, 7, 
 
229 
 
 say,*' Let us swallow them up alive as SheoU and whole as 
 " those that go down into the pit."* 
 
 (3.) There are five places, in which it seems to exclude 
 the interment of the hody This does not appear from three 
 of them, in which Jacob's gray hairs are represented as 
 brought down with sorrow to sfieol; except by a comparison 
 with a fourth, in wliich he expected to find in sheol, his son 
 Joseph, whom he believed to have been devoured by wild 
 beasts, and of course, not be in the grave. The fifth is the 
 one in which Jonah is said to cry to God "out of the belly 
 of sheol.^''^ and of course not out of tlie grave. 
 
 (4.) There are 13 otlier places in which, without stop- 
 ping to discuss the subject I humbly conceive it signifies 
 the intermediate state of all the dead, saints and sinners. 
 I shall simply refer to the texts, <= This sheol, or state of se- 
 paration, must come to an end ; because at the resurrection, 
 the souls and bodies of men must be reunited. 
 
 (5.) There are two instances, in which it evidently means 
 the separate state of the happy dead. " O that thou wouldst 
 hide me in sheol! that thou wouldst keep me secret, until 
 thy wrath be past, that thou wouldst appoint me a set time 
 and remember me." " For thou wilt not leave my soul ia 
 sheol, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see crorup- 
 tion." As the soul of the Redeemer, after the crucifixion, 
 went to Paradise, this is the sheol here mentioned ; and 
 there it was that Job wished to be hidA 
 
 (6.) Although in the passages referred to, under number 
 four, this word appears to embrace heaven and hell, until 
 the resurrection ; there are six places in which it denotes the 
 latter in contrast with the former. Concerning God's om- 
 niscience. Job says, "It is as high as heaven, what canst 
 thou do ? deeper than sheol^ what canst thou know.'"' The 
 Psalmist says, "If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there, 
 if I make my bed in sheol, behold thou art there." " Solo- 
 mon says, *' the way of life is above to the wise, that he may 
 depart from sheol beneath." "Moreover the Lord spake 
 unto Ahaz, saying, ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God; 
 ask it either in sheol, or in the height above." " Though 
 they dig into sheol, thence shall mine hand take them,- though 
 
 a Numb. xvi. 30, 33. Pror. i. 12. 
 b Gen. 42; 38,44; 31, 29. Jonah 2; 2. 
 
 c 1 Sam. 2; 6. Job, 7; 9, 17; 13, 16, 26; 6. Ps. 6; 5, 88; 3. 89: 48. EctsI.9:10 
 li. 38; 18. Hos. 13: 14. 2 ice. Hab. 2; 5. 
 d Job, 14; 13. Ps. 16;1G. 
 
:>30 
 
 tliey climb up to heaven, thence will I bring them down."* 
 (7.) There ai-e eleven places in addition to the nine men- 
 tioned in numbers two and six above, in which it is proba- 
 bly used to denote the place of future punishment. " Let 
 *' not his hoar head go down to sheol in peace.'* *' Norh his 
 " hoar head bring thou down to sheol with blood." " O 
 " Lord ! thou hast brought up my soul from sheol : thou hast 
 " kept me alive tliat I should not go down to the pit.*' Here 
 is a synonivious parallel^ in which the latter clause of the 
 verse explains the meaning of the former. **His soul was 
 virtually brought up from hell, by his being delivered from 
 the pow cr of tbe devil, and preserved from going to the pit. 
 ** Thy pomp is brought dow n to slieoU* " Sheollrova beneath 
 " is moved for thee, to meet thee at thy coming." As our Sa- 
 viour speaks of the rich man's sufferings in another world, 
 while his body was in the grave, so the body of this fallen 
 hero is represented as covered with worms, while yet his 
 soul, and the souls of "all the chief ones of the earth,"*' all 
 "the kings of the nations," are in the exercise of a sort of 
 activity and intelligence, and suffering under degradation 
 and punishment in another world. Again, the prophet 
 threatens him, " Yet thou shalt be brought down to sheol, to 
 tlie sides of the pit." That this is not the grave, but a place 
 of future punishment, will appear from Job xxxiii. 24, where 
 deliverance from going down to this pit^ is said to be the 
 end of Christ's gracious interposition, as a Ransom or 
 Atonement ; (as it is in the margin.) Now the atonement 
 Aoes\ircHerve from going down to Hell, but not from going 
 down to the gi'ave. "We have made a covenant with death 
 and with sheol are we at agreement " " Your covenant 
 *' with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with 
 *'«/ieo/ shall not stand." "I said, in the cutting off of my 
 '• days, I shall go to the gates of sheol.^^ " For sheol can- 
 *' not praise thee ; death cannot celebrate thee: they that 
 " go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth."* 
 
 (8.) There are 25 places in which sheol is certainly used 
 for helU in the Christian sense of the word. Moses, in speak- 
 ing of men, under the figures of the earth and the mountains^ 
 (language familiar to the scriptures,)d says, " For a fire is 
 
 a Job, II; 8. Pg. 139; 8. Prov. 15,24. Is, 7. 11. Am. 9. 2. 
 
 b This i« the true force of the ^ in this and some other passagt;^. 
 
 c I Kg8. ii. 6, 9 Ps. XXX. 3. Is. xiv. 9. 11 15 '28. 15. 18. 38. 10. 
 d See Deut. xxxii. 1. Ps, xcvi. 1. 11. 1 Chr. xvi. 31. 33. Is. ii. 2. 41. IS- 
 Ei. vi. 2. 
 
231 
 
 ** kindled in mine angcrand shall burn unto the lowest slieol, 
 "and shall consume tlie eai'th with her iiici-ease, an<l set on 
 •*fire the foundations of the mountains."" David says, " thou 
 " hast delivered my soul from the lowest sheoi ;'\, and the 
 same writer says again, '* The sorrows of sheoi compassed 
 ** me about ; the snares of death prevented me :"c and again, 
 *• The sorrows of death compassed me, and the pains of 
 " sheol gat hold upon me : I found trouble and soi'io\v."«i Af- 
 ter quoting this text, my o])ponent speaks as follows, viz. 
 •* We there find the Psalmist declaring that ' the pains of hell' 
 " had actually got hold of him. Now if the pains of hell 
 " had actually got hold of him, will it do to say that he re- 
 *' turned thanks to God that he had preserved him from going 
 *• into hell, or that he had not been there ?''e In reply, I 
 would observe that this reasoning of my opponent proves too 
 much, and therefore will avail him nothing. The text in 
 question has several clauses. In the first the Psalmist says, 
 '* The sorrows of death compassed me.'* In the second he 
 says, *' the pains of hell gat hold upon me." Now if the 
 second clause prove that he was in hell, does not the first 
 prove that he died before he went thither ? In answer to 
 this question, my opponent has expressly declared, that " the 
 " sorrows of death are all ex])erienced and felt, before death 
 ** actually takes place."t This is true: but it is no less true, 
 that the pains of hell gat hold upon him, before he was actu- 
 ally sent to hell. These three texts are all tantamount to 
 Ps. XXX. 3, noticed in No. 7, above, in which the latter 
 line of the distich explains tlie former : *' O Lord ! thou 
 •* hast brought up my soul from sheoi: thou hast kept me 
 " alive, that I should not go down to the pit." The same 
 interpretation is to be applied to Solomon's instruction for 
 the correction of a child : " Thou shalt beat him with the 
 " rod, and shalt deliver his soul from sheoVs The Psalmist 
 says, " Let death seize upon them, and let them go down 
 *' quick into sheol: for wickedness is in their dwellings and 
 " and among them."h Concerning the impure of both sexes, 
 Solomon says, " But he knoweth not that the dead are there. 
 
 a Deut xxxii. 22. i^'L 
 
 b Ps. Ixxxvi. 13. \^*t 
 
 c 2 Sam. xxii. 6. S: Ps. xviii. 5. "T; ^ 
 
 d Ps. cxvi, 3. 
 
 e .Minutes p. cxli, 
 
 f Little yellow covered sermon, published m 1894, p. 3i. 
 
 g Prov. xxiii. 14. 
 
 h Ps. It. 15. 
 
232 
 
 *^ and that her guests are in the depths of sheoV " Her feet 
 ** go down to death; her steps talcc hold on sheoL^^ These 
 passages are explained by another which, says, " Her 
 "house is the way*to sheol; go"ig down to the chambers of 
 ''death."" To such characters Isaiah says,*' thou"' " didst 
 " debase thy self even unto sheoh''^^ Whether this hell was 
 before or after death, may be learned from Ezekiel who says 
 of a certain character, *• he went down to sheol.'* "least 
 ** him down to sheol, with them that descend into the pit." 
 *' They also went down into s/ieol with him, unto them tbat 
 *' be slain with the sword." " The strong among the migh- 
 "ty shall S|)eak to him out of the midst oi sheol with them 
 ** that help him : they are gone down, they lie uncircumcis- 
 ** ed, slain by the sword. ' *' And they shall not lie with the 
 ** mighty that are fallen of the uncircumcised, which are 
 *' gone down to sheol, with their weapons of war: and they 
 * have laid their swords under their heads, but their iniqui- 
 "ties shall be upon their bones, though they were the terror 
 " of the mighty in the land of the living.'*c That this hell 
 was not before death, is evident, because the subjects of it, 
 though formerly " in the land of tlie living," were " slain with 
 the sword,'' before they went to hell. That sheol here means 
 something more than the interment of the body, appears from 
 their speaking to one another out of the midst of sAeo/, as 
 did the rich man and Lazarus. They had vainly expected 
 that by laying their swords under their heads in the grave, 
 they should take their weapons of war with them to sheol. 
 Contempt is here thrown upon this expectation, by ironical- 
 ly asserting its truth. Instead of this, however, it is de- 
 clai'ed that " their iniquities, or the punishment of their ini- 
 ** quities, shall be upon their bones." This shews that they 
 were in torment with the rich man, whose iniquity was upon 
 his tongue. With a view to the reception of many such cha- 
 racters, Isaiah says, ** iSheol hath enlarged herself, and open- 
 ** ed her mouth without measure : and theii* glory, and theii* 
 "multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall des- 
 *' cend into it.''d The Restitutionists say that this mouth 
 which is opened witliout measure, shall one day be satisfied. 
 'Rnt *'■ sheol* is declared by Solomon, to be one of those 
 things that say, *• it is not enough."^ They and the Des- 
 
 a Prov. ix. 18. v. 5. vii. 27. 
 
 b Is. Ivii. 9. 
 
 c Ez. xxxi. 15—17.32. 21< 2". 
 
 d Is. T. 14. 
 
 e Prov. ,\xx. 16. 
 
233 
 
 tructionists think that after '* Sheol hath enlarged herself," 
 she will nevertheless become superannuated, and die. This 
 is correct, when apj)lied to number four above. There will, 
 at the resurrection, be a re-union of the souls and the bodies 
 of men, and therefore a state of separation will be forever at 
 an end. Thus sheoU in that sense, may be said to be " old 
 and full of days,'* or satisjied with living, as Moses says 
 Isaac was, wlien he was gathered to his people, and his sons 
 buried him. But although sheol^ a state of separation, will 
 be full of days ; sheol, a state o^ destruction^ never will be 
 full. Solomon says, " Sheol and destruction Sive never full: 
 *' so the eyes of man are never satisfied.''^ ^ If this destruc- 
 tion meant annihilation, then Solomon would not have said, 
 ** Sheol and dest) action are before the Lord.''^ If those who 
 go to sheol, are to be annihilated, then that is the very city 
 of refuge, to which God's incorrigible enemies would flee, af- 
 ter they have called in vain for the rocks and mountains to 
 fall upon them, and hide them from his presence. But in 
 Ps. cxxxix: 7, mentioned in number six, above ; David says, 
 " Whither sliall I go from thy Spirit ? or whither shall I 
 flee from thy presence ? If I ascend up into heaven, thou 
 art there; if I make my bed in s/eeo/, behold thou art there, "c 
 Dr. Campbell says, " It is plain that in the Old Testa- 
 " ment, the most profound silence is observed in regai'd to 
 ** the state of the deceased, their joys, or sorrows, happiness 
 *' or misery;" that sheol "is always represented under those 
 "figures which suggest something dreadful, dark and «z/e«^." 
 In making these remarks, he probably had his eye, upon 
 such passages as that in which David says, *' Let the wick- 
 *' ed be ashamed, and let them be silent in sheoL''''^ But let 
 it be recollected that this great man declined the " enumera- 
 " tion and examination of all the passages in both Testa- 
 " ments wherein the word is found," as an endless task. If 
 he had examined Ez. xxxii. 21, quoted above, in which a 
 heatlien is represented as speaking " outof the midst of sAeo/," 
 would he have said that this was " always represented" as 
 silent ? The truth is, it is sometimes represented in one light 
 and sometimes in the other. Its silence denotes dismay, 
 and its utterance is the language of persevering impiety, and 
 hopeless importunity; weeping, wailing, and gnashing of 
 
 a Prov. xxvii. 20. c In. No. 6. this is among the 
 
 b ProT. XV. 11. contrattl,\n'S(^. 7, it is recognis- 
 
 ed as A probable, it might bejustlj 
 added to tiiose which are deem- 
 d Ps. xxxi, 17. ed certain, 
 
 Ff > 
 
234 
 
 teeth. Between these two representations there is no incoH- 
 sistency. Precisely the same diversity occurs in our Sa- 
 viour's representations of the day of judgment ; as they are 
 found in Matt. xxii. 11 — IS, and xxv. 41 — 46. In one of 
 these passages the convict is represented as " speechless ;** 
 in the other, as justifying himself. But in both cases, whe- 
 ther they be Jews or Gentiles, they are sent to deserved 
 punishment; for *' the wicked shall be turned into sheolf and 
 *' all the nations that forget God.''* From this all their ho- 
 nours and pleasures cannot preserve them. Though they 
 "were '* clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptu- 
 ously every day ;' they are liable at any moment, to have 
 it said to them, " thou fool, this night thy soul shall be re- 
 quired of thee." " They spend their days in wealth, and in 
 a moment go down to sheol.*\ Though in this world they 
 wei'e protected from the heat, by tents of state, and roofs of 
 cedar, by refreshing air and every healthful and exhilarating 
 potion, it shall be fti»' otherwise there* *' Drought and heat 
 ** consume the snow waters : so doth slieol those which have 
 ** sinned.''* Although God is not cruel but just, in thus con- 
 suming them for ever, without the possibility of annihila- 
 tion or restitution, Solomon calls their state of punishment 
 crueLy on account of the intensity and the duration of their 
 torments. ** J ealousy*^ is cruet as sheol. The coals thereof are 
 coalH of fire, which hath a most vehement flame."e Thus did 
 the rich man in the gospel find it If his torment be sorrow 
 and misery^ then the Old Testament is not si lent on this sub- 
 ject, as Dr. Campbell has, without examination, asserted it 
 to be. 
 
 2. 
 HADES. 
 We arc already informed by Mr. Balfour, " that the word 
 " Hades is only used eleven times in the New Testament. 
 ** It is rendered in the common version once grave, and in 
 all the other ten places, by the word heli.^\ Two of these 
 passages are the same declaration of our Saviour, reported 
 by two Evangelists. " And thou C'apcrnaum ! which art 
 exalted to heaven, shalt be thrust down to hades.*\ 'J'his is 
 tantamount to a denunciation of the prophet Obadiah against 
 
 a Pa ix. 17- 
 
 b Job, xxi. 13. 
 
 c Jol>, xxiv. 19, 
 
 d Thtti is, the jealousj of G od, as id the second commandraent. 
 
 c Cant. viii. 0. 
 
 f Chap, i, Hcc. 3, g Matt. xi. 23. Luke x. 15. 
 
236 
 
 Edom. ** Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and thougli 
 thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will 1 bring thee 
 down, saith the Lord." In the verse immediately preceding, 
 the prophet informs us that this exaltation of the Edomites 
 to the stars was in their own conceit. " The pride of thy 
 heart hath deceived thee." They thought their fortress in 
 the rock, to he the summit of safety ; but God thr'catens their 
 downfall. So the people of Capernaum tliought that they had 
 attained the pinnacle of prosperity, and that their happiness 
 was to be permanent. But Christ lets them know that their 
 fall shall be as low as their imaginary elevation was exalt- 
 ed. What divine justice threatened, divine faithfulness 
 doubtless executed. 
 
 There are four instances in which hades appears to denote 
 the state of separate spirits, whose bodies are in the grave. 
 Peter quotes David's prophecy concerning Clirist's resur- 
 rection, and the consequent re-union of his human soul and 
 body; *' thou wilt not leave my soul in Aa(/t?s, nor suffer 
 thine holy one to see corruption." The Apostle then adds. 
 " His soul was not left in hades, neither his flesh did see 
 corruption."* As Christ's vicarious and law ^satisfying death 
 removes the sting of his people's death ; so his resurrection 
 is a victory over hades, by securing the happy re uniun of 
 the souls and bodies of his people. Therefore the Spirit 
 says, " O death ! where is thy sting? O hades ! whei-e is thy 
 victory ?"'» The divine Jesus asserts his victory, wlien ad- 
 dressing John at Patmos : " I am the First and the La^t: I 
 " am He that liveth and was dead ; and behold ! I am alive for 
 ** evermore, Amen ; and have the keys oi hades and of death. "« 
 In some of these passages, as also in Hos. xiii. 14. the state 
 of eternal punishmx?nt may be intended ; though I cannot see 
 any reason for supposing that tlie word ijravexs a correct 
 translathm, unless the gejieral place of departed spiiits be 
 intended by this word, as is sometimes the (;ase. 
 
 In the hve remaining instances, a- in the two first, men- 
 tioned above, it is intended to point out the place of torment, 
 or the inhabitants of that world of woe. When our ^Saviour 
 says, " the gates of hades shall not prevail against"'^ his 
 church, I understand him as referring to the inhabitants of 
 hell, especially those who were high in com aaml : foi- such 
 ♦characters usually occupied the gates of Jerusalem, and oth- 
 
 a Acts, ii. 27 31. 
 b 1 Cor. XV, 55 
 c Rev J. 18, 
 d Matt. xTi. 18. 
 
286 
 
 ei- cities. Job " went out to the gate." " Mordacai came 
 before the king's gate.'* Daviil the king " went up to the 
 chamber over the gate." Isaiah says to the otiicers of gov- 
 ernment and tlie people at large, " Howl, gate ! cry, O 
 city ! thou, whole Palestina, art (iissolved." *' in the city is 
 *' left desolation, and the gate is smitten with destruction ;'* 
 that is, tiiere is desolation among the people, and destruction 
 among their rulers. Thus the gates of their enemies pi e- 
 vailed against them. But concerning the church, Christ 
 says, " the gates of /t«c/es," that is the devil and his legions, 
 " shall not prevail against it." 
 
 Although the devil and his legions shall never prevail 
 against the cliurch, tliey are said to destroy many of the human 
 race. "And 1 looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name 
 " tljat sat on him was Death, and hades followed with him, 
 *• And power was given unto them over the fourth part of 
 *' the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with 
 " death, and with the beasts of the eai'th.''* As iSheol is 
 sometimes connected with the word destruction^ so Hades is 
 here connected with the work of destruction : and let it be 
 observed tliat it is mentioned as following death, not preced- 
 ing it ,* — as following with death, not waiting until the genei'al 
 resurrection. As soon as the sinner dies, his soul enters 
 the place of torment, as the soul of the believer enters Para- 
 dise. The effect of the resurrection and the general judg- 
 ment is, to re-unite their bodies to their souls, and increase 
 their misery or their bliss. When the souls of the wicked 
 are separated from their bodies, and cast into the lake of fire, 
 wheje the rich man's soul was tormented, while his body 
 was in tlie grave, this is the first death. When this separa- 
 tion ceases and their souls and bodies are punished together 
 in this lake of fire, this is called the second death. " And the 
 ** sea gave up the dead which were in it ; and death and hades 
 '* delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were 
 ^' judged every man according to their works. And death 
 " and hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second 
 " death."'^ Many millions of sinners have perished in the 
 sea ; especially in the general deluge, when there was no- 
 thing but sea.'' Tiiese dead bodies are to be delivered up. But 
 many millions of sinners have pei-ished on the land, intend- 
 ed by '* deatW'' in the text. These dead bodies also shall be 
 delivered up at the resurrection. All the souls belonging to 
 
 a Rev. Ti. 8. c See Horseley, on Christ's de- 
 
 fa Ker. XX. J 3, 14. scent into Hell. 
 
237 
 
 these bodies are in hades^ with the rich man. Therefore it 
 is said " hades delivered up the dead," that is, the souls which 
 were ii> it. *' And they were judged every man according to 
 •* their works. And [after the judgment,] death, [that is, 
 " their bodies, which were once dead,] and hades, [that is, 
 " their souls, which were before in the lake without their 
 *' bodies,] were cast into the lake of fire [together.] This is 
 " the second death." I know that the whole tribe of Uni- 
 versalists, who believe the devil a mere personification, pre- 
 tend also that death and hades, in this text, are mere per- 
 sonifications or nonentities : and they would wisely teach us, 
 that these nonentities are cast into the lake of fire, that they 
 may be more completely nonentified. To call this a second 
 death or a first death either, would be strange indeed, since 
 there is nothing to die! Mr. Hume could have saved them 
 this trouble, by proving that sinners are nonentities. But if 
 it be true, that God is a real being, and a just judge; — and 
 if it be true that the devil and the devil's children have a re- 
 al existence, then it is also true that " Tophet is ordained of 
 *' old ; yea, for the king it is prepared : he hath made it deep 
 " and large : the pile thereof is fire and much wood ,• the 
 " breath of the Lord, like a stream of brimstone, doth kin- 
 *' die it." What could the Prophet mean here, by that fiery 
 Tophet^ prepared for the king, and kindled by the breath of 
 an angry God, but that "everlasting fiie, prepared for the 
 devil and his angels," into which the wicked are to be driv- 
 en by the breath of the Lord, in the sentence of condemna- 
 tion, at the day of judgment? 
 
 The only remaining instance in which the New Testa- 
 ment gives the name o^ hades to this state of punishment, is 
 in the case of the rich man. *' And in hades, he lifted up his 
 eyes, being in torments."^ This has been correctly referretl 
 to, in support of my five arguments severally. This case 
 shews the helplessness of the sinner, and the consequent im- 
 possibility of his restitution from hell : " They which would 
 •* pass from hence to you, cannot ; neither can they pass to us 
 '* that would come from thence." From these words their 
 state must be eternally fixed ; and there is as great a con- 
 trast between the eternal destiny of the one, and that of the 
 other, as between heaven and hell. In these words it is also 
 plainly denied that their condition ever will or can be chang- 
 ed. As a reason for tliis it is affirmed that he is in hades^ in 
 torments ; that is, he is in Iiell, the place of eternal j)unish- 
 
 a Luke x\i. 23. 
 
238 
 
 meiit That which is aflarmed in one verse, is also plainly 
 implied in another ', where " Ahraham said, son, remember 
 " that thou, in thy life time, receivedst thy good things, and 
 ** likewise Lazarus evil things : but now he is comforted and 
 '* thou art tormented." My opponent would make you be- 
 lieve that hell is in this life, and that it is to be seen and ex- 
 perienced in scenes of revelry and debauchery : but we are 
 here informed that m this life, the rich man received his 
 comforts, and his good things; and his hell was, to lift up 
 his affrighted eyes, and to utter his unavailing cries, in a 
 tormenting flame, after he was dead and buried. 
 
 It is with reluctance, I confess, that the quibbling of Mr. 
 Balfour and my opponent about his being on a level with La- 
 zarus, is here noticed. The former speaks as follows, viz: 
 *• Whatever place hades is, in which the rich man is here re- 
 " presented as in torment, it is very evident that Abraham 
 " and Lazarus were also in hades. Though spoken of as at 
 " some distance from each other, yet they were within sight 
 ** and hearing, and could converse together. The one is not 
 " represented as in heaven, and the other in hell : no ; they 
 ** are represented as in the same place, and on a level with 
 " each other."* In addition to tliis, if I mistake not, my 
 opponent has endeavoured to pi'ove this level by means of 
 the gulph which was fixed between them : understanding by 
 this gulph, a body of water, which, of course, seeks its level. 
 " In fact," says he, " the whole scene is laid upon a plain, 
 " which was supposed to be under ground ; every word in the 
 " original, signifying motionf implies that the places each side 
 " of the gulph, were on a level with each otlier; there is not 
 ** one word which conveys the idea of ascending or of de- 
 *■'■ scending^ but every expression implies distance, and not 
 '* height nor depth."** 
 
 In answer to these sage remarks, I would ask, was it not 
 strange for the rich man, lying near a vast body of water, to 
 ask a man on the other side of it, to bring him one drop ? 
 But stop : this body of water was not so large, for they could 
 converse across it. Of course, it must have been navigable 
 by a canoe. Why then did Abraham call it impassable ? 
 But why should they wish to pass it ? These gentlemen 
 have proved that they were in the same place ; in the same 
 state, although they had the gul])h between them, and although 
 they were afar off from each other. Is it true that two peo- 
 
 a Cliup. i. Sec. 2. 
 b Minutes p. 135. 
 
289 
 
 pie cannot speak to each other on the river which is neai* 
 us, witliout being in the same vessel, and without being on a 
 level ? Cannot one man from the top of a seventy-four, ad- 
 dress another in the bottom of a wherry ? and must Penn- 
 sylvania and Jersey be the same state, because they can 
 both be seen across the Delaware ? But there is one wurd 
 signifying motion, which appears to have escaped the notice 
 of my opponent. " In hell lie lifted up his eyes." Does this 
 imply that he gave them a horizontal direction ? What did 
 he mean just now, when he told you that he had been in- 
 formed of a general rumour through the city, last evening, 
 that my cause was looking up ? Did he mean tliat it was 
 thought to be on a level with his ? Let it therefore be re- 
 membered that unless we can reconcile palpable absurdities, 
 then tliere is not one iota of evidence to prove that Lazarus 
 and the rich man were in the same place. Their seeing and 
 speaking will not prove it, unless we are acquainted with 
 the organs of separate spirits. The contraiy conclusion 
 should be drawn from the express words of scripture. The 
 one was *' in hell," and the other " afar off;'' the one was 
 ** in torments," and the other " in Abraham's bosom" If 
 torment and comfort are the same thing, and heaven and hell 
 the same place, then the rich man and Lazarus were in the^ 
 same state. 
 
 It has already been shewn, that my opponent and his co- 
 adjutors consider this passage of scripture a parable; and a 
 parable, they think, can, with a little ingenuity, be made to 
 mean any thing or nothing. When it is most convenient, 
 they scruple not to make glaring insinuations, that what 
 they call parables, contain falsehoods. But let us see what 
 they have done in the elucidation of this parable, as they 
 would have it to be. Mr. Ballou in his " Notes on the Pa- 
 rables,"* makes the rich man to stand for the Aaronic High 
 Priest, and the pious beggar for the Gentiles. Tlie death of 
 Lazarus, means the conversion of the Gentiles, and the death 
 of the rich man the close of the Mosaic dispensation. His 
 being in hades, means conviction of sin, and his seeing the 
 beggar in Abraham's bosom, means his witnessing the con- 
 version of the Gentiles to Abraham's faith. My opponent 
 agrees with this interpretation, and thinks that he makes a 
 slight improvement by interpreting '^Abraham and his bosom, 
 the gospel dispensation."b Aa those who are run mad for alle- 
 
 a Parable 38. 
 
 b Lectures p 302. Not.e. 
 
249 
 
 gory, can never be satisfied with a parable, until tliey have 
 taiight it to go on all-fours, my opponent has spai'ed uo pains 
 in inquiring after the ridi man's five brethren. If he has, at 
 different times, had different opinions upon this subject, it 
 is an error to which all great men are liable, in sucli impor- 
 tant pursuits. 
 
 Previous to his debate witli Mr Bishop, in the Northern 
 Liberties, he delivered a popular sermon, in which he is said 
 to have used the following words, viz : " any man of sense, or 
 *' common understanding,mustknow, that, by the five breth- 
 *' ren, is to be understood the five books of Moses."* By the 
 same authority, we are publicly informed, (and I believe, 
 without contradiction) that my opponent has since relinquish- 
 ed that interpretation, which he said that "any man of sense 
 or common understanding, must" adopt ; and has very com- 
 plaisantly fallen in with Mr. Ballou's opinion, that the five 
 brethren are the same as the five foolish virgins. This is 
 evidently an improvement; and goes to shew that this is an 
 age of improvement. The first interpretation was, 1 think 
 myself, a little exceptionable; as there was evidently no 
 more reason, for believing that these five brethren meant 
 the five books of Moses, than that it meant certain five Ca- 
 naanizhig cities in the land of Egypt ;b or the five changes 
 of raiment which Joseph gave to Benjamin ;i or the five 
 porches of the pool of Bethesda;'' or the five barley loaves 
 which fed so many thousands.^ To make them mean the five 
 books of Moses, is as arbitrary, as to make them figurative 
 of the five horses which were sent to the Syrian camp;* or of 
 the five rams, five he-goats, and the five lambs, Mhich Na- 
 shon, the son of Aminidab offered *' for a sacrifice of peace- 
 offering ;''f or the five sparrows that were sold for two far- 
 things ;% or the five golden emrods, and the five golden mice, 
 which the Philistines offered for a trespass offering.*'*^ I 
 think, therefore, upon mature deliberation, that my oppo- 
 nent was right in discarding this scheme, although, in do- 
 ing so, he is stigmatized by his former declaration, as a 
 man destitute of *' sense or common understanding.'* 
 
 a See Mr. G. Bishop's " Public Controversy," published in Philadephia, A.D. 
 1822, p. 148. Note, 
 b Is. xix. 18. 
 c John V. 2 
 d John vi. 9. 
 e 2 Kinf^s vii. 13, 
 f Numb. vii. 17. 
 
 5; Luke xii. 6. 
 ) 1 Sam. vi. 4. 
 i Gen. xlv. 22. 
 
241 
 
 It has already been admitted that making these five bre- 
 thren to mean the five foolish virgins instead of the five 
 books of Moses, is a real improvement. Although I am 
 myself an advocate of the old way, and therefore unfit 
 to engage largely in the improvements of the present 
 day, I would modestly suggest the possibility of an im- 
 provement even upon this interpretation. Miglit it not be 
 more plausible to go in search of some quintuple, of the same 
 sex with these five brethren, as well as of the same moral 
 character? This disagreement of sex would as effectually 
 prevent some from identifying them with tlie five foolish vir- 
 gins, as with Abigail's "five damsels."* Being driven off 
 of this ground, we had better pass by Joseph's five brethren 
 whom he introduced to Pharaoh,"* and the five sons of Mi- 
 cal and Adriel,c and the five sons of Zerah,d as being rather 
 doubtful characters. It is true, this would be no solid objec- 
 tion, if they were the only fives mentioned in scripture : but 
 there are many others much more to the purpose ; and among 
 these we can choose that one, which will most effectually 
 help to allegorize the rich man out of torment. Since there- 
 fore, we have determined that these five brethren do not 
 mean the penteteuch, nor the foolish virgins, may they not 
 mean the five husbands of the Samaritan woman ?e or the 
 five spies that stole Micah's Gods ?f or the five Lords of the 
 Philistine Pentarchy ?g or the five kings of Midian, whom 
 Moses slew?'^ or the five kings of the Amorites, whom 
 Joshua hanged upon five trees ?» These are unexceptiona- 
 ble resemblances, as to sex and character. They are as 
 much like the five brethren, as the Universalists are like the 
 Unitarians: and all of them, whether brethren, husbands, 
 spies, Lords, Kings, Universalists, or Unitai'ians, are very 
 much of apiece. 
 
 But after all, there is a great difference between faith and 
 fancy; between expounding scripture, and darkening coun- 
 sel by words without knowledge. I would rather, with the 
 Apostle Paul, " speak five words witli my understanding,"j 
 than to form ten thousand heretical conjectures concerning 
 tliese five brethren, which are intended only to smother the 
 plain truth. This passage is plain, whether it be called his- 
 tory or parable. In eitlier ease, it can mean nothing less, 
 
 a 1 Sara. xxv. 42. f Judg. xviii. 2. 
 
 b Gen. Ixvii 2. g 1 Sam. vi. 16. 17. 
 
 c 1 Sam. xxi. 8. h Num. xxxi. 8. 
 
 d 1 Chr. ii. 6. i Josh. x. 5. 26. 
 
 « Fn. iv. 18. j 1 Cor. jriv. 19. 
 
242 
 
 than that, immediately after death, the soul of a believer 
 goes to the liappiness of heaven, and that of an unbeliever 
 to the torments of hell; between which two states, there is 
 an absolutely eternal separation. The language of Abra- 
 ham communicates thus much, and thus the rich man evi- 
 dently understood it : for he gives up all hope of his own sal- 
 vation; and asks, as his last request, that his brethren may 
 not come tliitlier to aggravate his torment five fold. He is 
 not consoled with the Unsversalist salvo, that although he 
 cannot pass the giilph himself, God can and will take him 
 over. Instead of this, he considers the words of Abraham, 
 as God's infallible declaration, that he never shall pass 
 from hell to heaven, nor have his torments mitigated by one 
 drop of comfort. 
 
 But instead of placing this impassable gulph between be- 
 lievers and unbelievers in the eternal world, Mr. Ballou and 
 my opponent would place it between the Jews and Gentiles in 
 this world ! the very contrai-y of which is declared by the 
 Spirit of Christ. '* Ft<r he is our peace, who hath made 
 ** both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of parti- 
 *' tion between us ; having abolished in his flesh the enmity, 
 •* even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; 
 " for to make in himself of twain, one new man, so making 
 *' peace; and that he might reconcile btith unto God in one 
 ** body by tlie cross, having slain the enmity ; and came, and 
 " preached peace to you which were afar off, [to the Gentiles,] 
 "and to them that were nigh, [to the Jews.]"* What a pity, 
 that when Christ has pulled down the wall of separation be- 
 tween Jews and Gentiles, the Universalists should endeavour 
 to fix an imi>assable gulph between them ! But the truth is, 
 they found this gulph in their way; and they were as much 
 at a loss to know where to put it, as they were to find ac- 
 commodations for tlieir five unbelieviug brethren; and as is 
 often tlie case with })revaricating witnesses, they placed it 
 exactly where it ought not to be. 
 
 The absurdity of this scheme is equally great in another 
 respect. The beggar *'died ;" and after death, those good 
 angels, whicli my o])ponent would consider personifications, 
 or non-entities, carried his soul to happiness. The rich man 
 also " died,'* and his body was buried ; but after death, his 
 soul was carried, by personifications of another description, 
 to the world of torment. Although in this world he asked 
 
 a r.[ih. ii. 14—17. 
 
243 
 
 no mercy, he calls for it there, where it cannot he found. 
 Abraham reminds him of the condition in which he and La- 
 zarus were placed in their " life-time," but tells them, that 
 ** now" after their death and burial, their conditions are 
 greatly changed. To shew that they were really dead, the 
 rich man requests that Lazarus may be sent " from tlie dead," 
 and Abraham assures him that an unbeliever cannot be sav- 
 ed, " though one rose from the dead." In the face of this- 
 accumulated and unequivocal testimony of inspiration, the 
 scheme which we are opposing, requires us to believe that 
 there was no death in the case ; but that this whole account 
 relates to the transactions of this life. 
 
 You can scarcely conceive of tlie extent of that barbanty 
 with which these people treat the word of God, until you 
 make a close comparison of their views with the oracles of 
 truth. This we shall now endeavour to do, in a paraphrase 
 which shall incorporate the features of their interpretation, 
 with the sacred text. This method of exposing error is used 
 with reverence to God, and love to your souls : for conse- 
 quences, let the corrupters of Revelation be answerable. The 
 Universalist paraphrase is as follows, viz. " There was a 
 *' certain rich man [the Aaron ic High Priest,] which was 
 " clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously 
 " every day. And there was a certain beggar, named La- 
 *' zarus, [the Gentiles,] which was laid at his gate, full of 
 ** sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell 
 *' from the rich man's table, [the High Priest's table.] 
 " Moreover, the dogs, [the Apostles] came and licked his 
 '* sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar, [the Gentiles] 
 " died, [became converted] and was carried by the angels 
 " [the personifications, or non-entities, or these dogs, the 
 ** Apostles,] into Abraham's bosom, [the Gospel dispensa- 
 *' tion.] The rich man [the Aaronic High Priest,] also died, 
 ** [was ex-communicated] and was buried, [alive] and in hell 
 " [in this life,] he lifted up his eyes [to an exact level,] being 
 " in torments [of conviction,] and seeth Abraham, [the gos- 
 ** pel] afar off, [very near in the same place,] and Lazarus, 
 " [the Gentiles] in his bosom, [its dispensation.] And he 
 "cried, and said, Father Abraham, [gospel !] have mercy 
 <* on me ; and send Lazarus [the Gentiles] that he may dip 
 ** the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I 
 *' am tormented in this flame. But Abraham, [the gos- 
 ** pel] said, son, [Jews] remember, that thou in thy life-time 
 '* [and thou hast never died,] receivedst thy good things^ 
 
244 
 
 ** and likewise Lazarus [the Gentiles,] evil things : but 
 ** now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And besides 
 '* all this, between us [the Gentiles,] and you [the Jews,] there 
 ** is a great gulph fixed ; [in the room of that middle wall of 
 " partition which is broken down,] so that they which would 
 ** pass from hence to you, cannot ; neither can tliey pass to 
 *' us, that would come from thence. Then he,[the High Priest] 
 '*said, I pray thee therefore. Father, [gospel,] that thou 
 ** wouldst send him, [tlie Gentiles] to my Father's house, [the 
 ** Jews ;] for I have five brethren, [the five books of Moses, 
 *' or the five foolish Virgins,] that he may testify unto them, 
 *' lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham, 
 *' [the gospel,] saith unto him, [the High Priest,] they [the 
 ** five books of Moses, or the five foolish Virgins] have Moses 
 *' and the Prophets ; let them hear them. And he said, nay, 
 *' Father Abraham : but if one went unto them from the 
 ** dead, [before he dies,] they will repent. And he said unto 
 *' him, if they [the five books or Virgins] hear not Moses 
 ** and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded though 
 *• one rose from the dead [before he dies."]a 
 
 But if it be true tliat God is not to be mocked with impu- 
 nity ; — if it be true, that after the death and burial of the bo- 
 dy, the soul must go with good angels to Abraham's bosom, 
 or with evil angels to the place of torment ; —and if it be 
 true, that that Divine Redeemer, whose blood removed the 
 wall of partition from between Jews and Gentiles, has given 
 his word, that none shall ever pass that gulph which lies be- 
 tween Heaven and Hell ; — then let those who reject or tri- 
 fle with the word of God, repent or tremble. 
 
 3. 
 GEHENNA. 
 
 In the Old Testament we read of the Valley of Hinnom,\, 
 which is once« called by the Septuagint, Gaienna,^ but ne- 
 ver Gehenna.e^ This latter word Gehenna^ occurs twelve 
 times in the New Testament, in not one of which, does it 
 denote the Gaienna of the Old Testament, althou^i it is 
 generally supposed, and perhaps, correctly, to allude to that 
 place. It is as correctly supposed that our Saviour alluded 
 to the Garden of Eden ^ when he said to the dying thief '* to 
 day shalt thou be with me in Paradise f'^ which word,g is 
 
 a Luke xvi. 19—31. f Luke xxiu. 43. 
 
 c J< bh. xviii, 16- 
 
 d youewa C yfsyvte 
 
245 
 
 repeatedly used in the Septuagint,a to signify a literal earth- 
 ly garden, orchard, or forest-b But there is often a great 
 difference between the thing spoken of, and the thing alluded 
 to. Our Saviour alluded to an earthly garden, wliich a 
 man enjoys in this life ; but he promised to take the repent- 
 ing, believing, and praying robber, to a Paradise, which was 
 to be enjoyed by his soul, after death. So when Joshua the 
 son of Nun, spoke of the Valley of Hinnoni, or Gaienna, he 
 meant a spot of ground near the earthly Jerusalem, which, 
 in process of time, became a scene of idolatry, cruelty, and 
 pollution ,- and in which place worms were generally found, 
 and a fire was kept up a long time, to consume the carcases 
 which were thrown into it. But let it be noted that these 
 worms died, and tliis fire was extinguished ', and while it 
 burned, it consumed nothing more than the body : whereas 
 the Gehenna, with which sinners are threatened by the Di- 
 Tine Joshua, the son of God, is a flame which seizes the soul 
 immediately after death, and both soul and body after the 
 general judgment; and in addition to this, it is a flame which 
 *• never shall be quenched." But we proceed to cite all the 
 passages in which it occurs. 
 
 '* It is profitable for thee, that one of thy members should 
 " perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into 
 ** Gehenna.^" *' Whosoever shall say thou fool, shall be in 
 '* danger of the Gehenna of fire." " It is better for thee to 
 " enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes, 
 '<to be cast into the ^ery Gehenna.'* " Ye make him [your 
 ** proselyte,] two fold more the child of Gehenna than your- 
 '* selves." The tongue " is set on fire of Gehenna." *' Ye 
 " serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the 
 " damnation of Gehenna V " Fear not them which kill the 
 ** body, but are not able to kill the soul : but rather fear him 
 ** which is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.^' 
 *' Fear him, which, after he hath killed, hath power to cast 
 "into Gehenna'''' "It is better for thee to enter into life 
 '* maimed, than having two hands, tQ go into Gehenna, into 
 '< the fire that never shall be quenched." *' It is better for 
 " thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast 
 " into Gehenna, into the fire that never shall be quenched." 
 *■' It is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with 
 " one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into the fiery Ge- 
 
 a Neh. ii. 8. Eecles. in 5. Cant. iv. 1-5. 
 
 b Dnnt) 
 
246 
 
 " henna^ where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not 
 *• quenclied."^ 
 
 After reading the ahovc passages of Scripture, any plain 
 and pious person of common sense, would understand the Ge- 
 henna of the New Testament, to he quite a different place 
 from the Gaienna of the Old Testament, although the one al- 
 ludes to tlie other, and is illustrated hy it. In the Valley of 
 Hiiinom, the worm dies, and the tire is quenched : but in Ge- 
 henna, " their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.'.' 
 In Gaienna^ih^ body only is consumed, but in GeAew«a, both 
 soul and body. And here it will not do to argue, as Mr. 
 Balfour does Aery elaborately, and as if he were in earnest,b 
 that the soul and body mean nothing but our mortal part: 
 for men can kill everything that is mortal about us ,• but the 
 soul here spoken of, is one w hich our Saviour declares they 
 cannot kill. " Fear not them which kill the body, but are 
 '* not able to kill the soul ; but rather fear him which is 
 " able to destroy botli soul and body in Gehenna.''''^ 
 
 Universalists perceive that our interpretation of the above 
 passages is very much strengthened by the use which is made 
 in them, of such words as Jire, destruction, and damnation ; 
 and accordingly, they spend much time upon these topics. 
 I shall, with the help of God, attend to them, as concisely as 
 possible. 
 
 (1.) Fire, Since it has pleased the all wise God, in con- 
 descension to our stupidity, to use the word fire, and the 
 phrase ^'re a?id brimsfonef to point out the torments of the 
 wicked, or the means or agency by which those torments 
 are inflicted, it becomes us to receive these and similar words 
 and expressions, as the words of God ; and not to be asham- 
 ed of them, on account of the profane wit of men, as we w ould 
 wish Christ not to be ashamed of us before his Father and 
 the holy angels. Christians will not cavil at these words, 
 and quibble about them, as Dr. Chauncey has done. If God 
 has plainly declared th'at there is an unquenchable fire, 
 which shall burn the soul as well as the body, a christian 
 will not contradict him, by objections drawn from the qua- 
 lities of that fire, with which we are daily conversant. As 
 well might he draw objections from that water which our 
 bodies drink, to refute the doctrine that there is " a pure ri- 
 **■ ver of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the 
 
 a Matt. V. 29. 30. 22. xviii. 9. xxiii. IS. Jas, iii. 6. Matt xxiii. 33. x: 28. 
 Luke xii. 5. Mk. ix. 43. 45. 47. 
 b Chapt. 1. Sect, 3. c Matt. x. 28. 
 
247 
 
 '• throne of God and of the Lamb."* Whatsoever qualities 
 may be found in our lower rivers, there is in Heaven, a ri- 
 ver of water, which shall refresh the souls and the spiritua- 
 lized bodies of God's people, to all eternity : and whatsoever 
 may be the qualities of our earthly fires, or furnaces, there 
 is a Tophet, a lake of Jure, in hell, which shall torment the 
 souls and bodies of the finally impenitent, to an absolute 
 eternity. 
 
 The existence of such a fire after the day of judgment, 
 and its existence for a long and indefinite duration, was ad- 
 mitted by Mr. Winchester himself; though he denied its ab- 
 solute eternity. The following are liis words, viz. "After 
 " the second resurrecti<m and the Judgment, the whole globe 
 " shall be turned into a lake of fire and brimstone, where 
 " the wicked shall be punished for ages of ages."b In the 
 natural progress of Universalism toward Atheism, it is no 
 wonder that many of Mr. Winchester's former adherents, 
 now deny that there is to be a general judgment, or anyfu- 
 ture punishment at all. In defending this refinement of er- 
 ror, they must of course say something of that fire, which 
 Mr. Winchester thought would torment the wicked after 
 death. They all, with one consent, quote that text in which 
 God says, " He is like a refiner's yiVe, and like fuller's soap ; 
 *' and he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he 
 "sliall purify the sons of Levi ; and purge them as gold and 
 " silver, that they may offer unto the Lord, an offering in 
 " righteousness. "<^ Mr. Ballon quotes a number of passages 
 in which fire is mentioned, and tlien selects one which he 
 calls his key text.*^ He then says, *' By my key I learn, that 
 "the fire which causes the wicked to suffer, has the power 
 " of salvation even for the sufferers. So in all the passages 
 " recited, where fire is mentioned, it is evident the same fire 
 " is intended." *' All the passages whicli allude to a dispen- 
 " sation of fire, which I have observed in this work," con- 
 tinues Mr. Ballou, " are direct evidences to prove tlie des- 
 "truction of sin and all sinful works, thepujification of sin- 
 •* ners, and their eternal reconciliation to holiness and hap- 
 ** piness."e 
 
 In view of such remarks, let us read a few passages of 
 scripture^ "There shall the /re devour thee,- the sword 
 
 a Rev. xxii. 1. 
 
 b Dialogue Stli. 
 
 c Mai. iii. 2. 3. Minutes p. 103. Ballou on Atonement, p. 155. 
 
 d 1 Cor. iii. 15. compare ray third Universalist argument. 
 
 e Ob Atonement, pp. 154. 219. 220. 
 
248 
 
 •' shall cut thee off; it shall eat thee up like the canker-worm." 
 " A fire devoureth before tliem, and behind them a flame 
 •* burneth." " The same shall drink of the wine of th» 
 " wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture, into 
 <* the cup of his indignation ; and he shall be tormented 
 •' with^re and brimstone, in the prcflsence of the holy angels, 
 " and in the presence of the Lamb.*'* Now, according to 
 Mr. Ballou and my opponent, these texts should be consid- 
 ered promises instead of threats ; promises that God would 
 purify sinners through love. Is the sword an instrument of 
 purification, or of destruction ? Is the canker-worm an in- 
 strument of purification, or of corruption ? This devour- 
 ing fire, — this burning flame, — this tormenting fire and 
 brimstone, are so far from being sent in love, that they are 
 said, in the last passage quoted, to proceed from unmingled 
 wrath. It is elsewhere spoken of, in language which should 
 not be thought equivocal. •' Tlie Lord Jesus shall be re- 
 *<vealed from lleaven, with his mighty angels, in flaming 
 "fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that 
 " obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." " Afire is 
 "kindled in mine a«5fer, which shall burn upon you.'* '*A 
 '•'fire is kindled in mine an^er, and shall burn unto the lowest 
 " helU^ " Ye have kindled a fire in mine anger, which 
 "shall burn forever.'''' •* The sinners in Zion are afraid ; 
 " fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. Who among 
 " us shall dwell with the devouring fire ? Who among us 
 " shall dwell with everlasting burmng'7*^ " Depart from 
 *' me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire.'* Sodom and Go- 
 morrah " are set forth for an example, suffering the ven- 
 *^ geance of eternal fire.^'h 
 
 But my opponent congratulates himself upon having a 
 happy method of eluding the force ol these texts, by saying- 
 that there is a difference between goino^ to everlasting burn- 
 ings, and being burned everlastingly. This quibble is as well 
 presented by Mr. Murray as by any Universalist with whom 
 I am acquainted. Conceroino- the cities of the plain, he 
 sa^s, " These people were set forth as an example, suffering 
 '* the vengeance of eternal fire. But they were not set forth as 
 an example eternally suffering the vengeance of fire." *' They 
 may suffer the vengeance of eternal fire, if they suffer but 
 
 1 Nah. iii. 15. Joel ii. 3. Rev. xiv. 10. 
 
 b 2 ThcB. i. 7. 8. Jer. xv. 14. Dut. xxxii. 22. Jer. xvii. 4. Is. xxxiii. 14. 
 MaU. XXV. 41. Jude vii. 
 
249 
 
 a moment!!!"' While speaking in this way, it is possible that 
 these gentlemen tbrgot thai they are in the habit of giving the 
 very opposite interpretation, to precisely the same form olex- 
 pression, when it n)ay be perverted to their own purpose. 
 They are both in the habit of quoting such texts as speak of 
 the everlasting iove of God, and the ever tasting joy of the 
 saints,'' to prove that God will love then), and they shall enjoy 
 him, to an absolute eternity. Why did they not tell us in their 
 unenviable ingenuity, that there is an essential difference be- 
 tween the fruition (*{ everlasting joy, and the everlasting fru- 
 ition of joy i Why did they they n(»t assure us, with a detes- 
 table disingenuousness, that they might enjoy everlasting love^ 
 if they enjoyed it but a moment? Does it need great perspi- 
 cacity to see that if God's promise oi' everlasting love and ever- 
 lasting joy to the saints, will secure their eternal salvation; 
 then his threat of everlasting Jire and everlasting burnings 
 to the wicked, shall ensure their eternal punishment? 
 
 But my opp(/nent has alreaoy let you know that his quiv- 
 er is nut exhausted. If this hre must be £fbsolutely eternal, 
 he thinks himself prepared to shew that God himself is this 
 eternal fire; and that it is therefore a happy thing to be cast 
 into it. *' For our God is a consuming fire."* I'his argument 
 is of a piece with that which re,)resentsthis fire as a puritying 
 flame : for those who uige it, say that God consumes their 
 sins, and saves their souls. That God does, in love purify 
 his people in the furnace of affliction, is a glorious and con- 
 solatory truth : but the context of every passage in which 
 God is called a consuming Jue, will shew that he consumes 
 men, and not sins ; his enemies, and not his friends^ and 
 that he is moved to do this, by just indignation, and not by 
 paternal affection. This is the sense of that passage to which 
 the Apostle alluded, in the text just now quoted, " For the 
 Loid thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God."^ To 
 shew that this jealousy is the zeal of a judge determined to 
 punish sinners, and not that of a father who would purge 
 away sins, Moses says soon afterward, "Understand tbere- 
 " fore this day, that the Lord thy God is he which goeth 
 *' over before thee ; as a consuming fire be shall destroy them, 
 "and be shall bring them down before thy face: so shalt 
 " thou drive them out, and destroy them quickly, as the Lord 
 " hath said unto thee."e 
 
 a Murray's Universalism vindicated, pp. 54, 55. 
 
 b Jer. xxxi. 3. Is. Ixi. 7. Minutes p. 141. 
 
 c Hebr. xii. 29. d Deut. iv. 24. e Deut, ix. 3- 
 
 Hh 
 
250 
 
 But if tliil fire is God, then the Gehenna of jire». must 
 mean the dwelling of God. It hecouies necessary therefore, 
 to adopt a scheme of interpretation, which neither ol' us has 
 hitherto recognized ; and make Gehenna to signify, neither 
 earth nor hell, l)ut heaven. If this be true, M . Ballon may 
 well claim all my authorities, in which this Gehenna is found 
 as " direct evidences" in favour of his system instead of 
 mine. Shall I undertake to expose to \ou, my beloved hear- 
 ers, the abominable folly and wickedness of this perversion 
 of the sacred oracles? Instead of saying with the \pn.stle 
 James, that the tongue which is full of deadly poison, ''is 
 set on fire ot hell,*' this scheme of niterpretation would rep- 
 resent it as set on the God of heaven. According to this, 
 whosoever shall say thou tool, shall be in danger of the dwel- 
 ling of God, ins'ead of the Gehenna of fire. According to 
 this system, it is better for thee to enter into life with one 
 eye, rather than having two e\e^, to be cast into the dwelling 
 of God. This plan would make it impossible for those whom 
 eur Saviour called serpents and vipers, to escape from going* 
 to heaven. But if such gross absurdity be far benea h the 
 dignity of common sense, how infiinitely is it beneath the wis- 
 dom of him who spake as man never spake! That my op- 
 ponent should turn his back upon his own argument, is na- 
 tural enough. 1 am only sorry that his chagrin should make 
 him deny that he ever used it.b 
 
 (2.) Destruction. In two of the passages where Gehenna 
 occurs, it is insinuated, that in certain cases, if a man per- 
 mit not a member to perish or be destroyed'^ on earth, his 
 whole b'Kly shall be destroyed in Gehenna. In another pas- 
 sage weai'etold to fear him who is able todestioy^hoi\\ soul 
 and body in Gehenna. The same Greek verb occurs in all 
 those passages, and is correctly rendered perish in one 
 place, and dealroy in another, because it is in different voi- 
 ces The same verb is translated lose where our Saviour 
 promises to '* htse nothing," that in, permit nothing tobedes- 
 iroi/ed,*' that the Father had given him. The same verb is 
 rendered in the sanie way, and its conjugate is rendered per- 
 dition where our Saviour says, *' none ol them is tost, but 
 
 a yiSwa <rou tu^oS 
 
 b He has accordingly as fir as I can perceive, left it out of those famous Mi* 
 ■utesof the Debate, which Mr Jennings lias fathered for him. 
 « atroXrjTai ^^^latt. v. 29. SO. 
 d a*oXetfa/. Matt. x. 28. 
 *' ewraXsrfw. John vi. 39. 
 
25L 
 
 the son of perdition, or destruction.*''' This noun is else- 
 where ti'ansliited perdUion, when immediately connected 
 with another word which is rendered destruction^* 
 
 The texts just now referred to, prove thatthe sonls and bo- 
 dies of traitors and rich urd)elievei's are destroyed in Gehen- 
 «a, after death. To deny the eternity of this destruction, or 
 to confine it to inen^s sins instead of their persons, will be 
 found not only inconsistent with scripture, but with former 
 concessions of the Universal ists themselves. This word oc- 
 curs in one of their favourite texts; in which it is said that 
 God is " not willing that any should jo^W«/<,« but that all 
 should come to repe!itance."^ Now suppose that this perish- 
 iny is not eternal, but tempcu'al. Then the text would read, 
 that God is not willing that any should sutfer a temporal 
 judgment! But again ; suppose that it relates to the des- 
 truction of men's sins, instead of their persons. Then the 
 text would mean, that God" is not willing that any person's . 
 sins should be destroyed] In this place the word perish, 
 must relate to the eternal, punishment of men's persons, or 
 the passage would make perfect non-sense, and contradict 
 the Universalists as well as the Orthodox. That it is a 
 dreadful torment, yet to come in its greatest intensity, upon 
 devils and men, is plainly indicated in scripture. Devils 
 said to Jesus, " Art thou come to destroif us V " Art thou 
 come hither to torment us before the time ? 'f That it is 
 the very opposite of eternal salvation, James intimates, in 
 sayino- " There is one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to 
 destroi/.'^S Paul also, repeatedly contrasts the two. He 
 speaks of Satan and the Pope, as working " with all deceiv- 
 " ableness of unrighteousness, in them that perw/t ; ^^ because 
 *'they received not the love of the truth, that they might be 
 " saved.*' " For we are unto God, a sweet savour of Christ, 
 " in them that are saved and in them that perish.*'' To 
 shew that our Saviour meant that this is an eternal aesf ruc- 
 tion, he repeatedly contrasts it with eternal life. " And I give 
 
 a ou^Si^ £| auTwv aTuXfro, £i (J-v o mS Tr,g acwXeiaS. J"h" "vii. 12. 
 
 b 1 Tim. VI. 9. •* 
 
 c aWoXstfflKi 
 
 d 2 Pet. iii. 9. 
 
 e aTfoXsrfai. 
 
 f Luke iv. 34. Matt. viii. 29. 
 
 gjas. iv. 12. 
 
 h aTToXXufASvoig. 
 
 ia*cXX.f.Jvo.f. 2Thess. ii.lO. 2Cor.ii.i:.. 
 
252 
 
 " unto them eternal life^ and tliey shall never perish^' " And 
 " as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so 
 " must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whosoever belie- 
 " veth on him should not perish^ but have eternai life. For 
 " God so loved the world, that he j^ave his only begoiteii 
 " Son, that whosoever believeth in him should r\oiperish^ but 
 *' have everlustimf lije.'\ In these tN^o last passages, as in 
 2 Peter iii. 9.b both parties are agreed that an eternal des- 
 truction is meant. 
 
 As this point is established, hy the contrast which is 
 made, between this destruction or perdition, on the one hand 
 and eternal life and salvation, on the other, so is it confiim- 
 ed by the connexion which is found between this perdition^ 
 and an important word of the same meaning "• But they 
 *• that will be rich, fall into temptations and a snare, and in- 
 '*to many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in des- 
 " truction and perdition.'"^ Now, that some do wish to be 
 rich, is undeniable ; and it is equally inconti'overtible, that 
 they fall into temptations and a snare ; and that they live 
 and die, in the indulgence of many foolish and hurtful lusts. 
 Then this prophetic threat makes it as certain that they 
 shall be drowned in the lake o^ perdition, as the Mosaic his- 
 tory makes it certain, that the Egyptians were drowned in 
 the Red Sea. In the text this perdition is synonymous with 
 destruction. If therefore, destruction be everlasting, so is 
 perdition. But Paul says, in another place, that the re- 
 jecters of the gospel *' shall be punished with everlasting 
 destruction.** d This proof of the eternity of destruction, 
 establishes the eternity of that peraition, which is synony- 
 mous with it. It also shews, that when the son of perdition 
 went to his own place, he went to that Gehenna, which is 
 the place of eternal perdition; in which God can and will 
 destroy the souls and bodies of gospel despisers, after death 
 and the general judgment. 
 
 But Mr. Murray would tell us not to be too hasty with 
 this conclusion ; for he has another of his weighty senten-^ 
 ces to give us, on tiiis subject, viz. " There is an immense 
 "difference between being punished with everlasting des- 
 *' truction, and being everlastingly punished with destruc- 
 
 a Johnx. 28. iii. 15, 16. 
 b See my 7tli Universalist Argument. 
 c oXeo^ov xai affcjXEiav 1 Tim. vi. 9, 
 ^ oXfBfov ttiwviov 2 Thes. i. 9. 
 
253 
 
 ** tion.'** I quoted sn-ipturc just now, which shews that this 
 destruction is repeatedly and expressly contrasted with ever- 
 lastiny li/e. Did Mr. Murray, or my opponent, or any other 
 Universalist, ever tell us that there is an immense difference 
 between liaving eternal lite, and eternally havin]^ life? 
 They all (|uotc tliese authorities for the ()})posite purpose. 
 While they deny that a denunciation of everlasting destruc- 
 tion, destroys the sinner eternally, they all declare that 
 these pioinises of eternal life, will eternally save those to 
 whom they are made. Satanic subtlety, when exposed, has 
 sometimes the appearance of idiotic imbecility. This argu- 
 ment was intended as a sj)ecimen of ingenuity : but it may 
 well serve as an example of fatuity. 
 
 (•i.) Damnation. On a certain occasion our Saviour ad-, 
 dressed his hearers in the following awful language. ** Ye 
 " serpents, ye generation of vipers ! how can ye escape the 
 ** damnation of Gehenna ?"b It is admitted that this word 
 signifies condemnation, or adjudication to punishment. The 
 passage would then read, how can ye escape hein^ condemn- 
 edf or adjudged to the punishment of Gehenna ? This is the 
 word which is used to distinguish the day of final account • 
 in which angels and men shall be sentenced to eternal hap- 
 piness or eternal niisery. " Herein is our love made per- 
 fect that we may have boldness in the day of jadcfmentPc, 
 This boldness of God's believing people arises from a con- 
 viction that Jesus Christ, their divine and law-satisfying 
 Surety, has borne their condemnation and punishment, and 
 clothed them with his perfect lighteousness In the day of 
 judgment, they know that they shall be justified through 
 God's covenant mercy. If all men universally, were to 
 sliew mercy here, and receive mercy in the day of judgment, 
 none w<mld be damned. But concerning that man who has 
 shewn no mercy the Apostle says, * he shall have judgment 
 or damnation without mercy :" and coticerning those who 
 have an interest in Christ, who was made a curse for them, 
 he says,*' mercy rejoiceth Signmatj udg?nent nv damnation "<* 
 Although in this world, this judymetif or da inalion is often 
 the drunkard's song, and is often made so, by the profane 
 taunts of Universalists and Atheists, the Holy Spirit assures 
 
 a Universalism Vindicated, p. 54. 
 ^ T19S x^Kttus 7r]S yasvvrjg Matt 2S. 33. 
 ev Tt) r/iis^a T*)g x^Ktsui, 1 In. 4} 17. 
 d Jas. 2j 19. Comp. tial. 3; 13. 
 
254 
 
 us, that with rej^ard to some, it is fearful in anticipation, 
 even here, and that hereafter, it is followed by that fiery 
 torment, of \^hi( h Judas and tl»e rich man have ah-eady a 
 foietaste, and which awaits all God's adversaries. Tlie un- 
 pardonable offender is said to have " a certain fearful look- 
 " ing for, of judgment, ov damn<itioni» and fiery indignation, 
 *' which shall devour the adversaries.'' 
 
 Whi-n my opponent insists that we must not look forward 
 so far for this condemnation, but that it takes place in this 
 life; I admit, that before man sinned, angels were condemn- 
 ed ; and since that event, he that believeth not is condemned 
 already. But if this condemnation be confined to this life, 
 and reach not beyond the grave, why does the Apostle say, 
 '* it is appointed unto men, once to die, but after this the 
 judgment ^'"^ Our Saviour assures us, that after men are 
 dead and buried, '' all that are in the graves shall hear his 
 " voice, and shall come forth ; they that have done good, unto 
 " the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto 
 "the resurrection of damnalion.**^ Although fallen angels 
 are already condemned or bound overto punishment, there is 
 yet a great day of accounts before them, which shall be so 
 far from relaxing their bonds, that the chains, by which they 
 are reserved for that dreadful reckoning, are expressly de- 
 clared to be everlasting. '' And the Angels whicii kept not 
 *' their first estate, but left their own habitation, lie hath rc- 
 " served in everlasting chains, under darkness, unto the 
 "judgment of the great day.'"^ That these everlasting 
 chains bind overto everlasting punishment, is plain from the 
 declaration of our Saviour, tliat " he that shall blaspheme 
 " against the Holy Ghost, hath never forgiveness, but is in 
 *' danger of, deserving of, bound over to, eternal damnatiuti.*^^ 
 
 The amount of the evidence, under this word Getienna, is, 
 that this is a place of punishment for the soul, after death, 
 and for the soul and body, after the general judgment ; that 
 it is a state in which the impenitent and unbelieving ai-e 
 tormented in unquenchable jire, with everlasting destruction^ 
 under eternal damnation. May God, for Christ's sake, pre- 
 serve you from a presumptuous defiance of such a fate. 
 
 b x^i^(f. n\'br. ix. 27. 
 
 c «vagaO'(V XiPirfews. I"- ■*'• 28, 29. 
 
 *■ ;V05f(/S E?iv aiwviou xpt(isu)C, ^Ik. iii. 29, 
 
255 
 
 4. 
 TARTARUS. 
 
 The word Tartarus is not literallij used once, in om* com- 
 mon Greek Scriptures, from Genesis to Revelation. Yet 
 both parties admit that it is cirtuall:/ used there, as one ofits 
 participial conjugates is found, amcine; the Wag Xs70|ui-sva(\vords 
 once sj)oken) of the New Testament. The word is tarta- 
 rosas from the verb tartaronii. This is literally rendered 
 by the French abimer, and the Italian abissare; which last 
 word is used for this purpose, in the Italian New Testament, 
 circulated by the British and Foreign Bible Society. The 
 Popish and Protestant French New I'estaments, published by 
 the same Society, have rendered it, c<»rrectly enough, by a 
 circumlocution; although that language affords a verb ex- 
 actly corresponding with the original. What they did from 
 choice, we have done fj'om necessity. In this we follow the 
 Latin of the Vulgate and Beza, the German of Luther, and 
 many other examples. Instead of manufacturing a new verb 
 for the occasion, our Hebrew New Testament, now in use, 
 renders it, "cast them down to Sheot;^^ and even the modern 
 Greek, which we shouhl su})pose, was not deficient in tiiis 
 respect, renders it, "^ cast them into Tartarus.^''-^ In the 
 Classical Greek wi-iters, the verb and the ciirumiocution are 
 us d interchaugeably. Concerning the same persons, Apol- 
 lodorus says, in one breath, that they nve "■ iiitartaratec/,'* 
 and in the next, tliatthey •jLve'-'cast into tartarus.'^h 
 
 That the Gi-eeks and the R)mans considered this a place 
 of punishment for the wicked after death, need not be elabo- 
 rately proved. Evidences of this are found in all the books. 
 ti Virgil, in his sixth /Eneid, whei-e he probably has a parti- 
 cular refei'enceto therepiesentations made of a future state 
 in the mysteries, as well as to those made by Homer, repre- 
 sents several soi'ts of per-sons, who had been guilty of yerj 
 heinous crimes, as adjudged to gi-ievous punishments in Tar- 
 tarus. Vers 565, ets^eq." Among the Greeks, the testimo- 
 ny of Plato deserves notice. '' In the conclusion of his 
 Phsedo, he introduces Socrates, in one of his most serious 
 and solemn discourses just before his death, talking after the 
 manner of the Poets, of the judges after death, of Cartarus^ 
 Acheron, the Acherusian lake, Pyriphlegetlion, and Cocy- 
 
 a TO'JS £/3aX£v ug tov Taprapov. 
 
 b xaTaTapTapw55vTas=p»(p5SV'Ta5 SM -Taprapov. See Parkhurst 
 
266 
 
 tus : that some, after having gone through various punish- 
 ments, shall be purged and absolved, and after certain peri- 
 ods, shall be freed from their punisliments: * But those who 
 
 * by reason of the greatness of their sins, seem to be incura- 
 
 * ble, who have committed many and great sacrileges, or un- 
 *just and unlawful murders, and other crimes oftlielike na- 
 *ture, shall have a fate suitable to them, being thrown down 
 *into Tartarus^ from whence they never shall escape.* The 
 like representation is made at the latter end of Plato's tenth 
 Republic, in the story of Erus Armenius. In his Goigias 
 also he supposes the wicked, and those wbo were incurable, 
 to be sent to Tartarus, wbere they shall be punished with 
 endless torments, as an example to others : and he approves 
 of Homer, for representing w icked kings who had tyrannized 
 over mankind, among tbose who shall be so punislied."^^ 
 
 That the writers of the New Testament adopted many 
 words from the Greeks, in w hose language they wrote, is as 
 easily accounted for, as it is willingly admitted : but that 
 the doctrines connected with these words in the New Testa- 
 ment, either originated with the Heathen, or are entirely 
 conformable to their views of religion and philosophy, is 
 denied. There is a degree of similarity between Plato's ac- 
 count of lartan/s, as given above, and the Sci'iptuial ac- 
 count of the same place : so there is some resemblance be- 
 tween the Inspired and the Platonic description of Hades. 
 Both contrast it with heaven, and both represent it as a place 
 of future punishment. The latter is done by the Philoso- 
 pher in the following words, viz. "They that have sinned 
 *' more frequently and more heinously, sliall fall into the 
 ** depth, and into those lower places, which are called 
 **■ Hades."" Again he says to the transgressor, '* Thou shalt 
 " suffer a suitable punishment, either whilst thou remainest 
 ** here, or when thou goest to Hades.^''^ That the author of 
 these declarations, differed from the Scriptures, in his views 
 of a future retribution, is evident from the falsehood and 
 folly which he has mixed with his assertions. The Philo- 
 sophers also differ from the scriptures, in the account which 
 they give of the origin of this doctrine. The Scriptures 
 never once insinuate as they do, that it was borrowed from 
 uninspired human tradition. It is true, the Universalists as- 
 sert this for them : but the inspired writers uniformly de- 
 
 c Leland's Advantage and Necessity of the Chi'istian Revelation, vol. 2, pp. 
 267.265. Finley's edition, Philadelphia. 
 
 •1 Leland, vol. 2. pp. 818. 319. 
 
257 
 
 liver it, upon the same authority with all their other instrucr 
 tions : they give it as the word of God, and not of man. But 
 when riato tells us of the punishment of sin being required 
 by the Justice of God, hi? says expressly, that this is " as 
 ancient tradition teacheth."e Doubtless, this tradition was 
 as ancient as the word Sheol, or the language to which it 
 belongs : but although the heathen world received it from 
 the polluted streams of tradition, the church received it, first 
 and last, from the pure fountain of revelation. 
 
 As the Church of Clirist, whether inspired or uninspir- 
 ed, knows that this do(;trine came from the source of truth, 
 they have always treated it as a solemn and eternal truth; 
 How different the treatment which it has received from the 
 Heathen and Heretical world ! Plutarch in speaking of the 
 Epicurean philosophy, says that tlie generality of the hea- 
 then were ready to admit what he calls '' the fabulous hope 
 of immortality, but that they had no fear of the punishments 
 said to be in Hades."^ Thus they used the words Hades and 
 Tartarus, to denote a state of punishment hereafter, while 
 in reality, the doctrine of future retribution was, with them, 
 an object of derision. That Mr. Balfour was, in some mea- 
 sure, aware of this, will appear from the following extract, 
 viz. *• Though punishment after death in Tartarus w as be- 
 ** lieved by the heathen generally, yet the better iiifoi-med 
 ** among them did not believe 'in the fables of hell,' butturu.- 
 '*ed them into ridicule. Juvenal took no part iii those 
 " opinions of the vulgar ; and Virgil says, ' it was the pro- 
 ** vince of philosophy alone to shake off the yoke of custom, 
 *' rivetted by education.' Is it not then strange, that a doc- 
 ^* trine, which was indented by heathens, and treated with 
 " contempt by their own wisest men, should be a fundamen- 
 '* tal article in the faith of christians ?".? 
 
 That this doctrine was invented by the heathen, is itself 
 a late invention : since the ancient heathen writers testify 
 that it was not formed by inveiition, but received by tradi- 
 tion, from a still more remote, and to them, inscrutable anti- 
 quity. That their would-be wise-men rejected the doctrine, 
 is admitted. To the names of Virgil and Juvenal among 
 the Romans, might be added those of their poets, orators, 
 historians, and philosophers in general, with tlie great Sen- 
 eca and Cicero at their head. To the name of Plutarch, tli€; 
 
 e Leiand, toI- 2, p. 364. 
 fl-eland, vol. 2, p. 391. 
 % Cha[». 1 , sect. 5. 
 
 Il 
 
258 
 
 latest of the Greek philosophers, may be added, (strange ay 
 it may seem,) the more ancient and eminent Plato and So- 
 crates, Epictetus, Aristotle, and Pythagoras, neither of 
 whom Avas a real believer in future punishment. With 
 these, the body of the pliilosophical sects, of Epicureans and 
 Peripatetics, Cynics, Cyrenaics, and Stoics, generally 
 agreed. Mr. Balfour intimates that this rejection of future 
 punishment was among the wise men, while the people gen- 
 erally held our doctrine It is the opinion of many that on 
 this subject, these Philosophers maintained an esoteric and 
 an exoteric doctrine ; the two opposite systems of Universal- 
 ism and Orthodoxy^ the one for the wise men, and the other for 
 the vulgar; a system of policy which Mr. Balfour attributes 
 to Dr. George Campbell. If this be true, then, according 
 to his scale of morality, they must not only have been wise 
 men^ but *» the very best of men.'*'' They taught a doctrine 
 publicly, which they inwardly despised, and privately ridi- 
 culed. Mr. Balfour is heartily welcome to the suffrages of 
 all such wise men as these, whether ancient or modern. I 
 would not exchange the testimony of one poor heaven-taught 
 martyr, w ithout a name ; for that of a regiment of blinded 
 philosophers, without a conscience. 
 
 Any enlightened Christian, who considers tlie gulph of 
 moral degradation, into which sin had plunged these Unita- 
 rian wise-men, will not wonder that they resorted to the 
 soothing fables of Universalism or Atheism, to relieve their 
 fears. While tliey were willing to restrain the vulgar with 
 the fear of God's punitive justice, they were obliged, like 
 modern Universalists, to avert their own guilty faces from 
 his indignant frown. Neither the heathen nor the heretical 
 world can endure the doctrine of God's anger against sin. 
 Altliougli Cicero approves of paying some regard to an oath, 
 he says tliat this should not be done " out of the fear of the 
 anger of the Gods, for there is no such thing." He declares that 
 '* God is never angry, nor iiurteth any one:" and concern- 
 ing this doctrine, he positively asserts, that ^' it is api'inci- 
 ple universally held by all tiie Philosophers." Concerning 
 the Gods, Seneca declares, *• they neither will, nor can hurt 
 anyone." As the sufferings of every day, under God's pro- 
 vidence, contradict ti»is empty assertion, my opponent will 
 admit that God can and w ill hurt some, though it will be in 
 this world only. For this he has pointed to the house of tlie 
 foolish woman : and has assured us that in the haunts of re- 
 velry and debauchery, we will fitid hell with its ten-fold 
 
259 
 
 horrors. Now it is a fact, no less notorious than mournful, 
 that the children of this world, can conceive of no better 
 heaven, than these sensual enjoyments. Notwithstanding 
 the halo of purity, with which the corrupt and ignorant have 
 graced the head of Plato, this universalist wise-man was him- 
 self addicted to such vices ; and in his fifth Republic, he re- 
 presents tlie enjoyment of such impure pleasures beyond 
 the grave, as constituting the chief feature of the brave sol- 
 dier's heaven. That this is the doctrine of Mahomet and 
 his millions of followers is well known to you all. I need 
 hardly add, that those Unitarians and Universalists, who 
 have made overtures of confraternity, to tlie successors of the 
 Arabian impostor, shew by their profession and practice, 
 that this is the heaven which they desire. How could it be 
 otherwise? They have rejected spiritual happiness, and no- 
 thing remains but a carnal paradise. After having despis- 
 ed the Trinity, could they be happy, where a Trinity pre- 
 sides ? After having abhorred the atonement, could they 
 dwell with those who are washed in the Saviour's blood ? 
 and could they relish the heavenly influences of that Divine 
 Spirit, whose Deity and operations they had denied and 
 rejected here ? They have forsaken the fountain of 
 living waters, and it is natural for them to hew out to 
 themselves, cisterns, broken cisterns, which can hold no wa- 
 ter. If, therefore, sensual pleasures, in which they delight, 
 be the only hell which is threatened them, what have they to 
 deter them from sin t Although Mr. Balfour has failed to 
 prove that future punishment was invented by tlie heathen, 
 it is a fact that this temporal hell of my opponent, is an in- 
 vention of heathenish corruption and infatuation. While 
 Plutarch represents the fear of future punishment, as a 
 " childish fear," and represents the doctrine which we hold, 
 as made up of " fabulous stories, and the tales of mothers 
 and nurses,'* he says, " I am of opinion, if it be lawful to 
 say so, that wicked men need neither the Gods nor men to 
 punish them: but their own life, being wholly corrupted, and 
 full of perturbation, is a sufficient punishment."** 
 
 The most prominent argument of these wise men for a fu- 
 ture immortality in any condition, was perfectly futile and 
 false, and accordingly, they generally doubted and rejected 
 the doctrine of a future existence altogether. When they ap- 
 peared to advocate it, it was only for a limited period, and for 
 
 h Leland, voL 2, pp. 375, 3r6, 339,373. 
 
260 
 
 the benefit of the learned only ; but even these usually joined 
 in denying it entirely. Aristotle says that " death is the 
 " most dreadful of all thin.s:s : for that it is the end [of our 
 *' existence] : and that to him that is dead, there seems no- 
 *' thing farther to remain, whether good or evil '* Cicero in 
 his Tusculan Disputations, informs us that the doctrine of 
 the immortality of the soul was despised by the whole literaiy 
 w orld. He tells us that it was not only contradicted by the 
 Epicureans, "but," says he, "1 know n<>t how it is, that 
 " every learned man treats it with contempt."' The sentence 
 quoted some time ago from Plutarch, in which he speaks of 
 the ^^ fabulous hope of immortality,'^ shews, that long aftey 
 miany of the vulgar heathen had received the Christian reli- 
 gion, "the better informed among them," as Mr. Balfour 
 styles these Philosophers, continued to ridicule what these 
 learned blind men considered the fobks of hell^ and the fa- 
 hies of heaven too. How unenviable is that pre-eminence, 
 ■which consists in the gioss abuse, of peculiar talents and op- 
 portunities of improvement ! A\ hile the Universalists admire 
 them for their errors, and give them the praise of being bet- 
 ter infoimed than the vulgar, who believed in future rewards 
 and punishments, the Spirit of God declares that they '* be- 
 *' came vain in their imaginations, and their f(»olish heart 
 " was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they be- 
 *' came fools." By such men it is an honour to be condemned 
 and derided. 
 
 While claiming these heathen wise men for the Univer- 
 salists, Mr. Balfour tells us that "punishment after death in 
 *' Tartarus was believed by the heathen generally." If this 
 be true, it is an astonishing fact. Concerning the people and 
 their instructors, it may gei>erally be said, " like priest, like 
 j)eople." " A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump." Now 
 although these favourites of Mr. Balfour and the Univer- 
 Salits. often spoke one thing and thought another ; — although 
 it is a notorious fact, that they openly advocated downright 
 lying ; it is far from being certain that the body of the peo- 
 ple materially differed from them. Concerning future punish- 
 ments, Plutarch says, "theie are not many that fear these 
 things." The celebrated disciple of Socrates repeatedly and 
 variously declares, that this doctrine of future punishment. 
 '* met with little credit among men." According to him, the 
 vulgar among the Heathen, were a sort of Atheistical Mate- 
 
 i 1^1. 2: 284. 285. 
 
261 
 
 'rialists, like my opponent. Plato says that *'most me* 
 " seemed to think that the soul was immediately dissolved 
 ** at death, and that it vanished and was dissipated, like the 
 ** wind or smoke, or became nothing at all : and that it need- 
 '* ed no small persuasion and faith to believe that the soul 
 ** exists, and has some power and intelligence after the man 
 " is dead.'li 
 
 The inconsistencies and contradictions found in the writ- 
 ings of these ancient philosophers, are scarcely more palpa- 
 ble than those which are found in their modern brethren. 
 Mr. Balfour and my opponent, at one moment, boast that 
 these wise men reject our fables of hell ; and at the next mo- 
 ment, accuse us of borrowing our doctrine of eternal punish- 
 ment in TartaniSf from the false philosophy of the heathen. 
 Their accusations are as groundless as their boasting is 
 shameful. The New Testament uses their words for devil 
 and hell; and it also uses their words for God and Heaven: 
 but while Paul declares to them the true nature of that God 
 whom they ignorantly worshipped, Peter teaches them the 
 true character of that Tartarus^ which they blindly derided. 
 The Universalists reject the doctrine of revelation, and boast 
 that these false philosophers did the same ! And who are 
 these better informed among the heathen, with whom it is 
 such an honour to agree ? They were the blind and deaf, al- 
 ways speculating about colours and sounds. They were al- 
 ways talking about divine truth, and yet " changed the ti*uth 
 of God into a lie." According to their own account, a por- 
 tion of the truth had been conveyed to them, howsoever imper- 
 fectly, by tradition : but *' they did not like to retain God in 
 their knowledge;" they despised alike, the fears of hell, and 
 the hopes of heaven, and even denied the spirituality and im- 
 mortality of their own souls. " For this cause God gave 
 them up to vile affections," and "gave them over to a re- 
 probate mind,*' and to a reprobate life. Indilging without 
 restraint, in the most brutal appetites, they seemed indeed, 
 as if they had no soul to distinguish them from the inferior 
 creation. Let who will glory in symbolizing with such men, 
 the Christian glories in nothing but the cross of Christ, by 
 whom he is crucified to the world, and the world to him. 
 
 The heathen generally believed in the transmigration of 
 souls, and in certain periodical conflagrations or annihila- 
 tions of souls, succeeding each other without end. From 
 
 j 1^1,2; 591. 382. 38S. 
 
262 
 
 these the Jews have rceeived a soii; of UniversJilism ; and by 
 these, Origen was corrupted. Besides him, my opponent can 
 find no other example in the ancient church. " Simon Ma- 
 *' gus, Biisilides, Carpocrates, and the impure Gnostics, we 
 " do not envy him f'^ as they were, like their brethren of 
 the present day, in the gall of bitterness and the bonds of 
 iniquity. On this doctrine, Clemens Alexandrinus, the pre- 
 ceptor of Origen, was decidedly orthodox ; and so was Cy- 
 prian, his great contemporary, whose superiority in piety 
 and usefulness, the Christian world so much admires. 
 
 Among the many proofs of their doctrinal soundness, I 
 have numbered the inspired declaration concerning Tarta- 
 rus. It is in 2 Peter, ii. 4. " God spared not the angels that 
 " sinned, but cast them do\^ n to Tartarus^ and delivered 
 ** them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judg- 
 *' ment." The questions suggested by this text, are, I. What 
 docs this threatening mean ? 2. Against whom is it directed ? 
 
 (i.) What does this threatening mean ? That it is a threat- 
 ening, is evident, because the subjects of it are said not to be 
 spared, but cast down, and confined in chains of darkness, <o 
 he punished, as we are informed in verse 9th. That it 
 reaches beyond this life, as far as men are concerned, ap- 
 pears from their being reserved unto judgment. " It is ap- 
 pointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment."' 
 That the judgment will rivet these chains, appears from 
 Jude's calling them, in verse 6th, " everlasting chains," and 
 from his placing these prisoners, in verse 7th, with the in- 
 habitants of Sodom and Gomorrha, who are " suffering the 
 vengeance of eternal fire." Peter also, places them in tJie 
 same company, in verse 6th, of the context. Of these per- 
 sons it is said in verse 3rd, the immediately preceding con- 
 text, that their '^judgment now of a long time lingereth not, 
 and ihcxr damnation slumbereth not." These words have al- 
 ready been examined in the original, in what was said on 
 the subject of Gehenna. There they were translated dam- 
 nation and destruction : and it was proved from the Scrip- 
 tures, that tliese are an everlasting destruction, and an eter- 
 nal damnation, in an unquenchable fire. As " fools make a 
 mock at sin," so fools will laugh at its punishment : but let 
 it be remembered that this is done only by Mr. Balfour and 
 his heathens, not by the Christian Church : and concerning 
 
 k Lampe, on the Eternity of Punishments, Part 2, Sect. 10. 
 I Hebr. ix. 27. 
 
263 
 
 these scorners, God has said, " I also, will laugh at your caj- 
 lamity, I will mock when your fear conietli." 
 
 (2.) Against whom is tliis Tartarean punishment threat- 
 ened I It was against " the angels that sinned." In the 6th 
 head of the first Oi'thodox argument, 1 have endeavoured to 
 shew, that the curse has subjected sinners to a real devil, and 
 not a mere personification. That he has angels distinct 
 from the human race, appears from the sentence of condem- 
 nation pronounce<l upon unbelieving men at the day of judg- 
 ment. *' Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, 
 prepared for the devil and his angels.'^'' These angels, men- 
 tioned by Peter, my opponent and the improved version, 
 would liave to be men : but this cannot be : for Peter, in the 
 context, saystliat angels "are greater in power and might.'* 
 They cannot be non entities; for sucli have neither power 
 nor might. But two things are manifest, from what our 
 Saviour and his inspired Apostle say concerning these an- 
 gels. One is, that it was on account of sin. that they were 
 cast into Tartarus, or this everlasting Jire. The other is, that 
 the same punishment awaits all impenitent sinners of the 
 human race. In the 9th verse, Peter says, " The Lord know^- 
 *' eth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to re- 
 '* serve the unjust unto the day of judgment, to be punished." 
 In the 1st, 2d, and 3d verses, he speaks of the preachers and 
 deluded professors of" damnable heresies," as participating 
 in X\\t judgment and damnation of these angels. In the three 
 following verses, he presents the case of these intartarated 
 angels, the case of the antediluvian world, and that of the 
 cities of the plain, as so many examples to warn all sinners 
 against the same condemnation and punishment ; letting us 
 know, that" if God spared not" these, he will punish all the 
 " unjust" of our race. 
 
 When our Saviour commands the wicked to depart into 
 *' everlasting fire," or as he afterward explains it, into 
 " CAerlasting punishment," his omitting to use the word now 
 in question, may appear to weaken our argument But 
 when we observe on the one hand that Christ casts wicked 
 men, and the devil, and his angels, all together, into the same 
 fiery and eternal punishment; — and when we observe, on the 
 other hand, tliat an unsparing God casts these angels d(jwn 
 to Tartarus ; — cannot a moderate reasoner see that the de- 
 vil and wicked men must be in Tartarus too ? — Tartarus, 
 then, is that everlasting fire wliich is " prepared for the devil 
 and his angels :"— and Tartarus is that place of everlasting 
 
264 
 
 punishment, into which the wicked '* shall go away" after- 
 the general judgment 
 
 Thus have I endeavoured to shew the scriptural doctrine 
 of SheoU Hades ^ Gehenna, and Tartarus. I have essayed to 
 prove, what has been proved a thousand times before, that 
 these terms are used by the inspii'ed writers, to denote a 
 state of eternal punishment ; and that all those passages in 
 which wicked men or angels are said to be cast into hell^ are 
 infallible proofs that their punishment is absolutely eternal. 
 In doing this, with a conscience enlightened by the word and 
 Spirit of Christ, and with a heart full of love to your souls, 
 my skirts are clear of your blood. Without attempting to 
 excite unprofitable fears, I have endeavoured, through grace 
 faithfully to warn you, of the wrath which awaits the impen- 
 itent and unbelieving. May God enable you to fke to the 
 only Refuge for lost sinners. 
 
 II. 
 THE DURATION OF PUNISHMENT. 
 
 The first branch of affirmative evidence, which we have 
 just now finished, discusses certain conspicuous words of 
 Holy AVrit, which denote the stale of the damned ; and it was 
 shewn that this was an eternal state. The second branch of 
 affirmative evidence, on which we are now entering, contem- 
 plates such words as perpetual and eternal, never and /or- 
 ever^ which mark the duration of this punishment, in a still 
 more pointed manner. Concerning Edom, God said, " Thou 
 *' shalt be cut ofS forever.'*'* "They shall call them the border 
 •' of wickedness, and the people against whom the Lord hath 
 " indignation forever.'''' "And when he looked on Amalek, 
 " he took up his parable, and said, Amalek was the first of 
 ** the nations, but his latter end shall be, that he perish /br- 
 *•' ever.'''* '* And he also [the scourge of the Jew^s] shall perish 
 ^^ forever. ^^ "If thou forsake him, he will cast thee off /or- 
 '' ever." " But the Lord is with me, as a mighty terrible one : 
 '' therefore my persecutors shall stumhle and they shall not 
 '' prevail : they shall be greatly ashamed ; for they shall not 
 •* prosper: their everlasting confusion shall never beforgot- 
 '* ten." '* The Lord hath sworn by the excellency of Jacob, 
 " surely I will never forget any of their works.'* " And I 
 ** will bring an everlasting reproach upon you, and a perpe- 
 *' tual shame, which shall not be forgotten." *« When all the 
 *^ workers of iniquity do flourish ; it is that they shall be de- 
 *■* stroyed forever.^' " He put them to a perpetual reproach." 
 •* Let them be confounded and troubled forever ; yea, let 
 
265 
 
 '* them be put to sliaine, and perish." "They perish /brewer, 
 *' without any regarding it." "Thou destroye>;t the hope of 
 *' man. Thou prevailest forever against him." '* He shall go 
 " to the generation of his fatiiers : they shall weuer see light.'* 
 ** Thou hast rebuked the heathen, thou liast destroyed the 
 *' wicked, thou hast put out their name forever and ear.'** 
 After deatlj, *'hc sliall go to the generation of his fathers; 
 " they sliall never see light." *' God shall likewise destroy 
 " thee /ore yer." "And many of them that sleep in the dust 
 *' of the eai'th shall awake, nowx^io ever lastitufWi^i, and some 
 ** to shame and everlasting contempt." " AVho among us shall 
 " dwell with everlasting burnings ?" " The smoke thereof 
 " shall go uj) forever.''' "For ye have kindled a fire in mine 
 '* ang' r, which sh ill burn /oreyer." " But he that shall blas- 
 ** pheine against the Holy Ghost, hath never forgi »eness, hut 
 *' is in danger of eternal damnation." " These are wells 
 " without water; clouds that are carried with a tempest; to 
 '* whom the mist of darkness is reserved ybreuer." " Raging 
 *' \vaves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wander- 
 " ing stars, to whom is reserved tlie blackness of darkness 
 "/orewer." " And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up 
 '^forever and ever, and tiieyhave jioiestday nor night, who 
 ** worship the lieast and his image, and whosoever receiveth 
 ** the mark of his name." " And again, they said, Alleluia. 
 *' And her smoke rose up forever and ever.''' "And the Devil 
 " that deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brim- 
 " stone, where the beast atid the false prophet are, and shall 
 ** be tormented, day and night, forever and ever :'* with an 
 " e^er«a/ judgment, [condemnal'ion, ov punishment.y "Even 
 " as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them, in like 
 *' manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going 
 ** after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering 
 *' the vengeance of eternal fire.'* " Who shall be punished 
 ** with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, 
 ** and from the glory of his power." " Wherefore, if t}iy 
 " hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off: for it is better 
 *' for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than hav- 
 " iny- two hands or two feet, to be cast into everlasting fire.'* 
 " Then shall he say unto them on the left hand, depart from 
 *' me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil 
 ♦* andliis angels." " And these shall go away into everlasting 
 *' punishment, but the righteous into life eternaW'^^ 
 
 m Obad i, 10. Mai. i. 4. Num. xxiv. 20, 24. 1 Chr. xxviii. 9. Jer. xx. 11. 
 Am. tiii. 7. Jer. xxHi. 40. Job i?. 20. xiv. 20. Pa: xpii. 7. Ixxviii. 66. Ixxxiii. 17« 
 
26() 
 
 From all this evidence, which is given in the words of our 
 connaon translation, the Universalists are in the habit of ap- 
 pealing to the Original Scrij)turcs. Tliither we are willing 
 to follow them. But when they are heateu on this ground, 
 and begin to complain of our speaking in an unknown tongue, 
 let it be remembered, who first found fault wit!i our transla- 
 tion ; who first appealed to the Hebrew language ', and \s ho 
 first prated about an cBonian punishmeiit. 
 
 The above authorities ai'e found in the Old and New Tes- 
 taiiBcnts. Of course, they are in different languages; and, 
 (what is not unusual,) the same word is used in our Version, 
 to render a variety of words in the Original. The Hebiew 
 words \ejeh, Od, and O'am^ are all interpreted everlastings 
 perpetual always, and forever: and certain Greek woi'ds 
 and phrases, dorived from Aion^ are rendered ever/asthig, 
 eternalyforever^ send forever and ever. If it be a fact that the 
 Spii'it of God often uses these woi'ds and j)hrases to denote 
 an absolute eternity; and if there be particular reason dis- 
 covered why they should be so understood, in the above pas- 
 sages relating to the punishment of the wicked ; then a good 
 conscience will oblige us to believe, tliat the wicked are ])un- 
 ishedto an absolute eternity. For the support of this con- 
 clusion, the premises shall, with the help of God, be now 
 established, in the critical examination of the following par- 
 ticulars. 1. ^ejeh. 2. Od. 3. Olam. 4. ^ion. 5. Eis- 
 Aiona, 6. Jiionios.n 
 
 1. 
 NEJEH. 
 
 This word often signifies victor}/: as in Hah. i. 4. "Judg- 
 ment does not go forth to victory.'*^ Our translators, with 
 Junius and Tremellius, thought this the meaning of it in Is. 
 XXV. 8. "lie will swallow up death in victory.''* The Vul- 
 gate and Calasio have rendered iiforever,^ Although Bishop 
 Pearce has, if 1 recollect rightly, endeavoured to reconcile 
 this with Paul's Greek, in 1 Cor. xv. 54,p our translators 
 were probably right, as they are generally. Be this as it 
 may, my opponent and others of the same pi'inciples, quote 
 
 xlix. 19. ix. 5. lii. 5. Dun. xii. 2. Is. xxxiii. 14. xxxiv. 10. Jer. xrii. 4 Mk. iii. 29. 
 2 Pet. ii. 17, Jude 13. Uuv. xiv. fl. xix. 3. xx. 10. Ueb. vi. 2. Jude 7. 2Thes8< 
 i. 9. Matt, xviii. 8. xxv. 41. 40. 
 
 o In scnipiternum. 
 
 P filg VIXOP. 
 
267 
 
 this passage in favoiiv of universal, eternal salvation. Thcj 
 have gi'anted this force to the word, in such passages as tlie 
 following; " He will not always chide:" " Neither will 1 be 
 a/ivai/s wroth."q Those wlio believe that the miry places of 
 li-i\hy\ox\^ ?i.w\ i\\Q,viarshes thereof^ sliall not be healed, will 
 allow this word the same force, where Isaiah says that "it 
 shall never be inhabited;" and Jeremiah says that "it shall 
 be no more irdiabited/oreyer.' In denouncing a similar curse 
 upon Idumea, Isaiah doubles the word, " None shall pass 
 . through '\t forever and (?yer."i- This appears to be its meaning 
 in Fs. xlix. 9, where it is said of the rich voluptuaries of this 
 world, that " none of them can by any means redeem his 
 brother, nor give to God a ransom for him :" " that he should 
 still \\\& forever.'"' 
 
 The I9th verse of this Psalm is one of the authorities quo- 
 ted above for eternal puiushmcnt. After this wealthy world- 
 ling dies, it is said that •' he shall go to the generation of his 
 fathers ; they shall never see light." if tlie generation of his 
 fathers felt toward him, as the rich sensualist in the gospel 
 felt toward his five bi etiiren, they did not wish him to come 
 into their place of torment. As it was declared that they ne- 
 ver should enjoy the light of life, the pains of the second death 
 would be aggravated by the company of a guilty descendant, 
 to whose ruin they were accessary. 
 
 In another passage adduced, it is said concerning impious 
 oppressors, '* The Lord hatb sworn by the excellency of J a- 
 " cob, surely I will never forget any of their works." When 
 God says of the penitent, '*I will be merciful to their unright- 
 " eousness, and their sins and tlieir iniquities will I remem- 
 '* her no more," every Universalist sees that this is a promise 
 of eternal forgiveness. When he says, " The needy shall not 
 alivays be forgotten,'' every one understands this to be a pro- 
 mise of efcrnul salvation. But if a promise that God's pious 
 poor shall not always be forgotten, secures their eternal iiap- 
 piness, is it diificult to see that eternal misery awaits those 
 sinners, concerning whom the excellency of Jacob swears by 
 himself, " Surely I will never forget any of their works ?'* 
 The duration of the blessing in the one case, and of the curse 
 in the other, is marked by the same word.^ 
 
 In a third authority advanced, the Psalmist threatens the 
 
 q Ps. ciii. 9. Is. lyii. 16. The references are always to the Englisli Bible. 
 
 ^ D^nV^ nVi 7. Is. xxxiv. 10. xiii. 20. Jer. I. S9. Comp. Ez. xlvii. II. 
 s Amos Tiii.7. Ps. ix. 18, Comp, Heb. Tiii. 12. Gen. kxvU, 45. 
 
268 
 
 deceitftil, lying, mischievous tongue, " God shall likewise 
 destioy thee /or fi'e/\"t If, as the apostle James tells us, this 
 tongue " is set on hi-e of /je//," then it must he destroyed for 
 ever: for hell is a place of everlasting destruction, as was 
 shewn under the word Gehenna, A few evideuces, that the 
 same doctiine of the destruction of the wicked, is contained 
 in the Old Testament, which was there asserted from the 
 New, will close this article. 
 
 Universalists and other pretenders to religion, are prone 
 to in-julge delusive hopes of escaping this destruction: hut 
 God says, "the hypocrite's hope shall perish^ or be destroy- 
 erf.'u They expect always to fly to their refuges of lies; but 
 the tiiiie is coming when, as God says, " flight shall perish 
 from the»n."v They v\'ould vainly persuade themselves that 
 they jiave no other destrucfio:i to fear, but that which precedes 
 death ,^^ and that, after death, their hopes sliall be fulfilled. 
 But Solomon says, " When a wicked man dieth, his expecta- 
 " tions shall perish^ or he destroyed : and the hope of unjust 
 " men perisheth^ or is destroyed.'*'^ 1 1 was not said of Amalek 
 that he should sustain a tempoi*al destruction in the prime of 
 lift; but " his latter end shall he, that he perish foiever."z 
 This destruction is never said in scripture to be sent in love 
 for the sanctifiration of the subject; but "by the blast of 
 " God they perish, or are destroyed^ and by the bieath of his 
 
 * nostrils ai'e they consumed." "The wicked shall perish, or 
 " be destroyed^ and the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat 
 " of lambs : they shall consume ; into smoke shall they con- 
 " sume away." *' As smoke is driven away, so drive them 
 '* away : as wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked 
 '* perish, or be destroyed, at the presence of God.''» Concern- 
 ing the worshippers of the Pope, that irreconcileable enemy 
 of Christ and his word, Daniel says, "- 1 beheld, even till the 
 " Beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the 
 
 * burning flame.''^ 
 
 The above passages do not expressly declare that this de- 
 struction is in Sheotov Gehenna, or the bottomless pit; but 
 other Scriptures do. It will be recollected that under the 
 
 t Ps. lii. 5, 
 
 u .Jol> viii. 13. 
 
 T Job xi. '20. Marginal reading. CalasLo ; *' Refugium peribit ab eis." 
 
 w >tt' Job xxviii. 22. 
 
 ■J. Job xi. 7. 
 
 2 Num. xxiv. 20, 
 
 a J')i. IV. y. Ps. xxxvii. 2©. Ixtiii. 2- 
 
 % Dan. Til. U. 
 
269 
 
 first branch of this argument, the destruction^ which, in'ftie 
 New restamoil, is caUeti 4/;y/t7rt, (from wliicli the name of 
 Appofii/uH is titi'ivcd,) was shc\Mi to take place in Geheii' 
 na, which was a place of punishnienl; by hic after death. 
 Tile (it struction nienlioned above, is by a burning Hanie, alter 
 the subject of it is slain. The Hebrew for destroy^ in the 
 above texts, is abad,^ and for deslruction, Abadun. Tyalasio 
 very justly observes that in Job xxvi. 6, this Abadun is used 
 *'fi)r the thing destroyed, p/u re.perada.^"''' .Sheoi is naked be- 
 foi'e him, and Abadun hath m> coveiing.'* Who tliis Abadun^ 
 this son of desti'uction is, the Apostle Jolm tells us. After 
 describing a destructive army, he says, '•'■And they hcH, a 
 " King over them, vviiich is the angel of the bottomless pit, 
 " whose name in the Hebrew ton.^ue, is Abaddon, but in the 
 *' Greek tongue, iiatli his name Apoilijon.'''' Thattliis destruc- 
 tion is in hell, with fallen angels, appears farther from the 
 case of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. M Ijen " they pens/ied 
 or were destroyed from among the congregation," it was by 
 going down '' into ^heot^"* or " into Hades ;^* as the Septua- 
 gint has it.'' This was done by the just judgment of an angry 
 God: for Solomon says, '■'■ Sheol and Abadun, [or (70) Haules 
 and Apoleia^ are before the Lord." When sinners rejjent 
 and believe in the Saviour, God s law and justice are saJis- 
 jied through his atonement. Their light afflictions would 
 then be temporal. But if they do not repent, their sufferings 
 must be eternal; for God has said that " Sheol and Abadun are 
 never satisfied.'e The road which leads to destruction is 
 said in Scripture, to be a broad way.f The Psalmist uses the 
 word way, as a figure for the ungodly multitudes who walk 
 in tills way of perdition. In this sense, he says, " the way 
 of the ungodly shall perish or be destroyed.^'s In tlie use of 
 the word nejeh, which is now under discussion, Job says, 
 ** They perish forever^ without any regarding it."'* 
 
 OD. 
 
 Concerning the God of Israel, David says to Solomon, " If 
 thou forsake him, he will cast thee off forever.'^ The same 
 word occurs in the declaration tliat Amaiek and otlier ene- 
 mies of tlie church "shall pei'ish/orever.'* The Psalmist 
 
 o This holds in all except the last, Dan. vii. 11 , which Daniel wrote in Chaldee; 
 and where the word is ejibed, only a dialectical variation, 
 d Num. xvi. 33. 
 e Prov. xxvii. 20. f Matt. vii. 13. g Ps. i. . h Job iv* 20. 
 
270 
 
 says, " When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all 
 " the workers of iniquity do flourish ; it is that they shall be 
 *' destroyedybrei/'^r." ''Let them be confounded and troubled 
 "forever; yea let them be put to shame and perish."' 
 
 It is freely admitted that this word does not always con- 
 note e^frrta/ duration : but that it is used familiarly for this 
 purpose, is evident from its frequent connexion with the ex- 
 istence, glory, and perfections of God ; and w ith the happi- 
 ness of the saints : and that it has this signification, in the 
 passages just now quoted, appears from its connexion with 
 that destruction^ which is absolutely eternal. 
 
 Concerning God, it is said, " His righteousness endurcth 
 forever.'''' " His praise endureth/o/eyer." " Thus saith tlie 
 High and Lofty One, that inhabiteth eternity.*' Tow ards his 
 people, it is said, that •■' He rctaineth not his anger forever.** 
 Therefore they shall love and enjoy him for ever. This is' 
 proved by the follow ing and similar texts : •' The fear of the 
 Lord is clean, enduring/orei;er." Concerning the heavenly 
 Canaan, it is said, " The righteous shall inherit the land, and 
 dwell therein for ever.** ** Your heart shall live for ever.'* 
 " Thou hast made him most blessed /or ever.'' " So will I sing 
 praise unto thy name /or ever.** " His seed also will 1 make 
 to endure/or cfcr." "His righteousness end ureth /or fu^r." 
 " The lip of truth shall be established /or ever.*"" '' Trust ye 
 in the Lord /or ever.** 
 
 The most of those passages in which Orfis connected with 
 Olam, I shall postpone to the next head, in which 0/am may 
 be particularly considered. Only one of them claims atten- 
 tion at this time. It is that in which God says to Israel, 
 " Ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.** 
 The original is, " od oulami od'* As or/ sometimes signifies 
 an indefinite, and sometimes an infinite futurity, I would ren- 
 der this passage literally, as follows : " Ye shall not be 
 ashamed nor confounded to the eternities of futurity^ or, to the 
 eternities of infinite duration.*' 
 
 Concerning this phrase, my opponent speaks in the follow - 
 ing manner, viz. " I now again repeat, that if my opponent 
 ** can shew, that the expression, od oulami od., which 1 am 
 ** willinff to admit may signify an absolute eternity, is any 
 ^ w here in the sacred volume, used in connexion with punish- 
 " ment, misery or death, then he has the argument ; and if 
 * not, it is evident, that what I said yesterday, still stands 
 
 i 1 C'hr. xxviii. 9. Num. xxiv. 20, 24. Ps. xcii. f . Ixxxiii. 17. In the 2n'l anfl 
 3rd of these texis, the plural »"| W 's used. 
 
271 
 
 *' sure, and we may fairly conclude that he caniiot do it."j 
 This declaration is here introduced, because it contains a 
 concession, tluit the phrase in question sitjnilies an absolute 
 eternity : otherwise, how could I gain the argument by shew- 
 ing it in connexion with punishment? Now if these words 
 together, signify an absolute eternity, at least one of them 
 alone, must have tliis meaning, independently of its relation 
 to the other. ./2u absolute eternity cannot be formed, by any 
 possible addition or multiplication of limited periods. If 
 oulam mean a limited time, and if o</ mean nothing more than 
 this, then, oidami od would mean, the times of limitation. But 
 this' would contradict my opponent, who says that this ex- 
 pression signifies an absolute eternity. Himself, tlierefore, 
 being judge, one of them must havetliis signification. Which 
 will' he choose ? He has told us. After pretending to weigh 
 his translation and mine, he says, '' In neither way does it 
 
 imply that 0*7*)^ oulam, of itself, means an absolute eternity.*''^ 
 He teaches us that oulami signifies limited aii;es. Unless there- 
 fore orf signifies eternity, tins expression will signify nothing 
 more thsm ages of limita-iGn. To make out his p(»int, my 
 opponent must hold that od is eternity. He would then trans- 
 late the passage, " Ye shall not be ashamed nor confound- 
 ed to the ages of eternity.''* But if this be true, where are those, 
 concerning whom the Psalmist says, " Let them be con- 
 founded and troubled to od, to eterniiyV All those authorities 
 which are quoted in the commencement of this article, will, 
 according to tliis interpretation, consign unbelievers to an 
 absolute eternity of suflcring. 
 
 3. 
 
 OLAM. 
 
 This word occurs in the singular and the plural numbei"s, 
 and in different forms. In the singular, it is olam, ovlam, 
 and eoutam. In the plural, it is oulamim ; unless Avhen in go- 
 vernment, as in the example given in the last aiticJe : in 
 which case it is oulami. Why it should signify eternity, when 
 used in any form, or in either number, I may not be able to 
 tell. It should suffice, for me to prove the fact. Many au- 
 thorities have been given, in which this word is connected 
 with the punishment of the wicked. If, therefore, it can be 
 shewn that this word signifies an eternal duration, the wicked 
 must be punished for ever. 
 
 j Minutes p. 16S. k Minutes p. 175. 
 
272 
 
 As the instance cited nnder the last head, presents this 
 word in ihe pluial nunibci', I shall mention other examples 
 in which it is found in the plural, unconnected with od. If 
 we examine the whole oi the 61st Psalm, we shall find that 
 David points to an eternal residence with God,(comp verse 
 7,) wheti he says, in \erse 4, " I will ahide in thy tabernacle 
 OULAMIM, /or ewer.*' In an address to Jehovah, the same 
 writer says, " Thy kingdom is a kingc'om of kal olamim, 
 all efernilics.'*^ Did, or did not the Psalmist mean, that the 
 kingdom of Jehovah was absolufely eternal? It has already 
 been noticed that Dan. ix. 24, isnrged by my opponent and 
 other Universal ists, in favour of their system. It is there 
 said, that the Messiah shall *' make an end of sins," and 
 " bring in everlasting righteousness '' This, they think, esta- 
 blishes the doctrine, that sin is temporal, but righteousness 
 absolutely eternal. But let it be remembered that the word 
 for everlasting in this text, is olamim^ Does this mean less 
 than eternal ? 
 
 In Isa. xlv. 1 7, where this word governs or/, it is found in 
 the former part of the verse, without that connexion. On 
 this my opponent speaks as follows, viz. " The passage re- 
 " ferred to reads thus : ' But Israel sliall he saved in the 
 *' Lord, with an («>ulamim) everlasting salvation.' In this 
 " former part of the verse, there is no difference between me 
 " and my opponent, we are perfectly agreed with respect to 
 f' their everlasting salvation; it is in the latter clause only, 
 " that there is any collision between us. ' Ye shall not be 
 " ashamed noi' (onfounded (od oulami od) world without 
 " mt?,' "iv. It will be recollected that these are the words of 
 my Universalist 0})p;!nent, stating waetcin we agree, and 
 wherein we disaa:rec, concerning the same text. Our disa- 
 g)-eement is on the meaning o^ou'ami in the latter clause of the 
 verse. I say that it signifies an absolute eternity. He denies 
 that this word, " of itself, meansan absolute eternity."" This 
 is the "collision" of which bespeaks. Now, what is the 
 subject, inMhich he says we ai-e *' perfectly agreed ?" It is 
 concerning this same word oulamim, with the same applica- 
 tion, and in the same verse, but otily in the former part of the 
 verse. I say that it nutans absolutely eternal, and so does he; 
 for otherwise, we could not be " perfectly agreed." In both 
 cases it is predicated of the salvation of the saints. I say that 
 
 1 P«. cxlv. 13. 
 
 ra Minutes, p. 163. 
 
 n MinuUB, p. 175. 
 
273 
 
 both cases, it has the same meaning-. He thinks that there is 
 an infinite difference in its meaning ; as, in one instance, it 
 signifies an eternal, and in the other a temporary duration ! ! 
 Let him shew a reason for this difference, and it shall have 
 its weight: hut let him not expect that you will give the name 
 of criticism, to an empty assertion, not only without evidence, 
 but contrary to all sober rules of interpretation* 
 
 But you will ask, how it comes h- pass, that he disputes 
 the force ofthese words in the latter clause of this verse, with- 
 in a few breaths of a concession, that they " may signify an 
 absolute eternity ," and an admission, that the same expres- 
 sion, in connexion with punishment, would prove its eternity. 
 That he has thus contradicted himself, is certain : and as I 
 have made use of his admission of the truth, I am willing to 
 examine his reasoning against it. It rests upon a counterfeit 
 translation of the passage, coined for the occasion. He says 
 that od oularni od, should be rendered, ^o the age and farther. 
 By this he proves that there is duration, farther than the age, 
 or beyond oularni^ and of course, oulami cannot mean eternity. 
 When I reminded him that there was no and in the original, 
 nor even in the Septuagint; and that the insertion of this con- 
 junction, in such a translation as his, was a perversion ; he 
 maintained its correctness, and quoted Dan. xii. 3, to prove it. 
 *' And they that be wise, shall shine as the brightness of the 
 " firmament : and they that turn many to righteousness, as 
 " the stars /or ever AND ever ; to oulam and OD." To give 
 a more complete refutation of my assertion, lie shews that the 
 Septuagint of this same passage in Daniel, has the conjunc- 
 tion and. It reads, " EIS TON AiONA KAI ETI, to the ao-e 
 and longer,^^ as he would render it. He attributes the very 
 same meaning to Isa. xlv 17, *"' heos ton aionos eti,'^ which he 
 renders in Latin, '■''in oetermim ampliiis." 
 
 As this is an Universalist method of reasoning, I wish it to 
 be well understood. I have said that there is nu and, either 
 in the original or the Septuagint of Isa. xlv. 17, and that the 
 insertion of this conjunction in such a translation as his, is a 
 perversion of the scriptures. Here we are directly at issue: 
 and as he takes the affirmative, he produces the evidence. 
 Alter hearing him speak so often of my ignorance of the lan- 
 guages, (a fault which I freely confess,) you perhaps tremble 
 for my fate, when you see him open the Hebrew and Greek 
 scriptures. You expect to hear him read, forthwith, in Isa. 
 xlv. 17, and shew, to my confusion, that it contains a con- 
 junction. Instead of this he turns to Dan. xii. 3. Here wefin«l 
 
 L I. 
 
274 
 
 li conjunction in the Hebrew, Greek and English. Where- 
 fore, my opponent triumphantly concludes that he has a right 
 to insert this word in Isa. xlv. 17, where it is not tound. But 
 lest this reasoning should not appear conclusive, even to his 
 Own followers, he reads the Septuagiut of Isaiah, in the very 
 text itself. This is coming nearer home ; and you expect an 
 English translation with the word and in it. Instead of this 
 he gives it to you in Latin ; " in aeturnum ampiius." I sup- 
 pose he thought that those Universalists who, like myself, 
 were ignorant of the languages, would think this translation 
 amply furnished with conjunctions. 
 
 When ray opponent renders OD OULAMI OU, by the words, 
 to the age and farther^ he knows, as well as I do, that oulami 
 is in the plural number, and that a literal translation, which 
 he affects to make, would give it a plural rendering. He 
 knows also, that if there were a conjunction between these 
 words^ the tirstof them would be written oulamim instead of 
 oulami. The dropping of the last letter, shews that this word 
 governs the one which follows it. In Western languages, 
 government is usually marked by the word governed : in the 
 Eastern, by a change in the word which governs. Oulami 
 has in itself, the force of a genitive, the sign of which, in our 
 language, is o/", and not and. If therefore, this word mean 
 uyes^ and if od mean farther^ the literal rendering of this ex- 
 pression would be, to the ages of farther I ! 
 
 The reason why ihe Septuagint have not marked this go- 
 vernment in the usual way, is, not that they differed from our 
 translators, in their understanding of the passage, but because 
 they used the little indeclinable word eii^ which is frequently 
 useu to translate od, and which, like o</, usually signifies in- 
 dejiuiiii or infinite duration; generally future, but sometimes 
 past. Job says, "Knowest thou not this ofoldT'o The He- 
 brew here for <f old, is meni od. Symmachus renders it, ap^ 
 AlONOS. But Trouimiiis informs us, that various Greek in- 
 terpreters render it apo ton eti. This shews that eti is con- 
 sidered a proper translation of orf, when it means duration 
 past or future, limited or onliujited. But take notice thatefi, 
 though indeclinable, is here treated as a noun in the genitive 
 case; APO TOU ETi, of old. Take this example to the Sep- 
 foagiiit of Isa. xlv. 17, and you can easily lind why it did not 
 insert a conjunction. ''■ Heos tou aionos eti,'' is literally trans- 
 lated, "Ho the eternity of futurity.'^ Except in its changing 
 the number of the governing noun, as our translators have. 
 
275 
 
 done, and as my opponent has done, it is a perfectly literai 
 rendering o( llie original, ""to the eternities of futurity.'* 
 
 I need not consume your time in quoting evidence that eti 
 denotes an indefinite futurity. P More than this will be done, 
 if it can be shewn that it signifies an endless futurity Solo- 
 mon says, " The king that faithfully judgeth the poor, his 
 -** throne shall be established ybr ever."'^ That this for ever^ 
 means an endless futurity, should be admitted by my oppo- 
 nent, since he believes that the thrones promised to the apos- 
 tles, are to endure for ever. To all believers, God has pro- 
 mised *'a kingdom which cannot be moved,'' an incorrupti- 
 ble crown, "a crown of glory that fadeth not away."r This 
 eternal, heavenly reward, therefore, is that throne, which, ac- 
 cording to the proverb just quoted, "shall be established/or 
 €uer.'* This ever is od in the Hebrew. Trommius informs 
 us, that various Greek interpreters render the phrase, " EiS 
 AIONA, to eternity" Symmacbus renders it, " EIS AIEI, to 
 always.' Aquila renders it, *' eis ETI, to endless duration :'* 
 for what less can eti mean here? 
 
 In the New Testament one single verse contains this word 
 four times, in such ^ connexion, thdi even iSemi-UniversalistSi 
 who deny the faithfulness of God in the execution of his 
 threats ; and CriptoSocinians, who deny Christ's vicarious 
 satisfaction ; are forward in declaring, that it affords irrefra- 
 gable evidence of the absolute eternity of the sinner's punish- 
 ment, as it certainly does of the saints' happiness. At the 
 close of time, when nothing but eternity remains, the Holy 
 Spirit says, "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and 
 *' he that is filthy, let him be filthy «<^7/ : and he that is righte- 
 " ous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him 
 '* be holy stilU^ In these four cases, the word still, renders 
 the Greek word eti: and as it removes all limits from the 
 continuance of the saints' holiness, and consequent happiness ; 
 so it does from the sinner's corruption and punishment. 
 
 The meaning of eti being thus established, it is not at all 
 alarming to find it connected with oulam by a conjunctions 
 as in the passage cited by my opponent from the Septuagint 
 of Daniel. The conjunction kai is found in the Greek, be- 
 cause raw is found in the Hebrew; and eti is found in the 
 Greek, because od is in the Hebrew. Oulam and od are justly 
 rendered ''*■ eis ton aiona kai eti,*' by the Seventy, and '^''for 
 
 p In iv. 55. vii. S3, xli. 35. xiv. 19. xvi. 12. Heb. x. 37. Rey. vi. 11. 
 
 q Prov. xxix. 14. 
 
 V Matt. xix. 28. Heb, 3ii. 28. 1 Cor. ix= 25. 1 Pet. v. 4. Luke xix. 17. Rev. i. 6, 
 
S76 
 
 ever and ever,^' by onr translators. Neither is there any real 
 discrepance bttwoen this passage of the Septuagint, and the 
 original of Isa. xlv. 17. In Isaiah, oulami governs od, and 
 therefore their literal rendering is, "eternities of futurity^ or 
 eternities of endless duration'' But if the Septuagiut had in- 
 serted a conjunction, and rendei'ed it, *'eis ton aiona kai eli" 
 this, to a man acquainted with the language, would have con- 
 veyed the same sense, and rc(iuired the same English trans- 
 lation. It is a rule which often holds good, that, " When 
 *' one substantive in joined to another by a copulative, the 
 " one must be translated as governing the other.'' This rule 
 is quoted from an authority vvhicli the Universalists cannot 
 resist. It is the celebrated Dr. M'Knight. As this great 
 critic was a renegado Presbyterian, with more learning than 
 piety, and more zeal for his own honour, than for the Ark 
 of God, he must of course, be a favourite with Mr. Balfour, 
 and he classed with Dr. Campbell, among the very best of 
 ni'.n. In the lJ)th section of his 4th Essay, Preliminary to 
 his translation of the Apostolical Epistles, he has shewn that 
 the above rule marks a feature of the Hebrew, Greek and 
 Latin idioms. If this be correct, then, instead of inserting a 
 conjunction, between Isaiah's two nouns which are in govern- 
 ment, we shall be obliged to explain Daniel's conjunction, 
 as if his two nouns were in government. His ^^ oulam and 
 o</," or his " eis ton aiona kai eti,^' will then read, " to the 
 eternity of endless duration,^* or which is the same thing, 
 " world without end.^^ 
 
 It is evident that Dan. xii. 8, is a parallel to Isa. xlv. 17. 
 In this light I consider it, and in this light my opponent has 
 quoted it. His adducing it as a parallel, has one aspect 
 which he is far from wishing it to have. Let it be marked 
 that he has repeatedly challenged me to slievv a parallel ex-r 
 pression connected with punishment In one of these ban- 
 ters, the following arc his words, viz. " I challenged him to 
 " shew me a passage where the same phrase is used with re- 
 " ference to punishment, as is used in Isa. xlv. 17, and which 
 " is rendered in the common version, world witlwut end, and 
 *' is there connecte<l with, and brought to prove F/rtRNAL 
 <' SALVATION ! I again repeat this challenge ! 11 he does, or 
 <' can shew it, he has the argument ; and if not, the argument 
 <' must be mine."s Now why did my oj)ponent endeavour to 
 force into Isaiah's text, the conjunction which is found in 
 Paniel's only? It was on this ground and this alone, that 
 
 s Minutee,p. 17t5. 
 
277 
 
 the '* oulam and o</," in Daniel, was precisely equivalent to 
 the oulami od, in Isaiah. If he did not mean this, then he 
 spoke without meaning, and he shouhl retract his reasoning, 
 as perfectly nugatory. But I have admitted and proved, 
 that the two expressions are equivalent, both in the Hebrew 
 and the Greek. If therefore, either expression can be shewn 
 in connexion with punishment, his own demands are com- 
 plied with. During the dinner interval of the discussion to- 
 day, a friend informed me, that even these unfair, restricted, 
 and peurile conditions could be complied with. Oulam and 
 od^ precisely as they are found in Daniel, and of course, as 
 substantially found in Isaiah, you will see connected with 
 punishment, in Ps. ix. 5. " Thou hast rebuked the heathen, 
 " thou ha,st destroyed the wicked, tliou hast put out their 
 ^ name ybr ever and ever, or, to the eternity of endless dura- 
 " tion, or ivorld without end.*' When my opponent thought 
 tha* it would answer his purpose, he assumed the identity of 
 this expression with that in Isaiah: but now he can discover 
 a very important difference, in the original and even in our 
 translation. I know not how to reply to this tergiversation, 
 better than in the words addressed to me by an amiable and 
 pious brother. '* I was happy to observe," said he, " that 
 " you had compelled your adversary to rest his scheme on 
 " the difference between the Hebrew phrase rendered, world 
 ** without eiid^ and that translated, /ur ever and ever. May 
 " all erroneous systems be made to hang as publicly upon 
 '* an aiiy nothing.^'' 
 
 Anotlier subterfuge equally claims our admiration. He 
 informs us that even if tlieir names are blotted out forever, 
 yet tlieii- persons may be saved, and have a " new name" 
 given them But if a man's old name may be blotted out, 
 and his person saved, may not a new name be given to him, 
 and his person lost? /Vnd remember that the text not only 
 speaks of the eternal blasting of their name but of the eter- 
 nal perdition of tlieir persons. '' Thou hast destroyed the 
 wicked, thou hast put out out their name/oreyer cnrf ewer." 
 
 But my opponent's most formidable embankment against 
 this inspired artillery, is a denial that this text relates to 
 futurity at all. His words are as follows, viz. " David 
 *' was speaking of an event that was then past, and which 
 ** has no reference to a future state of existence."'^ The only 
 excuse for this wresting of the word of God, is, that all the 
 
 tMiimtesp, 323, 
 
278 
 
 verbs in the text, are in the past tense. But as most of tlic 
 prophecies are written in the same way, this mode of inter- 
 pretation would make an entire revolution in all our views, 
 Universalist as well as Orthodox. Let us take a single Uni- 
 versalist text, and try it by this rule. " And every creature 
 " which is in Heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, 
 " and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I 
 " saying, blessing, and honour, and glory and power, be un- 
 '* to him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for 
 " ever and ever."" The verb in this prophecy is in the past 
 tense. Has it therefore no reference to futurity ? My op* 
 ponent has quoted it as referring to eternal futurity. It was 
 future to the writer; though, as the context will shew, it has 
 already been fulfilled. 
 
 But if David's words be thus interpreted, in order to favour 
 the wicked, some of his expressions of hope for his own sal- 
 vation, must be explained away. Of himself, he says, " He 
 ** asked life of thee, and thou gavest it him, even length of 
 *' da,jSf forever and eufr."* Oulam and or/ are used hereinc<m- 
 nexion with life; and if this be not eternal life^ I doubt wheth- 
 er it can be found in the Scriptures. Yet the promise is 
 conveyed by verbs in the past tense. 
 
 Under the preceding head, the most of those passages in 
 which oulam and od occur together, were postponed to this 
 article. In addition to those wliich have already been 
 quoted, the following will shew that if these words do not 
 signify absolute eternity, there is no eternity recognized in 
 the Bible. '* We will walk in the name of the Lord our 
 God/or ever and ever,"" *' I trust in the mercy of God /or ever 
 and ever.'''' '*I will bless thy name/or ewer anrf ewer.'' ♦'■ I will 
 praise thy name /or ever anrf eucr." " Therefore shall the 
 people praise thee /or ever and ^vcr." " For this God is our 
 God forever and ever.^^ The works of God *• stand fast /or 
 ever and ever.''* "The Lord is King/oreuer and ever ^ *' The 
 Lord shall rc\^\\ forever and ever.** Now if the faith and ho-; 
 liness, obedience, happiness, and glory of the saints; and if 
 the sovereignty of Jehovah, be eternal, then ontam and orf 
 signify eternal : for it is evident that the duration, and the 
 utmost duration of these things was here intended. 
 
 But it is not only in connexion with orfthat oulam has this 
 signification. When standing alone, it sometimes signifies 
 
 u Rev. V. I S. 
 V Ps. xxi; 4. 
 w Jsa. Ixiii; 16. Ps. xciii: 2. x\\; 6. 
 
279 
 
 eternity past, and sometimes eternity to come. In the for- 
 mer sense, Isaiah says to Jehovah, " Thy name is from 
 everlasting.''' The Psalmist says, "Thou art from everlast- 
 ing.'''' *' Remember Lord ! thy tender mercies and thy 
 loving kindnesses j for they have been ever of old.''* 
 
 The same word is often used to signify eternity past, and 
 repeated in the same sentence to mean future eternity. 
 "From everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.'' "The mercy 
 of God is from everlasting to everlasting, upon them that fear 
 him." " Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, from everlasting 
 to everlasting.'" "■ Blessed be thou, the Lord God of Israel, 
 our Father, from everlasting to everlasting.^'' These cxijres- 
 sions are frequently repeated.^ In the first and last of these 
 examples,y the Septuagint reads *' apo tou aionos kui heos ton 
 ainos.'^ In the second of them the Vulgate reads, " ab asferno 
 et usque in seternum.'"' In tlie two last it reads " ab aeternoin 
 <c/c/'m<m," and ** ab ceterno usque in ceterniim.*^ All these agree 
 perfectly with our translation, and with the Orthodox view 
 of the w ord oulam. 
 
 As this word occurs in most of the texts belonging to this 
 branch of affirmative evidence ; and as niy opponent has de- 
 nied that it signifies an absolute eternity ; it is suitable to 
 produce a goodly portion, of that abundant evidence which 
 the Scriptures contain on this subject. Oulam, when stand- 
 ing alone, is one of the most usual words, whereby the 
 Spirit of God conveys the doctrine of the absolute eternity of 
 the saints' happiness. Of such it is said, "He that doeth 
 these things shall never be moved." " He shall never suffer 
 the righteous to be moved.'' " Surely he shall not be moved 
 for ever J'"' " The righteous shall never be moved."^ '* And the 
 work of righteousness siiall be peace ; and the effect of right- 
 eousness, quietness and assurance forever.'''' '* As for me, 
 thou upholdest me in mine integrity, and settest me before 
 thy face/oreuer." ** He shall abide before God forever.** 
 " Depart from evil, and do good, and dwell for evermore: 
 For t!ie Loi'd loveth judgment, and forsaketh not his saints^ 
 they are preserved /or^i'er." *' The Lord shall preserve thy 
 going out and thy coming in, from this time forth, and even 
 for evermore.'''' " The Lord is round about liis people, from 
 henceforth, even /or euer." "For thy people Israel, didst 
 thou make thine own people forever.'* *' Let Israel hope iit 
 
 X Ps. xc; 2. ciii: 17. cvi;48. xli; 13: 1 Chron. xxix; 10. xti;,"?^. 
 
 y As an-anged in note x. 
 
 T Ps, XV; 5. Iv; 22. cxii; 6. Prov, T; f^O- 
 
280 
 
 the Lord from henceforth, and forever.*\ '* For the Lord 
 will not cast off /or ever.''* *' Therefore God hath blessed thee 
 forever." ** Save thy people, and bless thine inheritance: 
 feed them also, and lift them up forever,'*'' *' In theeO Lord ! 
 do I put my trust: let me never be put to confusion." " My 
 flesh and my heart faileth : but God is the strength of my 
 heart, and my portion /oreuer." "The Lord knoweth the 
 days of the upright, and their inheritance shall be/or euer.''^ 
 "My salvation shall be/or ever^ and my righteousness shall 
 not be abolished." " 1 will make thee an eternal excellen- 
 cy." " The Lord commanded the blessing, even life/oreuer- 
 moreJ* " I will glorify thy name for evermore.''* " I will 
 praise thee /oreuer." " So we thy people and sheep of thy 
 pasture, will give thee thanks/or ever.** '* I will sing of the 
 mercies of tlie Lord /or ever** " We will bless the Lord 
 from this time fortli and /or evermore.'* *' Let all those that 
 put their trust in thee rejoice : let them ever shout for joy, 
 because thou defendest them. ' "And the ransomed of the Lord 
 shall return, and come to Zion with songs, and everlasting 
 joy upon their heads ; they shall obtain joy and gladness, 
 and sorrow and sighing shall flee away." " Therefore the 
 redeemed of the Lord shall return, and come with singing 
 unto Zion ; and everlasting joy shall be upon their head : 
 they shall obtain gladness and joy; and sorrow and mourn- 
 ing shall flee away." " Everlasting joy shall be unto them,"^ 
 Several of these quotations will be readily recognized, as 
 favourite Universalist texts, to prove the absolute eternity 
 of the happiness of all those, concerning whom these passa- 
 ges speak. Such an interpretation is very reasonable indeed : 
 for the same word, which, in them, communicates the eter- 
 nity of the saints' happiness, does, in the 7th anil 9th verses 
 of the 24th Psalm, prove the eternity of Christ's name and 
 kingdom, and of that heaven, into whose uplifted doors, 
 the divine and eternal Head of the Church has entered. 
 " Lift up your head. Oh ye gates ! and be ye lifted up, ye 
 everlasting doors ! and the King of Glory shall come in." 
 And now that he is in heaven, "his name shall endure /or 
 ever ;** and his kingdom shall endure, " from henceforth, 
 even /or ever.** a 
 
 aPs. 37;18. 41; 12. 61; 7, 37; 27,28. 121; 8. 125; 2. 1 Chr. 17; 
 Ps 131" 3 
 
 b Lara. 3; 31. Ps. 45; 2. 28; 9. 71; 1. 73; 26. 37; 18. 
 
 clsa. 51;6. 60; 15. Ps. I'i.JjS. 86; 12, 52; 9. 79; 13. 115; 18. 89; 
 6; n. Isa. 35:10. 51:11. Cl:7. 
 
 fl Ps. 72: 17. J«a, 9: 7. 
 
281 
 
 Those lovers of truth, who have patience to bear a fatigue? 
 ing dissertation upon an important word, will not probably 
 be averse to my producing evidence that ouiam, when stand- 
 ing alone, is used with great familiarity by the Holy Spi- 
 rit, to signify the absolute eternity of tlie being and blessed- 
 ness, perfections and purposes of the one uncreated and im- 
 moi'tal God. 
 
 ** For 1 lift uj) my hand to Heaven, and say, I live for 
 ever.*'' " And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was 
 upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand 
 and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth 
 forever''' "The Lord shall endure /brt;i;er." "Thou Lord 
 shalt endure/orf?wr." *' Thou O Lord! reraainest /brever."e 
 **Thou Lord, art Most High, for evermore.'* "And Abraham 
 planted a grove in Beei -sheba, and called there on the name 
 of the Lord, the everlasting God." " Hast thou not known? 
 hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the Lord, the 
 Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is 
 weary ?"f *' This is my name forever.''* " Let it even be es- 
 tablished, tliat thy name may be magnified for ever." " Thy 
 name, Lord! endureth/or ever.''* He delivered the children 
 of Israel, '* dividing the water before them, to make himself 
 an everlasting name."s <■ Let thy name be magnified/or ever." 
 ** And blessed be his glorious jiame /or ever.*'' "Blessed 
 be the name of the Lord from this time forth and for 
 ever more** *' Blessed he the Lord for ever more*^^ " For 
 erer, O Lord! thy word is settled in Heaven." " The word 
 of our God, shall stand /or ever." '* The counsel of the Lord 
 standeth for ever.** " The righteousness of thy testimonies is 
 everlasting.*' " Concerning thy testimonies, L have known 
 of old, that thou hast founded them /or ever.'* "Thy word is 
 true, from the beginning ; and every one of thy righteous 
 judgments endureth /or ewer."' "The Lord shall be unto 
 thee an everlasting light:*' " thine everlasting light.'* " The 
 glory of the Lord shall endure for ever** " I will not con- 
 tend/or euer.'' " Because the Lord loved Israel for ever.'* 
 " I have loved thee with an everlasting love."j *' Under- 
 neath are the everlasting arms.'* " He ruleth by his power 
 for ever.'* " Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteous- 
 
 e Deut. xxxii.40. Dan. xii. 7. Ps. ix. 7. 102. 12. Lam. v. 19. 
 f Ps. xcii. 8. Gen. xxi. 33. Isa. xl. 28. 
 g Ex. iii. 15 1 Chr. xvii. 24. Ps. cxxxt. 13. Isa. Ixiii. 12. 
 h 2. Sam. vii. 26. Fs Ixxii. 19. cxiii. S. 89. 52. 
 i Ps. cxix. 89. l»a. xl. 8. Ps. xxxiii.ll. 119. osliv. 152.160. 
 j. Isa. Ix, 19. 20, Ps. civ. 31. Isa. Ivii. 16. 1 Kgs. x. 19. Jer. -^^ji 3. 
 
 M M 
 
288 
 
 ness.*' ** My righteousness shall be /or ever. " Which keep- 
 cth truth for ever.'* •' The truth of the Lord endureth for 
 ever.''* " Thou shalt keep them O Lord! thou shalt preserve 
 them from this g<>neration for ever."^ " With everlasting 
 kindness, will I have mercy on thee." "O give thanks unto 
 the Lord; for he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever.'** 
 The eternity of God's mercy is declared in very many in- 
 stances, of which twenty-six occur in one Psalm.i. In ad- 
 dition to the passage lately quoted, pointing out the eternity 
 of God's sovereignty, other Scriptures say, '' The Lord sit- 
 teth King Jor ever.*'' " The Lord shall reign for ever.** " He 
 is the living God, and an everlasting King." " His kingdom 
 is an evet lasting kingdom :'' " Whose dominion is an ever- 
 lastinq dominion." " His dominion is an everlasting domi- 
 nion :" " Whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom."m 
 
 In opposition to this mass of evidence, which might still 
 be enlarged, my opponent would urge that oulam is some- 
 times used for a limited duration. Yes ; it is often used in 
 this sense. In Exod. xxi. 6, and elsewhere it signifies the 
 lengtli of a man's life. " He shall serve him forever :" that 
 is, until he dies. It sometimes means the duration of a dis- 
 pensation: as in Ex. xxvii. 21, " It shall be a statute /or 
 ever.*' Or Ex. xl. 15, *' Their anointing shall surely be an 
 everlasting priesthood.'' It ^sometimes signifies the duration 
 of the earth : as Habb. iii. 6. " The everlasting mountains 
 were scattered, the perpetual hills did bow." Or Eccles. i. 
 4. " One generation passeth away, and another generation 
 Cometh, but the earth abideth for ever** But because this 
 word is sometimes limited to the Jewish dispensation, to the 
 life of man on earth, or to Ihe duration of the earth itself, 
 shall we limit it, when connected with God's being or domi- 
 nion, his truth or justice, his love or mercy ? Universal ists 
 themselves often give it an unlinuted sense, when the ever' 
 lasting joy of the saints is mentioned. Foi this they have 
 good reason: but, with divine assistance, we shall sliew that 
 there is as good reason, for giving it an unlimited sense, 
 when the everlastmg punishment of the wicked is affirmed. 
 
 One of the strongest authorities whicli can be found, in 
 proof of the eternal happiness of the saints, is Dan. xii.2. 
 But this passage uses the same word o?//am, in the same sen- 
 tence, to declare also, the eternal misery of the wicked. 
 
 k Deut. XXX. 27. Ps. Ixvi. 7. cxix. 142. Isa. li. 8. Ps. cxlvi. 6. cxvii. 2. xii. 7. 
 
 1 Isa. liv. 8. 1 Clir. xvi. 34, 41, 2 Chr. v. 13. vii, 3, 6. xx. 21. Ezra iii. 11. Ps. 
 Ixxxix, 2. 28. c. 5. cvi. h cvii. 1. cxviii. 4. 29. cxxxviii. 8. Jer.xxxiii.il. Pa. 
 cxxx%i. 1 — 26. 
 
 m Ps, xxix. 10. cxlvi. 10. Jer, x. 10. Dan. ir. 3, 34. vii. \i. 27. 
 
288 
 
 ** And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall 
 " awake, some to everlastint) life, and some to shame and 
 ** everlasting contempt." This text speaks of the general re- 
 surrection. Now, is not that life which men enjoy after that 
 event, absolutely eternal? If so, then the punishment of the 
 wicked is absolutely eternal: for the duration of both is ex- 
 pressed by the same word, without any reason for giving it 
 a different explanation. In both instances, all limited sig- 
 nifications are excluded by the exigency of the case. In this 
 place, oulam, cannot signify the duration of a man's mortal 
 life; because all mortal lives have already expired ; — it can- 
 not mean the Jewish, or any other c arthly dispensation ; be- 
 cause all are then abrogated ; — neither can it denote the du- 
 ration of the earth's existence : for this resurrection takes 
 place, after time, with all its divisions, sliall have been buried 
 in "the wreck of matter, and the cru.sh of worlds." "Yet 
 " once more, I shake not the earth only, but also Jieaven. 
 " And this word, yet once more, signifieth the removing of 
 '* those things which are shaken, as of things that are made, 
 " that those things which cannot he shaken may remain. "a 
 If this text relate to the general resurrection, which even 
 Manasseh Ben Israel, a Jewish writer, admits,^ then my op- 
 ponent sees that the argument drawn from it, in belialf of 
 future rewards and punishments, is unanswerable. He there- 
 fore denies its application to that important event. He de- 
 nies that it speaks of all mankind awaking from their long 
 sleep, but only a part. It does not say, "all of tiieni that 
 sleep,'' but " matiy of them that sleep in the dust of the earth 
 shall awake " In this restricted explanation of the woi-d ma- 
 ny, he considers himself supported by the Septnagint, which 
 gives the word poUoi, witliout the article. He insists upon 
 it, thsd polloi, Without the article, never signifies the whole 
 human race ; whereas, with the article, it does necessarily 
 signify all men universally. This latter position he took long 
 ago, in his comment on Romans, vth. On the same cliap^er. 
 Dr. Chauncey took the same ground. His great antagonist 
 duly exposed him. If this criticism be true, then Paul has 
 pronounced alt men false teachers : for he says, " We are 
 " not as many, HOi polloi, which corrupt the word of God." 
 Besides this passage, Edwards refers to evevy one in the 
 New Testament, in which, pol us, in the plural, is used with 
 the article ; and declares, " that in no one of them is a strict 
 
 n Heb. x'.i 26, 27. 
 
 o See Poole's Annotations oh the place. 
 
2d4 
 
 universality clearly intended."? He might have added, that 
 classical usage coincides with that of the New Testament. 
 Instances are accessible, in which Socrates, Plato, and Plu- 
 tarclj,used hoipoUoi, to signify only the generality of their 
 conteinporai ies and predecessors, with whose opinions they 
 were acquainted q 
 
 But it is rather gratifying than alarming, that my oppo- 
 nent hasatlast discovered that /?o//oJ, even without the arti- 
 cle, does not embrace the whole human family. While he 
 does this, lioping to deprive me of one authority, he is not 
 perhaps aware, that he is entirely relinquishing many of his 
 own favourite texts. Every one knows the Universalist ex- 
 planation of Heb ii. 9, 10. Inthelastof these verses, Christ 
 is represented as " bringing tnany sons unto glory." Here 
 is no article in the Greek ; and of course, according to my 
 opponent's criticism, these many sons whom the Saviour 
 brings to glory, are only a part of mankind. This is plain 
 truth. When Christ's blood is said to be " shed for many j" 
 and when he is said to "give his life a ransom for many i** 
 and "to bear the sins of »<any,'' (expressions often occur- 
 ring,)'" my opponent formerly said, that he was thus held forth 
 as the Saviour of all universally. But now he must give up 
 these texts, for in all of them, the many is without the arti- 
 cle, and must, of course, mean only a part of mankind. The 
 Universalists claim in support of their doctrine, the promise 
 quoted in Rom. iv. 17. ♦' I have made thee a father of many 
 nations" But this also, they must give up, both here, and in 
 the Septuagint of Gen. xvii. 5, in both of which places the 
 many is without the article. Isaiah says, *'By his knowledge 
 shall my rigJitcous Servant justify 7nany,^' " and he bare the 
 sins of manyP^ Tliese passages, my opponent has quoted in 
 favour of uriiversal salvation. Y et that Septuagint, to which 
 he has appealed in Dan. xii. 2, has no article in either of 
 these places. The !Oth verse of this same xiith chapter of 
 Daniel, affoi'ds another instance, in which, many, without 
 the article, cannot mean all men. It says, "*Many shall he 
 purified and made white, and tried." Now, that a// shall not 
 be purified, is evident from the whole Bible, and even from 
 the latter part of this same verse j which says, " but the 
 
 p Edwards agnin&t Chauiicey, pp. ICl, IC2. Matt. xvAv. 12, Acts xxvi. 24 
 Koni. xii. 5 XV. 22. 1 (Jor. i. 17, 3.i. 2 Cor. ii. 17. Rev. vvii. 1. 
 q Lelaiid's Advanfafjc and Necessity, vol. 2, pp. 139, 3if 3, 391. 
 r Mk. xiv. 24. x. 45, Matt. xx. 2». xxvi. '2S. Heb. ix. 8. 
 s Isa, liii 11, 12. 
 
28& 
 
 ** wicked shall do wickedly ; and none of the wicked shall 
 ** uniler.tund ; but the wise shall understand." 
 
 The success of my opponent in limiting the anartlirous 
 poUoi to a part of mankind, is calculated to remind one of 
 the battle in which Pyrrhus beat the Romans. After viewing 
 the shattered remains of his army, he observed tbat one 
 more such victory would ruin him. It is evident, that by his 
 criticism on one text, he has criticised himself out of nearly 
 a dozen of his (;bief reliances. And what has he gained in 
 return ? Has he proved that the text in question does not re- 
 late to the resurrection ? This is far from being a legitimate 
 consequence of his premises. The word many may signify a 
 part, and yet it may be said of that part, tliatthey shall rise 
 again. This is not unsupported theory ; it is based upon 
 inspired authority. Concerning the new-born Saviour, Si- 
 meon says, " Behold this Child is set for the fall and rising 
 again of many in Israel.*' Here the word many is without the 
 article, and the text limits its application. Yet in the origi- 
 nal, it is governed by the word signifying resurrection.^ Upon 
 a comparison of Isa. viii 14, to which this alludes, with 
 Rom. ix. 32, 33, where the Prophet is quoted and expound- 
 ed, it will be found that this rising again^ mentioned by Si- 
 meon, embraces the regeneration of the soul, and the resur- 
 rection of the body, both of which belong to that salvation 
 which Christ came to communicate to many. But while he 
 is a savour of life to some, he is a savour of death to others. 
 While he is set for the rising again of many, he is set for the 
 fall of many. And the texts just now referred to, with other 
 scriptures, will - shew, that these two manies^ are entirely 
 distinct from each other; quite as distinct as the sheep and 
 the goats. The passage is, like tliat in Daniel, evidently 
 elliptical. The meaning of it is plainly thisj thai many Jews 
 would aggravate their condemnation by rejecting Christ, 
 and many Jews should be saved through faith in his blood. 
 In the original and the Septuagint of Daniel, these two classes 
 are distributed, by words corresponding with the English 
 these and those.'^ The meaniug of the passage is, that, many 
 of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake to 
 everlasting life, and many of them that sleep in the dust of 
 the earth shall awake to shame and everlasting contempt. 
 Mk. x. 31, is another example of an elliptical sentence, in 
 
 ^ ava<a(J'iv flroXXwv. Luke n. 84. 
 
which polloi occurs once, without the article; yet is evidently 
 intended to mark two classes, in each of which, there arc 
 »wa«»/ individuals. The literal translation is, ''But many 
 shall be first last : and the last first.'' Here one many is ex- 
 pressed, but a second many is evidently implied. The mean- 
 ing therefore is, that many who are first shall be last, and 
 many who are last shall be first. The conclusion of the mat- 
 ter is, that my opponent's criticism has cost him much, and 
 gained him nothing. It still holds good, tliat Dan. xii. 2, 
 consigns some to everlasting punishment, after all the limited 
 periods of time have expired, and nothing but absolute eter- 
 nity remains. 
 
 All those doctrinal parallels which relate to the resurrec- 
 tion, confirm the doctrine which is here taught. And let it 
 be recollected that both parties agree in the propriety of re- 
 sorting to such evidence. Mr. Balfour says "that whatever 
 " difficulty there may be in explaining the peculiar phraseol- 
 " ogy of this passage, it is an allowed rule of interpretation, 
 ** that an obscure passage ought to be explained by those 
 " which are plain, where the same or similar subject istreat- 
 ** ed of."v As he and his Unitarian brethren believe the resur- 
 rection of the body, to be the great doctrine, for the esta- 
 blishment of which, the New Testament was written, they 
 ought to allow that it contains clear information on this sub- 
 j<'ct: and if they object to any light which may be drawn 
 from the Old Testament, it is tlieir own fault ; especially as 
 my opponent has appealed to that authority, on this very- 
 subject. The passage is, Isa. xxv. 8. " He will swallow up 
 *' death in victory ; and tlie Lord God will wipe away tears 
 " from otf all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he 
 ** take away from off all the earth : for the Lord hath spoken 
 *' it."w His argument from this passage depends ujion a 
 misinterpretation of the word all. IMiat this word is gene- 
 rally used in a limited signification, was abundantly proved 
 in my 9th and 10th Universalist jlrffumenis. This passage 
 contains inherent evidence that they are so used here. It 
 says, *'the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off 
 all the earth.'' Now " al/ the earth" here, is so far from em- 
 bracing all men universally, that it excludes all the people 
 of God, whom the ])eople of the earth rebuke, slander, and 
 persecute. *' The reproach and contempt which m as daily 
 
 V Note A , at the close of his work. 
 w Minutes, p. 12'i. 
 
287 
 
 " cast upon his faithful people hy the ungodly worl(l,"K God 
 has promised to take away. In doing this, he will wipe away 
 tears from off all faces ; that is, from all the faces of " his 
 people,*^ to whom the next clause of the verse expressly ap- 
 propriates the promise. Thus, the first ali in the text, signi- 
 fies the people of God, who endure great contempt before the 
 resurrectittn, but whose rebuke is followed by eternal con- 
 solation, after the resurrection. The second all signifies the 
 people of the world, who rebuke and contemn the righteous, 
 before the resurrection, but who shall tiiemselves, awake 
 from the dust of the earth, to an inheritance of "shame and 
 everlasting contempt." With reference to this passage, Paul 
 uses the word all, in the same restricted sense, in 1 Cor. xv. 
 51, quoted by my opponent. 
 
 If while appealing to Isaiah, my opponent had examined 
 the 19th verse of the next chapter, (xxvith,) he would have 
 found the Spirit of Christ promising a happy resurrection, to 
 none but the members of his mystical body ; those who have 
 a covenant interest in his death and resurrection. <' Thy 
 ** dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they 
 ** arise." With this Paul agreed, when he preaclied unto 
 them, Jesus and the resurrection. Also Peter and John, 
 when they '• preached, tlirough Jesus, the resurrection from 
 the dead." Christ himself restricts tlie blessings of a happy 
 resui-rection to those whom the Father had given him, and 
 wliom he emphatically distinguishes from the unbelieving 
 world. .« And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, 
 *' that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing, 
 '* but should raise it up again at the last day." He confines 
 it to those whom the Father draws by his grace. " No man 
 ** can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me, 
 ** draw him ; and I will raise him up at the last day." Paul 
 confines it to those who have the Spirit of God dwelling in 
 them ,• and all men have not the Spirit. " But if the Spirit 
 *' of him that raised up Jesus from the dead, dwell in you, he 
 •* that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken 
 *' your mortal bodies, by his Spirit that dwelleth in you." 
 Christ restricts it to those who eat and drink his flesh and 
 blood. "Whoso eatefh my flesh and drink eih my blood, hath 
 ** eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." Paul 
 confines it to those who trust in God. •' But we had the sen- 
 *' tence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in 
 
 X Poolt's Annotations; 
 
288 
 
 " ourselves, but in God, which raiseth the dead.*' Thus doeis 
 our Lord confine it to believers. " And this is the will of him 
 " that sent me ; that every one which seeth the Son, and be- 
 •* lieveth on him, may have everlasting life, and I will raise 
 " him up at the last day." '* Jesus said unto her, I am the 
 '* resurrection and the life : he that believeth in me, though 
 " he were dead, yet shali he live." Paul, in the 19th verse of 
 this xvth chapter of 1st Corinthians, quoted by my oppo- 
 nent, has appropriated this blessing to those who have Chris- 
 tian hope, and in another Epistle, to the saints who sleep in 
 Jesus. * If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are 
 " of all men, most miserable." " For if we believe that Jesus 
 ** died and rose again, even so them also whichsleep in JesuSy 
 ^' will God bring with him." When John tells us that "the 
 " sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and hell 
 " delivered up the dead which were in them," he does not 
 add. as my opponent would, that all were received into hea- 
 ven, but '* whosoever was not found written in the book of 
 lile, was cast into the lake of fire.'* Concerning the fate of 
 these impenitent evil-doers, our Saviour says the same thing, 
 while he confines the blessings of a happy resurrection, to 
 tijose who have, through grace, do!te good. '' Marvel not at 
 '• this, for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the 
 « grave, shall hear his voice, and shall come forth, they that 
 *' have done good^ unto the resurrection of life, and they that 
 " have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. '*y 
 
 From these authorities it appears plain, that the inestima- 
 ble blessing of a resurrection to life, mentioned in Dan. xii. 
 2, is not bestowed upon all men universally, but only on thoso 
 who are given to Christ, and are written in the Lamb's book 
 of life ; those who die and rise in Christ, and are drawn to 
 him by the Fatlier, and have his Spirit dwelling in them; 
 those who, by faith, eat and drink his body and blood ; those 
 who believe, hope, and trust in him ; and those who do good 
 and sleep in Christ. These have a resurrection to life, and 
 shall drink of the river of the water of life. But there are 
 others who are not given to Christ, nor drawn to him ; who 
 do not receive him nor his Spirit; who do not believe nor 
 obey him. These are said to have a '* resurrection of dam- 
 nation,*' and to be " cast into the lake of fire." In the light 
 of these scriptures who can he at a loss for Daniel's mean- 
 
 y Acts xvii. 18. iv. 2. .lohn vi. 39, 44. Rom. viii. 11. John vl. 54. 2 Cor. i. 9. 
 .^ohn vi.40. xi. 24—26, 1 Cor. xv. 19. 1 Tljess. iv. 14. Rev. ix. 13, 15. JoIiqt.' 
 
 J8.29, 
 
289 
 
 ing? "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth 
 ** shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame 
 ** and everlasting contempt.'' And what unpiejudiced per- 
 son can help seeing, that as this happiness of believers, and 
 this misei'y of unbelievers, are declaimed to be eternal, after 
 the resurrection, vvhen time is at an end, they must both be 
 absolutel*/ eternal7 
 
 The Divine Head of the Church has now enabled me, as 
 he has very many before me, to produce evidence that 0M/a//i 
 often signifies eternal^ whether alone or in conjunction with 
 od., and always has this meaning, when in connexion with 
 the happiness of the saints, or the misery of the wicked.z 
 Tliis decides the application of many of those texts, which 
 were read in the commencement of this 2d branch of affir- 
 mative evidence. " Thou shalt be cut off /or ever."" *' And 
 *' they shall call them the border of wickedness, the people 
 ** against whomtlie Lord hath indignation for ever.^* " Their 
 ever iastincf confusion shall not be forgotten." "And I ivill 
 " bring an everlasting reproach upon you, and a perpetual 
 *' shame, which shall not be forgotten." " They perish ybr 
 *' ever, without any regarding it." "Thou pre vail est /or eu«r 
 " against him." *' He put them to a perpetual reproach." 
 " Let them be confounded and troubled for ever ; yea, let 
 " them be put to shame and perish." " They .shall never vsee 
 " light.'' " Thou hast rebuked the heathen ,• thou hast de- 
 *' stroyed the wicked ; thou hast put out tiieir name for ever 
 ** and ever.*'' 
 
 It was shewn, that after the " resurrection of damnation," 
 the resurrection " to shame and everlasting contempt," which 
 is the doom of unbelievers, they are to be " cast into the lake 
 of fire.'' Several passages of the Old Testament declare that 
 this fire is oulam, absolutely eternal: and although, to the 
 
 z That o!a?n signifies an absolute eternity, is confirmed by the collateral evidence 
 of those parts of the Old Testanieot whicli were originally writttn, not in Hebrew, 
 but in (Jhaldee, which is nearly related to it. In them it is said, " I blessed the Most 
 " High, and I praised and honoured him that Vweth forever." " He is the living 
 " God, and stedfast /orewr." " Blessed be the name of (lod, from everlasting 
 " to ever lastiji^." His kingdom " shall never be destroyed," but, " shall stand 
 " forever." " But the saints of the Moit High shall take the kingdom, aniJ'possess 
 ^' the kingdom forever, e\en forever and ever." Instead of the Hebrew QSI^ 
 or D'J37li^ these passages have the con-esponding Chaldaic words {|<J3'7J^ 
 
 I'O'^i? »nd }>{'^7^. The meaning is clearly made out by the maimer in 
 which they are used. Dan. iv. J4. vi. 26, it. 20, 44, twice, vii. 18. 
 
 N N 
 
290 
 
 careless and whole-hearted, it may, for a while, he a subject 
 of mockery, the time is coming, when those verv persons, 
 whether professing religion, or avowedly opposing it, shall 
 he seized with a fearful apprehension of its dreadful reality. 
 '* The sinners in Zion are afraid ; fcai'fulnesshath surprised 
 '* the hypocrites. Who among us shall dwell with the de- 
 " vouring fii'e ? Who among us shall dwell with everlasting 
 "• burnings ?" " It shall not be quenched night nor day ; the 
 " smoke thereof shall go up /or ever." '■' For ye have kindled 
 " a fire in mine anger which shall burn /ot ever.'''' A con- 
 scientious conviction that this is the truth of God, and that 
 it is your interest to know it, makes me willing and even 
 anxious to declare it to you ; with a hope that my labour shall 
 not be in vain in the Lord; but 'hat your souls may be en- 
 lightened as well as alarmed ; that they may be sanctified, 
 comforted, and saved, through the grace of God in Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 4. 
 
 AlOm 
 
 This word, in the New Testament, has three meanings ; 
 eternity past, eternity to come, and a limited duration. 
 
 1. A (iinited duration' It signifies the revolutions of time, 
 the dispensations of Providence, the great and important pe- 
 riods in ti»c history of mankind ; this world, with its wisdom 
 and power, riches and honoui's, course, cares, and concerns. 
 In this sense, it oc(;urs thirty- one times. The particular 
 places are n<»w before me, but need not be read.a These 
 seons^ or «r/e.s, or worlds., had a beginning. " As he spake bj 
 " the mouth of his holy propliets, since the world beyan.'*''^ 
 Tijey also have an end. *' The harvest is the end of the 
 world. "c 
 
 2. Eternity past. One would expect the New Testament 
 writers to use it fin* an absolute eternity^ as they wrote for the 
 Gi-eeks who attached this meaning to it;— as they generally 
 spoke after the manner of the Septuagint; — and as Christian 
 antiquity understood them to use the word in this sense. 
 
 a Matt. xJi. 32. xiii. 22, 39, 40, 49. xxiv. 3. xxviii. 20. Mk. iv. 19. Luke i. 70. 
 xvi. 8. XX. 34. Actsiii. 21. Horn. xii. 12. I Cor. i. 20, twice, ii. 6, twice, ii. 8, iii. 
 IS X. 11. 2Coi-. iv.4. Gal. i. 4. Eph. i. 21. ii. 2. vi. 12. 1 Tim. vi. 17. 2 Tim. iv. 
 10. Tit. ii. 12. Ileb. i. 2. is. 26. xi. .3. 
 
 '^ c.-n-'afwvo?:. Luke i. 70. Acts iii. 21. 
 
 *^ ffoVTS'Ksta Tou Muvoi. Matt. xiii. 39, 19. xxiv. 3. xxviii. 20, Hcb.ix.26. * 
 Coi'. X. 11. Ta tjX->] twv aiMVC/jv, 
 
291 
 
 Scapula says, that a2on is, as if it were spoken aien on, ^- 
 ing alxoays. For this etymology and explication, he refers to 
 Aristotle and Philo, b<ith of whom declare unequivocally, 
 tliat it means an absolute eternity. An examination of the 
 Septuagint, (with which the Apostles were familial-,) in those 
 passages where nejek^ od. and olam signify efei^nifi/, will soon 
 shew the use which that ancient translation made of this 
 word; and we liave already given some hints, atul may yet 
 give others, of the sense in which the Christian fathers un- 
 derstood it. That they were right in their views, is evident 
 from the fact, that the eternity of (iod's being, wisdom and 
 purposes are communicated in the New Testament, by tbis 
 word. In the use of aion^ Paul ascribes lionour and praise 
 " unto the King eternal^ immortal, invisible, the only wise 
 God.'' Here the first word, eternal^^ denotes his existence 
 from eternity, and tbe second word iin .tortal^ his existence to 
 eternity. Again; "Known unto God, are all his works, 
 from the beginning of the world;"*" that is, from eter*nity, for 
 this is the fact. Again ; " According to the eternal purpose 
 " which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord."* The mean- 
 ing of our translation here, cannot easily be misunderstood. 
 The word aion is translated eternal. Some versions are not 
 so decided, but I helieve that few of any respectability, op- 
 pose this rendering. I could almost promise at a venture, 
 that if my opponent woiild open and quote those numerous 
 versions, about which he has been so pompously boasting, 
 they would be all in our favour. The Syriac Testament is 
 MEN OLEMA, /ro/rt eternity. With this agrees the French 
 of De Sacy ; *-*■ avant tons les temps, before all times.''' Beza's 
 Latin is fBternum. The Spanish is eterna., and the Italian, 
 eferno; agreeing with our eternal. This is Doddridge's 
 translation, and that of Archbishop Newcome : and wonder- 
 ful to tell ! The Socinians have copied it from him, in their 
 celebrated Improved Version : although Mackiiiglit has herd- 
 ed with Waiceficld, and Scarlett, and my opponent, in taking 
 a different view of the text. It would have heen well for the 
 church, if he had never polluted a better communion, 
 
 3. Eternity to come. Speaking of God, Paul says, '* Unto 
 " him be glory in the church, by Christ .lesus, throughout 
 '-'■ all ages, world without end,'* Here Macknight breaks off 
 
 '^ Twv aiwvwv. I Tim. i. 17. 
 
 ^ afl-'aiwvos. Acts xv. 18. 
 
 f i{Poh(ft\i Twv aiwvwv. Eph, iii. 11= 
 
292 
 
 from his company, and renders this passage, '■'■ throughout 
 all the endless successions of ages." The Improved Version 
 still follows Newcome, and renders it, "throughout all ge- 
 nerations, for ever and ever.^'s Peter says, " But grow in 
 *' grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour, Je- 
 ** sus Christ To him be glory, both now and forever.'' So 
 Newcome and the Improved Version. Literally, "both now 
 and unto the day of eternity'^ as Macknight ren«lers it. Here 
 Scarlett and my opponent are left out of sight. To those 
 who give up the present world for Christ, he promises, '* in 
 the ivorhi to come, eternal life."'' With this, the Primate 
 and the Improved Veision agree. Instead of "in the world 
 to come,'' Campbell says, "in the future state." Here also, 
 Scarlett and my opponent, with their temporal ages, and 
 aonian limitations, are quite forgotten. 
 
 In the 1st sense of aion, given above, it is proved to be 
 sometimes temporal. But under the present head, it may be 
 shewn, that these present limited aeons are expressly con- 
 trasted with those future aeons, which are unlimited. 
 " Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be 
 forgiven him, neither in this world^ neither in the world to 
 come.*'' The word tvurd, in this text, is aion, in the original: 
 and if this world mean time, it is evident that the future must 
 mean efeniiti/. The same observation will hold, with re- 
 gard to what Paul says about the exaltation of our Divine 
 Saviour, " far above all principalities and powers, and might 
 and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this 
 world, but also in that which is to come."J Not only are the 
 disputers, wisdom, and rulers of this world, distinguished 
 from Clirist's spiritual kingdom ; not only are the children 
 of this world distinguished from the children of light; not 
 only do the scriptures speak of " this present world ;" and 
 *' this present evil worhi,""^ in such a way as plainly to im- 
 ply a future aion, and a state of uninterrupted happiness, but 
 they expressly point out a future aion, or eternity, which is 
 in heaven, subsequent to the general resurrection ; for which 
 we should make present provision, and which we should hope 
 to enjoy, through grace, after the present aion, the present 
 state of existence, has come to an end. *' And Jesus, an- 
 
 g £ig liadoii Tag y£v£as tou aiwvog twv aiwvwv. Eph. iii. 21. 
 
 " fv Tw c/.iwvi TW £^0(XSvu, ^w>]v aiwviov. Mk. x. 30. Luke xviiJ. 30. 
 
 i Mutt. xii. 32. 
 
 j Eph, i. 21. 
 
 k 1 Cor. 1. 20. ii. 6. Luke xi. 18. 2 Tim. ir. 10. Tit. ii. 12, 
 
293 
 
 <' swering, said unto them, the childrenlof this worWmarry and 
 "are given in marriage; but they which shall be accounted 
 "worthy to obtain that world and the resurrection ft om the 
 ** dead, neither marry nor aie given in marriage ; neither 
 " can tliey die any more : for they are equal unto the angels ; 
 <* and are the children of God, being the children of the re- 
 *< surrection." " For in the resurrection they neither marry 
 " nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God 
 *' in heaven.^'' Here, as in some former instances, Campbell, 
 Newcoine, and the Improved Version agree with our trans- 
 lation; and Scarlett and Crimson are left in a company by 
 themselves. The same fact is observed, where we are indi- 
 rectly taught to care about the eternal world, by being told 
 that "the care oUhis world,'' is sometimes pernicious.i 
 
 In the above passages there is a marked distinction between 
 the temporal aion and the eternal aion. In this aion^ people 
 marry, and in that aion, they do not. This aion is before tlie 
 resurrection, that aion is after the resurrection. The people 
 of this aion are sinful men on earth, but the people of that 
 aion, are "children of God," *' children of the resurrection,'' 
 '* as the angels of God in heaven." Thus, at the end of this 
 aion, we are taught that God's people, (not unbelievers,) 
 shall arise to that aion, an eternity of happiness in heaven. 
 AVith respect to hypocrites and infidels, Christ says, " As, 
 " therefore, the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so 
 '< shall it be at the end of this aion. The Son of man shall 
 " send forth liis angels, and they shall gather out of his king- 
 '* dom, all things "that offend, and them which do iniquity ; 
 " and shall cast them into a furnace of fire; there shall be 
 " wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous 
 " shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who 
 *' hath ears to hear let him hear.'™ This furnace of fire may 
 allude to Tophet, which was a furnace in the valley of Hin- 
 nom, or it may allude to Nebuchadnezzar's furnace in the 
 plain of Dura ; but it cannot mean either of these places, be- 
 cause they belong to this world, whereas the furnace of fire 
 here threatened, is after "the end of this world.'' Moreover, 
 the furnace of this world cannot always inflict pain, even 
 when heated seven-fold ; whei-eas in the furnace of fii-e in the 
 eternal world, <' there shall be wailing and gnashing of 
 teeth." These are the words of infinite truth, and must come 
 
 1 Luke XX 34—36. Matt. xxii. 30. xiii. 22. 
 TO Matt. xiii. 40 — i3. 
 
294 
 
 to pass : therefore let no one permit himself to be deceived 
 with Tain words. 
 
 Enough has been said to shew, that in Classical, Eccle- 
 siastical, and inspired Gi'eek, J/ow means an endless dura-- 
 tion. It does not occur in its absolute form in any of the 
 texts adduced under the second branch oi' affirmative eyidence: 
 yet it was necessary to notice it, on account of the bold and 
 unjustifiable assertions of the enemies of truth, and on account 
 of its necessajy connexion with the 5th section, where it is 
 often found pteceded by a preposition, and with the 6th sec- 
 tioi^, which treats of an adjective derived from it. 
 
 W \ii]e aiuii has been before us, unusually frequent mention 
 has been made of my opponents new translation of the New 
 Testanierit, together with the iinproved version, and that of 
 Mr. Scarlett. As Lowth, am! Horsley, and Newcome, and 
 Campbell, and Macknigiit, have set the world mad about new 
 translations, so tiiat every one must be engaged in it; this 
 will perhaps, be as convenient an opportunity, as I shall soon 
 have again, to give some easy directions for getting a name 
 in this way. Although you may not know whether Greek is 
 read from right to left, or from left to right, you will pi'ofess, 
 of course, to translate *' fiom the original Greek according 
 " to Griesbach ; upon the basis of the fourth London edition 
 *' of the Improved Version, with an attempt fo further im- 
 *' provement from the translations of others. Then sit 
 doM n and copy Scarlett's ti'anslation, witli a number of un- 
 meaning (and therefore safe) transpositions and alterations 
 of words and plirases, to make the work your own. Enclose 
 many words and sentences here and there, in brackets, to 
 shew, that up(m a careful comparison of manuscripts, you, 
 in your Judgment, think them spurious. Adorn your margin 
 with notes from the Improved ^'ersion. Give credit for some, 
 to shew your reading : and after altering a word or two, 
 give others as your own, to shew youi* learning. Get some 
 printer who understands Greek, to publish the work, with 
 Griesbach in one column, and your do«d)ly improved version 
 in the other. Send a copy to every college in the Union , and 
 invite all the clergy and literati of America to read this thing, 
 and to send you their remarks, after they have paid the post- 
 age. As they will probably be weak enough to consider 
 you, as Nabal did David, a servant broken away from his 
 master, they will, of course, take no notice of this invitation. 
 Then publish, that they are silent, because they do not con- 
 sider the work susceptible of any farther improvement, ex» 
 
295 
 
 cept from its vastly improved author. After this, you can 
 institute a course of lectures on the Greek language, and 
 send round invitations to all the clergy of the city, to attend 
 and be enlightened. They will n(»t come; but thei. places 
 will be filieel by others, wlio will think you the greatest pi'o- 
 digy, that the world has ever seen, since tiie tune that the 
 image fell from Jupiter. 
 
 5. 
 EISAIONA. 
 
 This is the phrase which is usually translated /or ci;er; 
 and its reduplicate, eis ious aionous ton uionon^ is usually ren- 
 dered, /or ever and eveu The former occurs forty times in the 
 New Testament, and the Uitter, twenty-one times.n Of these 
 sixty-one instances, six relate to future punishment. These 
 are the first six texts quoted from the New^ Testament, at the 
 beginning of this branch of o^VwjartW evidence. 'I'he sense of 
 tliese phrases in these particular texts, will depend much upon 
 the signification in which they are generally used by the New 
 Testament writers. This meaning can be satisfactorily as- 
 certained, by those who examine the passages, whetiier they 
 understand Greek or not. We sliall tlierefore lay them be- 
 fore you, in theftdlowing order. 
 
 1. In seventeen places, it expresses the duration of tlie be- 
 ing and life, the perfections, promises, and dominion of God. 
 " For thine is the kingdom, and the power and the glory 
 "for et'cr." "The Creator, who is blessed /or ever" "Over 
 <•' all God blessed for euer." " To whom be glory for ever J' 
 '* Which is hXtHHO^A for ever more.'' "• To whom be glory /or ever 
 " and ever.''' *'Now unto God and our Father, be glory /or 
 ^^ ever and ever.''' "Be honour and g\oiy for ever and ever." 
 *' To whom be glory /or ever and ever." *'To him be glory 
 "and dominion /or etjeranrfeuer." "For the truth's sake 
 " which dwelleth in us, and shall be with us for ever." " He 
 " hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mer- 
 " cy, as he spake to our fathers, to Abraham and to Jiis seed 
 '^^ forever."' "The word of God, which liveth and abideth 
 <■' for ever.'''' «' The word of the Lord enciureth forever.^' 
 *' Amen : blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiv- 
 ♦' ing, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God, 
 ^^ forever and ever, Amen." " And one of the four beasts, gave 
 
 n Rev. XX. 10. Jude 7. 2 Tliess. i. 9. Matt, xviii. 8. Heb. i. 8. 1 Pet. v. 11 iv 
 11. Rev. i. 18. iv. 9,10. v, 13, 14. \ii. 12, x. 6. xJ. 15. i.6. xxii. 5. xv.V. xiv.' 
 11. xix. 3, XX. 10. 
 
296 
 
 ** unto the seven angels, seven golden vials, full of the wrath 
 "of God, which liveth for ever and ever.'' " Thy throne, O 
 ** God ! is for ever and ever, "o 
 
 It may be reasonably expected, that all the orthodox agree 
 with our translation, in these passages. Indeed every here- 
 tic of sense, would, out of regard to his own character, agree 
 with it. Accordingly, that detestable abomination, nick- 
 named the Improved Version, being made by sensible men, 
 though bitter enemies to God, has coincided with our trans- 
 lation, in the renderir»g of tlie phrases in question, in every 
 one of the above texts ,• unless the first, which it suppresses 
 entirely, and another, (i Pet. i. 28,) in which they have ju- 
 gulated this phrase, may be considered exceptions. In the 
 work of suppression, my opponent follows them ; for this is 
 his forte : but in all the other fifteen texts, he follows Scar- 
 lett, his old guide, in giving us, to the age, and to the acjes of 
 ages, instead of ^br ever, and yor ever and ever. His acquain- 
 tance with the Improved Version has only made him spoil 
 Scarlett's childish translation with some serious perversions. 
 If they had told us, what they knew to be the fact and what 
 Junius and Tremellius have told us, in their translation of 
 Dan. xii. 3, that these were absolutely eternal ages, SEMPI- 
 TERNA secula, it would have altered the case: but an at- 
 tempt to criticise away, not only the eternity of future re- 
 w ards and punishments, but the eternity of the Creator him- 
 self, is as unreasonable as it is impious. 
 
 2. Two of the above texts,? though using the word God, 
 relate evidently to Christ, who is the Supreme God, and the 
 eternal Son of God, as declared in those texts. Twenty-one 
 others are of the same description.*! One more is spoken of 
 the Holy Spirit.^ 
 
 3 It occurs nine times in relation to the saints. "But 
 '* whoso drinketh of the watei' I shall give i)im shall 7iever 
 *' thirst : but the water that I sliall give him, shall l«e in him 
 *' a well of water springing up unto everlasting life." " If 
 " any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever.'' " Verily, 
 *' verily, I say unto you, if a man keep my sayings, he shall 
 ''^ never see death;" ''never taste death.'' *' i give unto 
 
 o Matt. Ti. 13. Rom. i. 25. ix. 5. xi. 36 2 Cor. xi.31. Gal. i. 5. Phil.iv. 20, 
 1 n itn.i. 17 2 rim. iv. 18. iPet.v.ll. 2 Jokn 2. Luke i. 55. 1 Pet. i. 23, 25. 
 Rev. vii. 12. xr 7. Heb. i. 8. 
 
 p Rom. ix. 5. (ieb. i. 8. 
 
 q Luke i. 33. Jnhn vjii. 35. xii. 34. Rom.xvi. 27. Heb. v. 6. vi. 20. vii. 17, 21, 
 24, 28. xiii. 8, 21. 1 Pet. iv. 11. Rev. i. 6, 18. iv. 9, 10. v. 13, 14. x. 6. xi. 15. 
 
 r John xiv. 16. 
 
^ them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall 
 " any pluck them out of my hand " *'• Whoso liveth, and be- 
 ** lieveth in me, shall /leuerdie." "His righteousness remain- 
 " eth Jorever. ** And the world passeth away, and the lust 
 '* thereof; but he that doeth the will of God, abidetb /oreuer.'* 
 *' And they shall reign for ever and ever.^^ Here, as before, 
 Scarlett confines the happiness of the saints to an age, or 
 ages, and my opponent, of course, follows him, in every in- 
 stance. The authors of the Improved Version would have 
 been glad to dotliesame: but they had sense enough to keep 
 from exposing themselves. They, therefore, fell in with the 
 common ti anslation.s 
 
 4. There are six instances remaining ;t in all of which the 
 Improved Version is right, in the translation of this phrase, 
 anJ Scarlett and my opponent wrong, as before. The great 
 improveujent which they have made, by rendering eiS 
 Aii'NA, to the age, may be in some measure estimated, by a 
 comparison of their translation with ours, in one of these 
 texts. Our bible says, " The servant abideth not in the house 
 ^^ for ever; but the son abideth ever" This declaration that 
 *' the son abideth erer," "in the house," is equivalent to Ps. 
 xxiii. 6, '* Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the 
 *' days of ray life; and I will dwell in the house of the Lord 
 *^ for ever;' that is after this life has come to an end. But it 
 is said that *' the servant abideth not in the house for ever; 
 that is, to eternity : for, would it be correct to say, that he 
 dees not abide in the house during this life ? Is it not a com- 
 mon thing, for hypocrites to live and die in the visible 
 churcli? In this text, thereiore. eis aiona occurs twice, with 
 an unlimited signification. Now. letushear the doubly im- 
 proved translation, which my opponent has made, for th© 
 benetit of the unlearned. " And the slave abideth not in the 
 '* house to the age: but the son abideth to the age." Among 
 all classes of the community, it is a very common thing, to 
 talk of sons being of age, and consequently leaving their fa- 
 ther s house; and of slaves abiding in the house to old age 
 and death. The unlearned, and unsophisticated reader of 
 my opponent's Version, would exclaim. How different was 
 the custom in former times, from that which now prevails! 
 Now a slave abides in the house during life : butin old timeSj^ 
 he did not continue in the house, even until he was of age, 
 
 s John iv. 14. vi. 51, 58. viii. 51. 52, x. 28. xi. 25. 2 Cor. ix. 9. 1 John u. If. 
 Rev. xxii.5. 
 
 t John viii. 35, twic«. 1 Cor. viii. 13. John xiii, 8. Matt. xxi. 19, Mk. si. 14» 
 
 O 
 
This is about as much of an improvement, as that of a cer- 
 tain expounder who ivad begyur's skius for badgei s skins, in 
 Ex. xxvi. 14, or another who substituted an oyster-man for 
 an auatere rnan, in Luke xix. 21. 
 
 We have now given ail the passages in which eis aionee 
 and its reduplicate occur in the NeM Testament. In the 
 scores of places, in which it marks the duration of the being, 
 perfections and sovereignty, of God, and of Christ, and of 
 the Holy Spirit, judge ye, whether it does not mean, to an 
 absolute eternity. Among the few places in which it relates 
 to other subjects, even the Improved Version cannot sliew 
 that it should be limited. What, then, are we to conclude, 
 in relation to those six passages, in which it is connected 
 with future punishments " He that shall blasjdieme against 
 " the Holy Ghost, hath never forgiveness." '* These are wells 
 " without water ; clouds they are, carried w ith a tempest, to 
 " whom the mist of darkness is reserved ybr ever." " Raging 
 " waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame: to whom. 
 " is reserved the blackness of darkness, for ever." '• And 
 " the smoke of their torment asrendeth up /or ever andever: 
 ** and they shall have no rest, day nor night, who worship 
 " the Beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the 
 "mark of his name." "And again, they said, Alleluia: 
 *' and her smoke rose up for ever and ever.'*' " And the devil, 
 '' that deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brim- 
 '* stone, where the Beast and the false prophet are, and shall 
 " be tormented day and night,/or ever and ever."^ 
 
 In all these places, the Improved Vei'sion agrees with our 
 bible, in the translation of eis aiona and its reduplicate. But 
 as these passages declare the doctrine of future punishment 
 very plainly, it becomes necessary for them to add a few 
 rotes, in order to contradict the text. Thry have one to Rev. 
 xiv. 11, <*The smoke of their torment shall go up/or ever 
 and ever.'' Their note reads as follows; viz. "It would be 
 ** very unreasonable to infer the gloomy doctrine of eternal 
 " misery from the loose and figui ative language of a pro- 
 " phetic vision, in opposition to the plainest dictates of rea- 
 *' son and justice, and to the whole tenor of divine revela- 
 ** tion. But if any is disposed to lay undue stress upon this 
 ** text, it may be suilicient to remark, that it is not here as- 
 " seKed that the torment continues, but that the smoke of it 
 *' ascends/or ever and ever. The smoke of a pile in which 
 
 B Mh. ji>. 29. 2 ['c(. ii. 17, Jude 13. Rev. xit. 11. xix. 3. xx. 10. 
 
299 
 
 " a criminal has been consumed may continue to ascend long 
 " after the wretched viciim has ceased to suftei. Aud a me- 
 " morial of the puiiisliment which has been inflirted on vice 
 " may remain long after vice itself lias been utterly exter- 
 *"* minated. After all, as the prophecy relates wholly to 
 '^ states of things in the present world, the punishments 
 " threatened ought, in all reason, to be understood of tempo- 
 ** ral punishments, and not of the sufferings of a future life. 
 ** So in Jude, verse 7, Sodom and Gomorrha are represented 
 " as suffering the vengeance of eternal fire, i. e. of a tempo- 
 ** ral calamity, a fire which completely desti-oyed them." 
 
 Whether eternal means temporal, we hope to examine in 
 the next section, whicli treats of aionios. But it is some- 
 what remarkable, that while this note says that eternal means 
 temporal, it substantially concedes, that for ever and ever 
 means to an endiuss duration. They admit that the smoke 
 ascends /orever and ever, that is, without end ; but they deny 
 that sinners are tormented /or ever ^/ni ewer, that is, without 
 end. If, by this phrase, they uiid-rstood a limited time, then 
 what they luive said, would amount to a denial that sinners 
 endure a limited punishment; a thing which they never in- 
 tended. It is only an en?! less punishment which they deny : 
 and this endless punishment they admit would have been here 
 declared, if the text had declai'ed the same concerning the 
 toi'ment of men's persons, that it has, concerning the smoke 
 of their torment. On this ground, therefore, they shall be 
 met. I shall not throw away time in disputing whether the 
 Apocalypse relates wholly to (lie present world ; for as the 
 Universalists and Orthodox alike, quote from it, for and 
 against the eternal salvation of all men, it shall be taken for 
 granted, that the assertion contained in the above note, is 
 gratuitous, contradictory and absurd. Neither shall I un- 
 dertake formally to defend the infallibility of revelation, in 
 whole or in part, in opposition to the scornful reflection 
 contained in the above note. The plenary inspiration of the 
 Scriptures, I must now take for granted ; and leave it to in- 
 fidels and heretics, to prate about the " loose" language of 
 scripture, and about the " far-fetched analogies, and inac- 
 curate reasonings" of inspired Apostles ; as this same Im- 
 proved Version has done, in another note also, at the close of 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
 
 If it were possible for a conscientious man, to write such 
 a note as that of the Improved Version, on Rev. xiv. 11, he 
 would do it from a sincere conviction, that it was only the 
 
300 
 
 smoke of torment which is to continne for ever and ever* after 
 the sufferings of sinners have ceased : he would do it from a 
 real belief that neither that passage of Revelation, nor any- 
 other passage, taught that sinners themselves were to be tor- 
 mented /or ever and ever. Yet in Rev. xx. 10, the same thing 
 which was before declared of the smoke of torment, is said 
 of sinners expressly. *' And the devil, that deceived them, 
 ** was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the 
 ** Beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day 
 ** and night/or ever and ever.'''' As it will not do to answer 
 this text, by talking of smoke without fire, or fire witliout 
 fuel, the Improved Version escapes its force, by retreating 
 to allegory, the last and never failing refuge, of imbecile 
 corruption and blind depravity. According to them, "the 
 *' persons who are here said to be tormented for ever and 
 ** ever^ are not real, but figurative, and symbolical persons, 
 ** the devil, the beast, and tiie false prophet. The place 
 " therefore, the kind, and the duration of their torment, must 
 " also be figurative.'* When God tells these children of de- 
 lusion, that the smoke of torment shall continue for ever; 
 they pretend that it is nothing but smoke. When God tells 
 them, that the devil and the beast and the false prophet, and 
 lall who worship and follow tliem, shall be tormented for 
 ever; these wonderful expounders say, none of these ai'e real 
 beings: and if they had been told expressly, that the Em- 
 peror and the Pope, and their secular and ecclesiastical sub- 
 alterns, with Judas and the authors of the Improved Ver- 
 sion, should be punished for ever; they would reply, this is 
 a '* heart- withering doctrine,^^ conveyed in " loose'' lan- 
 guage, as I conceive, " in opposition to the plainest dictates 
 of reason," and therefore, I am not "disposed to lay undue 
 stress upon" it. God has told us of a real devil, real sin- 
 ners, and a real hell : if, by the pestilential breath of a little 
 squadron of these rebels, their whole host is to evaporate 
 into mere shadows, and figures, and symbols; who can tell 
 where this process of pride and folly will end ? Will they 
 not next declare, with equal truth, that there are none but 
 imaginary saints, an imaginary heaven, and an imaginary 
 God ? 
 
 J5ut one feels a natural curiosity, to know, what my op- 
 ponent's doubly improved version makes of these authori- 
 ties. He exactly follows the directions which 1 gave some 
 time ago, for obtaining a name, as a linguist and a critic. 
 "At adopts Scarlett's translaiiuu of the words in question. 
 
30i 
 
 and copies tht notes of the Improved Version, as his oww^ 
 without giving credit to any one for them.' No wonder that 
 the University of Cambridge, when they received his book 
 Jooked in silent amazement, on such audacity. If, however' 
 a man of Scarlett's lia;ht metal, had been alive, he would not 
 probably have been silent. May God presnve us from the 
 principles of Universalism, and from its deleterious effects 
 upon the morals of its votaries. 
 
 e. 
 
 Aionios. 
 
 ^ This word is found in the first and the five last of the New 
 Testament authorities, quoted in the commencement of this 
 second branch of affirmative evidence. Thus it is six times 
 connected with future punishment. Whether it means a^w- 
 lu/e/i/ eternal^ in these instances, will depend in a great mea- 
 sure, upon the meaning in which it is used, in the remainder 
 of the seventy-one times, in which it occurs in the New Tes- 
 tament. It will be found predicated of infinite duration, 
 past as well as future. 
 
 I. It is applied four times, to things unseen, to God, his 
 Spirit, power and glory *• The things which are seen, are 
 *' temporal : hut the tilings which are not seen, are eternal:' 
 *' According to the commandment of the everlasting God.**' 
 *' To whom be honour and power everlasting:^ Christ 
 " thi-ough the eternal Spirit offered himself, without spot, to 
 God."* In rendering aionios in these texts, the Improved 
 Vci-sion agrees with our bible, as with all others, in general, 
 in every language. On the last text, my oppc.nent copies a 
 note of theirs, for w hich he gives them credit : but he follows 
 Scarlett, in transcribing instead of translating. 
 
 ■ 2. It is applied five times to Christ, his covenant, king- 
 dom, and gospel." 
 
 3. It is applied three times, to eternity pasty "According 
 <* to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret, 
 ** since the world began. "^ " Who hath saved us" " ac- 
 ** cording to his own purjwse and grace, which was given us 
 
 V He only altered etemal into aionian ; and put to the cures ofa^es. instead of 
 for ever and aver. o j o j, 
 
 w 2 Cor. iv. 18. Rom. xvi. 26. I Tim. vi. 16. Heb. ix. 14. ) 
 
 X 1 John i 2. v. 20 Heb xiii 20. 2 Pet. i. U. Rev xiv. 6. 
 y Rom. xvi. 25. 2 Tim. i. 9. Tit. i. 2. 
 
 ^ xf ovoi? aiwv.o.s. Rom. xti. 25. Comp. 1 Pet. i. 12. « Which things thr an- 
 gels desire to look into." 
 
-^* in Christ Jesus, before the world began."* " In hope ot'eter'- 
 *^ nal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the 
 *• world began."o The same words Chronoi aionioi, occuring 
 in nil these places, have received a uniform translation, in 
 our bible. Not so with my opponent's excessively improved 
 rersion. The same wortis, he renders former uges^ in the 
 first text, and aionian times, in the two last. This, however, 
 was necessary, in order to make his New Translation, a 
 faithful copy of Scailett's old one. How easy it is, now-a- 
 days, to translate from the original Greek ! 
 
 On these two last texts, Macknight speaks as follows; viz. 
 ^ Supposing the word aionios in this clause, to signify eier- 
 ** naif the literal translation of the passage would be, before 
 *• eternal times. But that being a contradiction in terms, 
 * our translators, contrary to the propriety of the Greek 
 " language, have rendered it, before the world began,'''' Froili 
 such reasoning as this, the most eminent anti-universalist 
 polemic has relinquished these two instances, and these alone, 
 of all the seventy-one, in which this word occurs. But if 
 these a priori reasonittgs be regarded, we may speculate 
 away every tiling that is ^ aluable in criticism and theology. 
 Language is arbitrary, and is formed by custom. The use 
 of ancient languages is no more subject to the control of a 
 modern critic, than the fires of ^tna are subject to a modern 
 engineer. This sort of reasoning would attach absurdity to 
 some of the best authorized usages of our own language. Is 
 it more contradictory to say, that before eterniti/ and abso- 
 lute eternity mean the same thing, than to say that ravel and 
 nnravel mean the same ? Berause two negatives make an 
 aftiriitative with us, shall we charge the Greeks with absur- 
 dity, for making them an emphatical negative ? It is well 
 for us, that there are some men, of all ages, and all degrees 
 of improvement, whom such sophistry never moves. The 
 established signification of aionios, eiernal^ did not prevent 
 Gregory Nazianzen from using proaionios, before eternal, 
 in the same sense. Thus is it understood by the best mo- 
 dern expositors of the language. Hedcricus explains pro- 
 aionios, by the Latin ^tkrnus, eternal; and Scapula ex- 
 plains the same word, by omni /eternitate prior, fe^ore 
 all eternity. This is, to all intents and purposes, as absurd, 
 as the expression before ifie eternal times, which Macknight 
 
 ^ '"■^o X?"^''^^ a(Wvio;v. 2 Tim. i. 9. 
 ^ '"'^0 X^ovwv ftiwviwv. Tit, K 2t 
 c P. 222. 
 
SOS 
 
 has condemned. Yet either before the eternal times^ or hefam 
 all eternity^ would be as correct a translation of the texts iu 
 question, as ** above alt heavens*^ is of Eph. iv. JO. l"he 
 Scriptures recognize three heavens, the serial and aetherial 
 heavens, and the lieavens of heavens : higlier than which, no 
 one ever went. Yet the apostle says, " He that descended, 
 '* is the same also thut ascended up iar above all heavens, 
 « that he might fill all things:" Now, if the heavens are to 
 be understood literally, would not Macknight's mode ot in- 
 terpretation make this passage say, that Christ has not only 
 ascended above the fiist heavens, our atmosphere, in which 
 clouds are suspended, and birds fly;— not only ab(»ve the se- 
 cond heavens, in which tlie sun, moon and stars are placed ; — 
 but above, and far above, all heavens, even the third hea- 
 vens, the residence of God and angels, and saints? But sup- 
 pose that in this text, heavens should be understood metony- 
 mically. Suppose that it means the inhabitants of heaven. 
 Would not Macknight's mode of interpretation make the 
 text say, that Christ had ascended not only above saints and 
 angels, but far above the eternal Father, and the eternal 
 Spirit ? It is easy for a sickly hypercriticism to find absur- 
 dities in the best translation, or even in the pure, authentic, 
 and infallible original. Yet in answer to them all, 1 would 
 say, tliat Christ has ascended into heaven; and that to ex- 
 press this emphatically, the apostle said that he had ascend- 
 ed far above all heavens. So I would say that salvation 
 through Christ, was promised before the world began, before 
 the commencement of time, that is, from eternity: and this 
 is emphatically expressed by the apostle, when speaking of 
 this salvation, as a thing "which God, that cannot lie, pro- 
 mised, PRO CHRoNON AioNioN, bejore the eternal times; 
 that is, from an absolute eternity. 
 
 There is not a whit more of absurdity, in this mode of ex- 
 pression, than there is in the addition and multi])lication of 
 eternities, which we find practised in the Old and New I'es- 
 tament, with such intelligihl<» familiarity, and such un- 
 questionable coi-rectness. In most subjects, the plural is more 
 than the singular: not so with olam and aion. In most cases, 
 the amount is greatly enhanced by the multiplication of a 
 plural. Myriads of myriads mentioned Rev. ix 16, is ten 
 thousand times more than the simple plural. Not so with 
 eternity. The addition or multiplication of a«o»s amounts to 
 nothing more than an emphatical way of expressing a sim- 
 ple eternity. Eis aiona and its reduplicate mean the same 
 
304 
 
 thing. So the ■« ord God and its reduplicate mean the same 
 thing. When the Council of Nice sa)S, "We believe in one 
 Goii," did they mean any thing more, or any thing less than 
 the true God ? When the same Council say that the Lord 
 Jesus Christ is **God of God, Light of Light, very Goii of 
 very God/' they speak thus, not to represent the Saviour, as 
 more or less than God, but to express in an unequivocal man* 
 ner, his essential Deity, and his peculiar and eternal r«'la- 
 tion to the Father. So we speak of heaven as God's dwelling 
 place J and we mean no other than his dwelling-place, when 
 we speak of the heavens and tlie heavens of heavens^ or Jar 
 above all heavens. Thus do the scriptures mean the same 
 thing hy from eternity^ and ''^before the eternal times.''* 
 
 4. It is applied ten times to the future duration of Chris- 
 tian fraternity, of the celestial house and habitation of the 
 saints, of their glor^ and inheritance, consolation, salvation, 
 and redemption. " For perhaps he therefore departed for a 
 *< season, that thou mightest receive him /or ever.'* " 1 say 
 ** unto you, make to yourselves friends of the Mammon of 
 *■* unrighteousness, that wlien ye fail, they may receive you 
 «• into everlastimj habitations " "• Therefore I endure all 
 *' things for the elects' sake, that they may also obtain the 
 ** salvation which is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory.'* 
 « But the God of all grace, who hath railed us unto his eier- 
 ** ual glory, by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered 
 •' awhile, make you perfect, stab lish, strengthen, settle you." 
 *• Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our 
 " Father, who hath loved us, and given ns everlasting conso- 
 *' lation, and good hope, through grace." "The promise of 
 « eternal inheritance." " Having obtained eternal redemp- 
 ^ tion for us." " He became the author of eternal salvation 
 " unto all them that obey him." " An house not made with 
 " hands, eterna in the heavens.'* '* A far more exceeding and 
 *< eternal weight of glory. "d 
 
 The above passages speak of the future happiness of be- 
 lievers, which my opponent professes to believe eternal. They 
 contrast that eternal happiness with these temporal afflic- 
 tions; and they are intended to comfoi-tthe ('hristian under 
 the calamities of time. No one ought, therefore, to doubt, 
 that the word aionios is here used in an unlimited sense, and 
 has been correctly rendered in our bible. But, Scarlett, 
 knowing the consequence of such an admission, chose rather 
 
 (1 Fhilem. xv. Luke xvi. 9. 2 Tim. ij. 10. 1 Pet. T. 10. 2Tke»». u. 16. Hcb. is. 
 Ir5, 12, \. 9- 3 Cor. v. I. it. 17, 
 
305 
 
 to transcribe than translate, and has thus spoken to the uui- 
 learned reader in an unknown tongue. A Ministerial brother 
 in the West, once lent me a book on Universalism ; in which 
 the author, whose name I cannot recollect, supposes a case 
 of a poor afflicted widow, endeavouring to seek in religion, 
 an alleviation for her many and heavy sorrows. Applying 
 to Mr. Scarlett, a professed Christian Minister, he lends her 
 a copy of his New Testament. She opens at 2 Cor. iv. 17. 
 " For our momentary light affliction is working out for us 
 •' a most exceeding (sonian weight of glory." This treats 
 of affliction, and is probably applicable to her case ; but what 
 it means, she cannot tell. She visits her learned instructor, 
 and says, "Deai- Mr. Scarlett; what does «oma« mean ?" 
 
 * Why, Madam, it means agical, or age-lasting.'* " And may 
 " I be so bold as to ask, what is the meaning of agical, or age- 
 ** lasting ?" ^ Age-lasting ^ov agical f Madam, has different sig- 
 
 * nifications. It sometimes means as long as the world lasts, 
 ' and sometimes, as long as a dispensation, or a man's life 
 
 * lasts, whether it be a thousand years or one year.' "And 
 ** dear Mr. Scarlett, is that all the extent of glory and hap- 
 '* piness, which Christianity offers to a poorold widow, who 
 ** is sinking under the weight of more than half a century of 
 ** sorrow ?" 
 
 But, from my opponent's reply to this supposed case, he 
 would be understood to insinuate that it was not found in a 
 book, as stated, but that it was manufactured for the occa- 
 sion, and the name of Scarlett used, where his was really 
 intended. He therefore requests that his own name may be 
 openly used in such cases. The truth is, there is very little 
 more difference between the two, than there is between an 
 original and a copy. This request may be complied with, 
 as soon as I have given a becoming attention to his transla- 
 tion and exposition of the afflicted widow's text. " For our 
 '* present light affliction worketh for us an excessively ex- 
 " ceeding aionian weight of glory.'* In a note he gives us 
 the Gi-eek,*^ and then speaks as follows, viz. " Now Viaionion 
 <* be strictly infinite or endless, how can any thing exceed it, 
 ** even by a rhetorical figure, so as to be hyperbole upon hy- 
 perbole ahove or beyond it ?" The sentiment of this question 
 he has urged before you, not only interrogatively but posi- 
 tively. "Excessively exceeding aionian weight of glory,*' 
 is an altered translation borrowed from one who had little 
 
 Pp 
 
306 
 
 idea of the perversion which it was doomed to undergo. Iti 
 author meant exceeding to be in apposition with aionian or 
 eternal, and would have been as well satisfied to have ren- 
 dered it " exceedingly excessive eternal ;" thus making it 
 evident that the one adjective was in apposition with the 
 other. This is consistent with the original, and leaves aionian 
 with its true meaning, that of ahsolutly eternal. But my op- 
 ponent treats exceeding as a participle governittg aionian ' 
 thus representing the weight of glory as exceeding aionian, 
 in such a manner as to excel it, transcend it, go ** above or 
 beyond it." If this criticism had any foundation, then might 
 there be one place in the whole New Testaujent, in which 
 aionos is used with a limited signification. But every person 
 who understands the Greek language, will perceive, at a 
 glance, that this is a mere artifice, intended to mislead those 
 who could not examine the original for themselves. 
 
 I have reason to believe that my opponent has read a com- 
 ment upon this passage, by Chrysostom, one of the Greek 
 Fathers.' How differently does this early and enlightened 
 scholar interpret the words of his own language, from one 
 who claims the character of a translator from the original 
 Greek ! In explaining this passage of the apostle, Chrysos- 
 tom says, " He opposes things present to things future, a 
 ** moment to eternity, lightness to weight, affliction to glory; 
 •* nor is he satisfied with this, but he adds another word, and 
 ** that a reduplication, saying, * kath^ hyperboten eis hyper- 
 ** hohuy that is, an exceedingly excessive greatness."s Here 
 this eloquent Greek Father does not represent aionian^ as 
 infinitely transcended by something else, but he considers 
 the apostle as contrasting aionian with the moment of this 
 life, and making it to excel it, by an exceedingly excessive 
 greatness. As this cannot be truly said, of any thing but eler- 
 nlty., Chrysostom has given his decided testimony, that aio-^ 
 niun means an absolutely eternal 
 
 That gloss of my opponent, by which he would make ex- 
 ceeding to be a participle, governing aionian^ and thus ex- 
 ceedingly limiting its duration, is probably an invention of 
 his own. No translator or commentator, ancient or modern, 
 within the restricted circle of my acquaintance, appears ever 
 
 f 'Vh\t observation was made in the debate, not from an apprehension that mf 
 npponf'nl wii8 familiar with the Fathers, but because tlie convmcntary in question 
 is <iuotPfl It) Parkhurst, wliose lexicons 1 soon found, formed the liorizon of my 
 oppouf.-iit's crilicul researches. 
 
307 
 
 to have imagined such an absurdity. Even the authors oi' 
 the Improved Version, who wrote for the very purpose of 
 misleading theii- readers, had too much knowledge of Greek, 
 and of the present state of society, to attempt such an imposi- 
 tion. Their translation is, *' F^or our present light affliction 
 ** worketh for us a very exceeding and everlasting weight of 
 ** glory." Although this does not strongly present the anti- 
 theses of the original, it still offers the consolation of eternal 
 happiness in heaven, to God's afflicted and poor people on 
 earth. 
 
 In the next chapter of this Epistle, Paul preaches the same 
 consolatory doctrine, without the use of tiiose hyperboles 
 which we liave been discussing. *' For we know that if our 
 " earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have 
 ** a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal 
 " in the heavens ''** My opponent, as usual, has this, *'aio- 
 nian in the heavens." Now I will not send the afflicted wi- 
 dow to Mr. Scarlett, about this translation : but as my oppo- 
 nent has requested that his name may be used instead of 
 Scarlett's, I will make application to him myself. Here is 
 a poor, weakly, sickly sinner, who, to all appearance, is not 
 far from his latter end. Nothing but the Gospel of Christ 
 can give me comfort. While my earthly tabernacle is near 
 to dissolution, I read in a certain tiling, professing to be a 
 New Translation, that there is an aionian house above. I 
 enquire into the meaning of this word. Can you tell me, 
 Mr. Scarlett^ or, as my opponent prefers my using another 
 name, can you tell me, Mr. Crimson, what is meant by aio- 
 nian, in your translation ? In tlie 2lGth page of his Lectures, 
 he answers me "that these words do not, in any instance, 
 " necessarily convey an idea of eternity ; nor yet an endless 
 ** duration of time.'' Yes, these are my opponent's words: 
 and the tendency of them to deny that the saints have any 
 revealed charter of eternal happiness is evident. And is it a 
 fact then, that even that house which is not made with hands, 
 is subject to dissolution? So natural is the leaning of the 
 doctrine of univei'sal salvation, to that of universal annihi- 
 lation, or damnation, or Atheism, that it would leave us to 
 mere conjecture, or, at best, to unassisted reason, to ascer- 
 tain whether any should enjoy eternal happiness or not. 
 
 My opponent has also objected, to my understanding of 
 the first text quoted, in the beginning of this sub-section. It 
 
 h 2 Cor. r. 1. 
 
308 
 
 is Philemon 15. In his 8th Lecture we find the following p'a- 
 ragrapli extracted from Scarlett; viz "The word aionian 
 ** expresses duration or continuance; hut it is sometimes of 
 '* a short, and at other times of a longer duration. Paul, writ- 
 ** ing to Philemon concerning Onesimus, says, * perhaps he 
 
 * was separated for a while, that thou mightest have him 
 
 * aionianly.'* This certainly could mean, only during the life 
 " of Onesimus." When Scarlett is the teacher, my opponent 
 is a very apt scholar. Accordingly, his New Testament 
 rendei's the passage, " Perhaps also for this reason he was 
 *' separated for a little while, that thou mightest have him, 
 "for lift.^'' Macknight, whom he has quoted in his favour, 
 may he well balanced hy Estius, whom Macknight has cited 
 in our favour. But we both profess to have better evidence 
 than any inan^s opinion. My opponent's argument is this ; — 
 Paul intimates that Onesimus may be the slave of Philemon 
 aiomaniy; — But in the future life there is no slavery; — there- 
 fore, aionian must mean during this life. This is plausible; 
 and it would be unanswerable, if it were not for one thing : 
 and that is, that the major proposition contradicts the very 
 passage which my opponent depends upon to support it. 
 Where does the apostle say, that Philemon may have Onesi- 
 mus as a servant yo*- ever ? The Improved Version, which 
 coincides with our translation ; (and which, notwithstanding 
 its deep depravity, is often better than Macknight, that cold- 
 hearted apostate,) the Improved Version, reads as follows : 
 " For perhaps he therefore departed for a time, that thou 
 *' mightest receive him /or ever; no longer as a servant, but 
 *' as above a servant, a beloved brother.^* In this world it is 
 an inestimable privilege of Christ's mystical body, that its 
 members are spiritually united to their common head, and 
 to each other. But there is also a promise, that " neither 
 death nor life,'"* " nor things present nor things to come," 
 shall dissolve this union.' My argument therefore, is this ; — 
 Paul says, that Philemon may have Onesimus, as his aio- 
 nion brother; — But Christian brotherhood is absolutely 
 eternal ; — Therefore aionion means absolutely eternal. And 
 so it plainly does in all the ten instances quoted in this sub- 
 section. 
 
 5. In the forty-one remaining instances of its occurrence, 
 unconnected with punishment, it is always found connected 
 with life; and in every individual text, speaks of a state of 
 
 i Rom. vfii. 38,39'. 
 
309 
 
 endless happiness. J " "What shall I do to inherit eternal [i(eV\ 
 *' Search the Scriptures: for in them ye think ye Ivavg eternal 
 **■ life, and they are they which testify of me.*' '* Ye put it 
 *' from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting 
 *' li/e.^' •• No murderer hath eternal life abiding in him." 
 ** Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy 
 ** of our Lord Jesus Christ, unto eternal life.^' "And every 
 " one that hath forsaken houses, or brothers, or sisters, or 
 " father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my 
 " sake, shall receive one hundred fold, and shall inherit ever- 
 •* lasting life"^ ** Whosoever believeth in him, should not 
 ** perish, but have eternal life:''' or *■' everlasting life.'^ '*He 
 *' that believeth on the Son hath everlasting /i/e." *' The wa- 
 ** ter that I shall give him, shall be in him, a well of water 
 ** springing up into everlasting life.'* '* He that reapeth, re- 
 " ceiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal.'" " He 
 " that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, 
 '* hath everlasting /i/e,and shall not come into condemnation, 
 " but is passed from deatli unto life." •' Labour not for the 
 ** meat which perisheth, but for that which enduretli unto 
 " everlasting life.''' " This is the will of him that sent me, 
 " that every one which sceth the Son, and believeth on him, 
 •< may have everlasting life.^' '* He that believeth on me, hath 
 ** everlasting life.'''' " Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh 
 ** my blood, hath eternal life.** *' Thou hast the words of 
 *' eternal 'f/e." *' And I give unto them eternal life, and they 
 " shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out 
 ** of my iiand." " He that loveth his life, shall lose it, and he 
 ** that hateth his life in this world, shall keep it unto life eter- 
 " wa/." " And 1 know tliat his commandment is life ever- 
 ** tasting,' " Thou hast given him power over all flesh, that 
 " he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given 
 " him. And this is life eternal; that they might know thee, 
 •* the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent ''>» 
 " And as many as were ordained to eternal life, bejieved.'* 
 
 J During the debate, I gave a concise ploss upon these texts as they were read, 
 to prove that they really meant eternal life. These and much other matter which 
 was spoken, and much which was prepared, and not spoken, I omit, for preci- 
 sion's sake, in the written argument. Neither are all of the texts repeated in 
 whole or in part ; because many of them are almost in the same words : but aU 
 are referred to in the notes. 
 
 k Matt. xix. 16. i. 17. Luke x. 25, xviii. 18- 
 
 1 John V. 39. Acts xiii. 46. I John iii. 15. Jude 21. Matt. six. 29. Mk. i. 30. 
 Luke xviii. 30. 
 
 m John iii. 15,18, 36. iv. 14,36. T. 24. ri. 27, 40, 47, 54, 68. x. 28. xii. 25, 50. 
 xiii, 3,5. 
 
310 
 
 *^' To them who, by patient continuance in well-doin§, seek 
 *' for glory and honour, and immortality, eternal lije.^* 
 " That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace 
 ** reign through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Jesus 
 " Christ our Lord." " Ye have your fruit unto holiness, and 
 *' the end everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death ; but 
 *• the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our 
 " Lord.'* " He that soweth to the Spirit, shall of the Spirit 
 *' reap life everlasting,''^ *' Howbeit, for this cause I obtained 
 ** mercy ; that in me first, Jesus Christ might shew forth all 
 " long-suffering, for a pattern to them which should hereaf- 
 ** ter, believe on him, to life everlasting.''* ** Fight the good 
 ** fight of faith ; lay hold on eternal life,*''^ '* In hope of e/er- 
 *' nal life.*'' '* According to the hope of eternal life.'^ *' And 
 " this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal 
 *' life.'* " And this is the record, that God hath given to us 
 *' eternal life, and this life is in his Son." " These things 
 ** have I written unto you that believe on the name of the 
 ** Son of God, tliat ye may know that ye have eternal life.'*o 
 
 If that is absolutely eternal life, which is the result of 
 God's unparallelled love, which is Christ's greatest gift, and 
 the subject of the greatest promise ; — if that be really eternal 
 Hfef which Jews and murderers rejected and forfeited, and 
 which apostles, saints and martyrs gained, through grace, 
 in exchange for temporal life; — if that be truly eternal life, 
 which we are required to seek, as an imperishable good, and 
 an everlasting consolation, connected with a good hope; — 
 then, aionios means ahsoiuteltf eternal. Socinians themselves 
 acknowledge that iwwor<a/i///, or incorruption means an ab- 
 solute eternity : yet in the above passages, God has promised 
 eternal life to those who seek immorlality or incorruption. 
 All but Atheists acknowledge that God exists, in the exer- 
 cise of his infinite perfections, to an absolute eternity : yet in 
 the above authorities, we find that while God and Christ 
 thus exist, the eternal life of the saints shall endure.P So far 
 is it from having bounds set to it, in the passajjes quoted, 
 eternal glory is expressly contrasted with temporal suffer- 
 ing, and the eternal house and habitation of believers is con- 
 trasted with their earthly and failing abode. 
 
 Out of the seveuty-one places in which this word occurs, 
 we have now recounted sixty-five ,• in all of which, the un- 
 
 n A.et8 xiii. 48. Rom. ii. 7, v. 21. vi. 22, 23. Gal. Ti. 8. 1 Tim. i. 16. vi. 1«,1P. 
 o Tit. i. 2. iii. 7. 1 John ii, 215. v. II, 13. 
 p Rom. ii. 7. John x. 28, 29. 
 
3(1 
 
 learned, as well as the learned, can perceive that aionios 
 means absolutely eternal. This might never have been dis- 
 puted, but for the sake of the i-eniainin.^ six, which read as 
 follows. '* He that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, 
 ** hatii never forgiveness, but is in danger oi eternal damna' 
 " Hon." '* Even as Sodom and Gomonha, and tl>e cities about 
 *' them, in like manner, giving themselves over to fornica- 
 •* tion, and going after strange flesh, ai'e set forth an exam- 
 *' pie, suffering the vengeance of tternal jireP *' Who shall 
 ** be punished with evei lasting destruction from the presence 
 " of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.'* *' It is bet- 
 ** ter for thee to enter into life halt or maimed ; rather than 
 ** having two hands or two feet, to be cast into everlasting 
 '''-fire.''* *'Tlien shall he say unto them on the left hand, Ue- 
 *' part from me ye cursed, into everlasting fire^ prepared for 
 " the devil and his angels.*' *' And these sliall go away into 
 ** everlasting punishment^ but the righteous into life eternaU^q, 
 The note which my opponent has, without giving credit, 
 copied from the Improved Version, on the first of these texts^ 
 was worth so little, that he appears to have stolen it merely 
 to keep his hand in.^ Concerning the eternal fire, mentioned 
 in the second text, he speaks as follows, viz. " It is said to 
 *' be set forth as an example to others, that they may avoid a 
 *' similar fate. Now, I ask you, my hearers, admitting the 
 *' meaning my opponent attaches to it were true, can that 
 *' which takes place in an invisible world, be an example to 
 '* those who exist here, and who have never seen any thing 
 " of it, nor any who came from thence ? — It is said to be set 
 *• forth : of course it must be something that is brought into 
 *' view, and not that which is hidden. The apostle says, (2 
 " Pet ii. 6,) ' And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomor- 
 *" * rah into ashes, condemned them with an overthrow, mak- 
 " * ing them an ensample unto those that after should live 
 *• 'ungodly.' Now, I ask, what fire was set forth as an ex- 
 " ample to other nations, wlio should afterwards live un- 
 ** godly ? Could it be the fire of my opponent's Hell in an- 
 *' other world, which was set forth as an example to those 
 " who should live here as the inhabitants of Sodom and Go- 
 ** morrah ? No, my hearers, it was the tire which destroyed 
 " those cities, and continued to the days of the aj'ostle, which 
 •' is here meant.'* At the same time, he quotes from Scarlett, 
 
 q Mk. iii. 29. Jude 7. 2Thcss. i. 9. Matt, xviii. 8. xxv. 41, 46. 
 r He has made an unirnporrant alteration of a few words, to make it his own ; 
 as soipe men tak« possession ottheir neighbonr's cattle, after altering their mark*. 
 
312 
 
 who proiessed to quote from Whitby, that '*This fire lasted 
 " from Abraham's time, till after the apostolic age ; and was 
 *' burning in the time of Pliilo Judseus, the beginning of the 
 " second century." In his Lectures, he tells us,^ from Scar- 
 lett, that tliis fire " lasted upwards of two thousand years," 
 '' but is now extinct/'^ 
 
 The substance of the above argument is this ; — Nothing 
 can be set forth as an example, but that which is submitted 
 to occular inspection," — But Sodom and Gomorrha *' are set 
 *' forth an example, sufiTering the vengeance ofaionianjire;*'' — 
 Therefore, this aionianjire must mean that visible fire which 
 lasted upwards of two thousand years, but is now extinct ; 
 Wherefore, it cannot be an absolutely eternal fire. My oppo- 
 nent says, *' It is set forth : of course, it must be something 
 *' that is brought into view ; and not that which is hidden.'' 
 " Can that which takes place in an invisible world be an ex- 
 ^^ ample to those who exist here, and who have never seen 
 " any thing of it, nor any who came from thence ?" 
 
 But, in reply to these sage remarks, I would observe, that 
 he would not believe it, if one were to come from thence. For 
 God has said, " If they hear not Moses and the prophets, 
 " neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the 
 *' dead.'' But is it true, that nothing can be set forth as an 
 example, but that which is seen ? James says, *' Take, my 
 " brethren, the prophets, who have spoken in the name of 
 " the Lord, for an example of suffering affliction, and of pa- 
 " tience."t Had James or those to whom he wrote, ever seen 
 these prophets i Concei*ning the destruction of the Israelites 
 in the wilderness, Paul writes to the Corinthians, '*Now 
 '* tliese things were our examples, to the intent we should 
 " not lust after evil things, as they also lusted." **Now all 
 " these things happened unto them for ensamples : and they 
 " are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of 
 " the world are come."" Had Paul or the Corinthians ever 
 seen the carnage in the wilderness ? Moreover; in the text 
 quoted above by my opponent, Peter says that God has made 
 the case of Sodom and Gomorrha " an ensampleunto those 
 " that after should live ungodly." Is it an example to no un- 
 godly person that lias not seen the fire ? 
 
 The manner in which Universalists contradict themselves 
 and one another on this text in Jude, looks unfavourably. 
 
 8 Minutes, p. 274. Lectures, p. 207. 
 
 t Jas. V. 10. 
 
 u ICor. X. 6, 11. 
 
313 
 
 My Opponent, using a stale quibble, observes that '■''' the term 
 *' aionion is not connected with the suffering which they en- 
 ^* dured, but with the fire which destroyed them." It has been 
 shewn^that elsewhere, the Improved Version used this same 
 sophism. But here it contradicts itself as well as my Oppo- 
 nent. Instead of telling us that it is only the fire that is eter- 
 nal, it says in a note, that it is ^^ everlasting \n its effects; the 
 •* cities having been finally desti-oyed." What are the effects 
 of suffering the vengeance of everlasting fire, has been shewn 
 in treating the word/re, under the term Gehen?ia. The same 
 thing is established by what was there said of tlie scriptural 
 words destruction and damnation. All these words occur in 
 the texts quoted above, where aionios is coimected with pun- 
 ishment. In one of them it is said that sinners '* shall be pun- 
 ished with everlasting destruction.'''' On this text Mr. Ballou 
 says, "That which "is destroyed, I grant, is endlessly de- 
 •* stroyed;"' insinuating that it is sin only, and not the sin- 
 ner. What is the subject of destruction, let the whole passage 
 decide. *' The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from Heaven, 
 ** with his miglity angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance 
 ** on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel 
 '* of our Lord Jesus Christ ; who shall be punished with ever- 
 « lasting destruction.''^ If language can be understood, then 
 this passage declares that men who reject the gospel, shall 
 be destroyed: therefore, according to Mr. Ballou's proposi- 
 tion, these sinners will be endlessly destroyed j or, (as an- 
 other text expresses it,) go aw ay into everlasting punish- 
 ment. 
 
 In the text here alluded to, (Matt. xxv. 46,) the same word 
 is used to mark the eternity of the sinner's punishment, which 
 is used in the same sentence to declare the eternity of the 
 saint's happiness. "And there shall go away mio aionian 
 punishmetitf but the righteous into aioman life :'* and there is 
 no reason, except the mere wish of the wicked, for explain- 
 ing the one to mean a limited duration, more than the other. 
 There is, however, the best possible reason for denying that 
 it is to be so understood in either case. This takes place at 
 the day of judgment; when measured periods are all merged 
 in an absolute eternity. All temporal lives have expired, all 
 earthly dispensations arc abrogated ; these visible heavens 
 are rolled up as a scroll, and the elements are melted with 
 fervent heat. *' Yet once more I shake not the earth only, bu% 
 
 ^ On Atonement, p. 179. C rhe5s. i. 7— .10 
 
 Qq 
 
314 
 
 ** also heaven. And this word, yet once more, signifieth 
 ** the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things 
 " that are made, that those things \k?hich cannot he shaken 
 " may remain."* 
 
 It is not at all surprising, that my opponent and his breth- 
 i-en deny that there is to be a day of judgment, after death. 
 That infidelity, which is willing to wear a disguise, consi- 
 ders nothing too sacred for its polluted fingers. The reason 
 which they give, for applying thexxvth chapter of Matthew 
 to temporal events, is, that there is some appearance of the 
 same thing being done by our Saviour, in Matt. xvi. 27, 2S. 
 " For the Son of man shall come in the glory of liis Father, 
 " with his angels ; and then he shall reward every man ac- 
 '* cording to his works. Verily I say unto you, there be some 
 *' standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see 
 *' the Son of man coming in his kingdom:'' or as Luke says, 
 **■ till they see the kingdom of God :" or as Mark says, *' till 
 '' they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.* 
 Again he says, in predicting the destruction of Jerusalem, 
 '* But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be 
 *' darkened, and the moon shall not give her light; and the 
 *' stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in hea- 
 *• ven shall be shaken. And tlien sliall they sec the Son of 
 " man coming in the clouds, with great power and glory. 
 ** And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather togeth- 
 ** er his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part 
 " of the earth, to the uttermost part of heaven." ** Verily I 
 •' say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all 
 **' these things be done.*'x 
 
 Here are predictions of the coming of Christ, in glory, 
 V!ith his angels, to gather all his elect, and reward every 
 man according to his works. It is to be accompanied with 
 the darkening of the sun, moon, and stars : which we consi- 
 der to belong to the general judgment. Yet it is said that 
 all these things shall be fulfilled before the demise of that 
 generation, to which these prophecies were addressed. These 
 are among the craggy cliffs of revelation, which many sur- 
 vey, but few surmount. The obstacles are often of our own 
 making. Instead of seeking for the mind of the Spirit, by 
 comparing spiritual things with spiritual, men often measura 
 the Sacred Oracles by rules of human invention, and thus 
 create difficulties, where things would otherwise be plain, 
 
 w Heb. xii. 26, 27< 
 
 i Luk.c ht. 27. Mk. »x. 1. xiii. ^i— 27, 3C. 
 
315 
 
 That many prophecies have a primary and an ultimate fufc- 
 fihnent, is too evident to require elaborate proof. Before 
 Samson's birth, God told the mother of this well known type 
 of Christ, "The child shall be a Nazarite." This had a 
 subordinate fulfilment a short time after the prophecy was 
 uttered : but its grand accomplishment is recorded in the 
 New Testament. " And he came and dwelt in a city called 
 ** Nazareth : that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by 
 *' the prophets, he shall be called Nadzoraios, a Naza- 
 " rite.*^y So the above predictions had an inceptive accom- 
 plishment in that generation to which they were addressed. 
 They contemplated the resurrection of Christ from the dead, 
 bis glorious ascension into heaven, the powerful effusion of 
 his Holy Spirit, and the gathering of his elect into the visi- 
 ble church, under the administration of his apostles and other 
 ministers, in every part of the then known world. There was 
 also such a judging of the sheep and the goats, according to 
 their works, as was foretold by Ezekiel ; when it is said, " I 
 ** will feed them with judgment. And as for you, my flock ! 
 ** thus saith the Lord God ; behold I will judge between cat- 
 ** tie and cattle, between the rams and the he-goats."* Such 
 a discrimination was made in the destruction of Jerusalem: 
 which awful event, was, according to the account of Jose- 
 phus, accompanied with such preternatural phenomena, in 
 the heavens and the earth, as might well be designated by 
 the darkening of the sun, moon, and stars. 
 
 But surely the fallen angels were not destroyed with Je- 
 rusalem. Jude must therefore have referred to some other 
 event, when he told us that they were " reserved in everlast- 
 ** ing chains under darkness, unto the judgment of the great 
 *■* day.^'^ The Scriptures say moreover, concerning men, 
 ** Behold the Lord cometh with ten thousand of his saints, 
 ** to execute judgment upon all." " We shall all stand before 
 " the judgment-seat of Christ." A similar passage of the 
 same writer is thus paraphrased by Macknight. *' For we 
 "■ must all [at the last day,] appear [in the body] before the 
 ** tribunal of [the Lord] Ciirist, that every one [of us] may 
 « receive [from him,] rewards and punishments in the body, 
 *' according to what he hath done [in the body] whether what 
 " he hath done be good or bad.'' " Behold he cometh with 
 '' clouds, and every eye shall see him." *' The Son of man 
 
 y Judges xiii, 5. Matt. ii. 23. Thus it is explained by Diodati, Dr. Clark«» 
 and Pai-khurst. See the latter on the word. 
 7. Ez. xxxjv. 17. 
 
31« 
 
 ** shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his 
 ** kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity." 
 ** So shall it be at the end of the world : the angels shall 
 ** come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just."* 
 *' It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the 
 '* judgment." "For the Lord himself shall descend from 
 ** heaven, with a shout, with the voice of the arch-angel, and 
 " with the trump of God : and the dead in Christ shall rise 
 ** first. Then we which are alive, and remain, shall be caught 
 '• up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in 
 *' the air; and so shall we ever be with the Lord.'' " The 
 " Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven, with his mighty 
 * angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that 
 " know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Je- 
 " sus Christ; who shall be punished with everlasting destruc- 
 ** tion from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of 
 ** his power ; when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, 
 ^ and to be admired in all them that believe."* 
 
 As Canaan was a type of heaA en, so was the destruction 
 of Jerusalem, a figure of the day of judgment: thus it is a.<J 
 reasonable to confine all that is said of future happiness to 
 the land of Canaan, as to restrict all the above texts to the 
 temporal judgments by which Jerusalem fell. In those pas- 
 sages, men and devils are the subjects of this judgment ; 
 and it takes place at the end of the world, after the great 
 body of mankind have died and arisen again : and those be- 
 lievers which are alive when the ti'umpet sounds, shall be 
 caught up in the clouds, together with the risen saints, to 
 dwell with Christ forever. The same authorities agree with 
 the parable of the wise and foolish virgins, and that of the 
 talented servants, and many other passages of scripture, in 
 making a complete separation between the righteous and the 
 wicked, and sending the latter to eternal destruction. That 
 ^is is the doctrine of Matthew xxvth, must be plain to the 
 candid reader of God's word. " When the Son of man shall 
 ** come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then 
 *' shall he sit upon the throne of his glory : and before him 
 '* shall be gathered all nations ; and he shall separate them 
 " one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from 
 ^* the goats : and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, 
 ''* but the goats on the left. Then shall the king say unto 
 '' them on his right hand. Come ye blessed of my Father, in- 
 
 a Jude vii. 14, 15. Rom. xiv 10. 2 Cor.v. 1 0. Rev, i. 7. Matt. xiii. 44, 49. 
 Keb, ix. 27. I Thess. rr. 16, 17- 3 Thess. i. 7—10. 
 
317 
 
 ** herit the kingdom prepared for you, from the foundatioai 
 ** of the world.'' *' Then shall he say also unto them on the 
 ** left hand. Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, 
 " prepared for the devil and his angels." " And these shall 
 " go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into 
 ** everlasting life/'^ With a becoming deference to the good 
 sense of this audience, and especially with a sacred regard 
 to the authority of God, speaking in his word, I must con- 
 clude, that those texts, in which aionios is connected with the 
 punishment of the wicked, should be considered affirmative 
 evidence of the absolute eternity of that punishimcnt^ 
 
 RECAPITULATION. 
 
 With the help of Almighty God, I have now endeavoured 
 to shew the meaning of his word, in support of the truth, 
 and ill answer to objections which are made against it : 
 whether these objections were drawn from the present cha- 
 racter and sufferings of mankind, the general offer of salva- 
 tion, or the attributes of God; whether they related to pur- 
 gatory, or restitution, or fatherly chastisements; or whether 
 they contemplated the will of God, or Christ's prophetic^ 
 kingly, or priestly office. 
 
 The doctrine for which the church of God has ever con- 
 tended, has been faiily inferred from the scriptural account 
 of God's milder and severer attributes, and the guilty, de- 
 praved, and helpless condition of mankind. It has been shewn 
 that tliis doctrine is often implied^ in the use of such scriptu- 
 ral figures as insinuation, supposition, and interrogation. 
 This doctrine has been also established, by the contrast 
 which the scriptures mark, between the righteous and the 
 wicked, in relation to their character, standing and future 
 destiny : and by scriptural negations, or denials that there is 
 any end to the punishment of the wicked. 
 
 The affirmative evidence was divided into two branches : 
 the first of which related to the state of the damned. In this, 
 the doctrine was proved by those scriptures which threaten 
 the wicked, with the punishment of hell ; whether by the 
 name of Sheol, Hades,, Gehenna, or Tartarus. The second 
 branch of this argument related to the duration of punish- 
 ment, and was founded on texts which declare that this pun- 
 ishment is eternal, or shall last /orever ; whether the writers 
 
 b Matt, XXV. 31—34^ 41^ *&. 
 
convey their ideas in Hebrew or Greek; whether by neje/j, 
 otif or olam ; or by aion, eis aiona^ or aionios. 
 
 The texts belonging to the last branch of the last argu- 
 ment, assure us that some have their portion in the mist of 
 darkness,— in the blackness of darkness, — in the lake of fire 
 and brimstone, — in the smoke of torment, — in confusion, 
 Bhame, contempt, reproach, destruction, damnation. And 
 this is declared, in the unlimited sense of the words to be 
 foieA^er, for ever and ever, everlasting, perpetual, eternal. 
 W bile a God of infinite truth speaks such language, his peo- 
 ple must believe, that he will punish the finally impenitent 
 and unbelieving, to an absolute eternity. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 This point of faith, like all other articles of the Christian 
 creed, is calculated, tlirough grace, to promote the temporal 
 welfare and the eternal salvation of men. It is rash for its 
 enemies to impeach its moral tendency. Yet my opponent 
 has just now insinuated, that its advocates do not entirely 
 agree with the apostle, in his wish that all *' may lead a 
 *• quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness, and honesty," 
 but that they would allow of a little turbulence, a little im- 
 piety, and a little dishonesty.'' Now that I think of it, I 
 should be obliged to that lady, who sent me this fan, which 
 has yielded me so much refreshment during tliis debate, if 
 she would, when convenient, have the kindness to let me 
 know, how it may be returned to its owner. As far as I un- 
 derstand the principles in question, they have, through the 
 Spirit of Christ, a tendency to preserve their possessors from 
 dishonesty, even to the value of a fan or a pin. Insinuations 
 of this sort, come with a peculiarly ill grace from Univer- 
 salists, and especially fi-om that sect to which my opponent 
 belongs. An inquiry into the connexion of principles and 
 practice, will, by no means, redound to their honour. For 
 the general promotion of piety, sobriety, and honesty, men 
 should have correct views of their moral disease, and of the 
 remedy which God has appointed for it. The scriptures put 
 in requisition, all the resources of language, in order to de- 
 scribe the malignity and odiousness of sin, and the love and 
 condescension of God, in the cross of Christ; by which we 
 are crucified to the world, and the world to us. Yet my op-: 
 ponent's religion makes sin a mere negation, and the atone- 
 
 e MinnteB p. 395: 
 
319 
 
 ment a downright imposition. ^' They that be whole need not 
 « a physician, but they that are sick." Those who make a 
 mock at sin, will not apply to a divine Saviour, for pardon 
 and sanctification : and without him they will never be truly 
 wise, holy or upright. Their practice supports this position. 
 Universalism never was known to reform a sinner : but it 
 has been the means of depraving many a sober man, and of 
 blasting the fair prospects of many a family. Universalism 
 never attempts to mortify the lustof theflesii, the lust of the 
 eye, and the pride of life; while all its energies are exerted, 
 to keep men from being too religious themselves, and from 
 labouring for the conversion of others. 
 
 If ever piety, purity, and righteousness were found oh 
 earth, they have been found in the blood-bought church of 
 Christ Yet this church has ever held, with an unyielding 
 pertinacity, the eternity of future rewards and punishments. 
 They have ever viewed sin with abhorrence, and have pre- 
 ferred truth and holiness, to the enjoyment of reputation, 
 property, or life. Permit one who has tasted the bitterness 
 of sin, to add his feeble testimony to their general voice. 
 Although I have conscientiously defended the truth, with a 
 desire for your salvation, if God were to judge me, out of 
 Christ, I am lost fi»r ever. I have committed sin enough in 
 this debate, to damn a world, if it were imputed to it. If God 
 were to lay justice to the line, and righteousness to the plum- 
 met, and deal with me, independently of Christ*s atonement, 
 I confess that I cannot answer for the way in which I advo- 
 cate his cause, or call upon his name. It is this which endear* 
 to me the cross of Christ, and it is this which makes my heart 
 bleed with compassion for your precious souls. The pleasure 
 of serving your spiritual interests, has far outweighed that 
 bodily sickness and weakness which has excited your sym- 
 pathy. In the truth, there is an indescribable loveliness; and 
 in the sweet hope, that God will bless his word, to your con- 
 viction, conversion, and edification, thei-e is an unspeakabW 
 comi'oi-t. My flesh and my heart fail ; but thou, God, art 
 flie strength of my heart, and my portion forever. 
 
JERRATd. 
 
 In page 142, line 20, for This read The 
 
 U6, line 4 from bottom, for has read ha»U 
 
 172, hne 12, for cAa,vn read chain. 
 
 176, line 12, for several read *ex»ere»- 
 
 182, note, before kindness m.en profemonal. 
 
 208,Imel6,for;AaireadMa«. 
 
 225, line 29, for mead read meec/. 
 
ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 DISCUSSION or BAPTISM. 
 
 In June, 1820, there was, in Mount Pleasant, Jefferson county, Ohio, a 
 public debate on Baptism, between Mr. John Walker, a minister of the As- 
 sociate Church, and Mr. Alexander Campbell, an Arian Baptist. At the 
 close of that conferencp, Mr Campbell spoke as follows, viz. " I have now 
 " accepted the invitation or challenge of the Seceders, and having now fully 
 " satisfied their most eager desires for an interview of this kind, I conceive 
 *' it is my time to give an invitation or challenge to any fedo-Baptist mi- 
 " nister; and to return the compliment with the utmost ceremoniousness, 
 *' I this day publish to all present, that I feel disposed to meet any Pedo- 
 " Baptist minister of any denomination, of good standing in his party, and 
 " I engage to prove in a debate with him, either uiua uoce, or with the pen, 
 " that Infant Sprinkling is a human tradition, and injurious to the well- 
 *' being of society religious and political. I have to add, that I must have 
 " an equal vote, in determining the time and place. This is the only re- 
 " striction I attach to the challenge I now publish." This professed chal- 
 lenge, as its author repeatedly calls it, was published in Mr. Campbell's 
 printed account of the debate, which Mr. Walker afterward proved to be 
 spurious. In consequence of an application from an important friend and 
 partizan of Mr. Campbell's, I was induced, in the year 1823, to send him 
 an acceptance of his challenge. This introduced a correspondence, which 
 terminated in a public conference of seven days in Washington, Mason 
 county, Kentucky, in October 1823. There was no stenographer engaged. 
 Yet Mr. Campbell has been so kind as to write a volume of speeches for me, 
 without my ever thinking of imposing such a task upon him. If God per- 
 mit, the merits of his performance, and the character and testimony of his 
 friends who have aided him, and certified for him, may be the subject of free 
 animadversion, hereafter. This controversy is as interesting in Kentucky, 
 as Universalism is in Philadelphia. The reason is, that Arianism and all 
 other evils, are brought in under the cloak of Anti-Pedobaptism. Real 
 Christian Baptists are the objects of my sincere love. Am'ong them, I have 
 dear relatives and friends in the West and in the East. Mr. Campbell 
 would deprive me of their friendship by writing speeches for me. When 
 Providence will permit me, in consistency with pastoral duties, and a pro- 
 per regard to health, it is my earnest wish, and my fixed design to publish my 
 own argument, with Mr. Campbell, as I have with Mr. Kneeland. And that 
 I have the means of doing it, Mr. Campbell well knows, since he made as 
 frequent and as doleful complaints of my little book, as did the Universalist 
 champion. Meanwhile I wish it to be understood that I do not consider 
 myself responsible for the follies which Mr. Campbell may forge for me. 
 
 W. L. M'C. 
 
^1012 01029 3423