en, neither in this world, neither in the world to come, how can he be saved by "the only name given whereby we must be saved." But not to insist on this last difficulty, how you will settle the first I have mentioned I am not able to guess. You must positively contradict scripture, or you must acknowledge you are not correct in supposing that all will be delivered from the curse of the law; or, lastly, you must suppose the curse is something different from the punishment, which the wicked do suffer in a future world; and of course something different from any thing which is threatened in the scriptures. It will follow, then, that the curse of the divine law is no where threatened in the law, nor in any part of the word of God. But if even you could devise a way by which you might fancy you could get out all the others from their deserved punishment; yet the blasphemer against the Holy Ghost, who is never to be forgiven, would stand in your way.

Perhaps, then, you will say, the law must take its course with him, if he cannot be forgiven, and he must pay the utmost farthing. The question will then return, what is the punishment due to the demerit of sin? It cannot be that punishment which the wicked suffer in hell, in order for their own good, that they may be made better, and brought to repentance. For according to you, they are to be delivered from that punishment shortly, by Jesus Christ, and made happy in heaven. Christ delivers from the curse of the law; of course, those whom he delivers, do not suffer that curse. If then the curse of the law be not that misery which the wicked do actually suffer in the future world, it must be either a greater temporal punishment, or endless misery. But, sir, if the penalty of the divine law be any where threatened in the law, (and I presume it is no where else to be found) it cannot be a greater temporal punishment than the damned in hell do actually suffer; for no other punishment is any where threatened in the scrip

Now, sir, I believe you must of necessity take one of three courses. You must continue to affirm, as you have. affirmed in your second answer to my questions, that those who are punished in a future world, are finally delivered from punishment, and carried to heaven by the merits of

Christ; consequently do not suffer according to their demerits; and plainly and positively contradict a vast number of threatenings, not only of the law, but also a vast many positive declarations of Christ and his disciples, that the wicked are punished according to their works, that no mercy is shewed them: or, 2d, you must say, they do suffer all the law threatened them; have satisfied all its demands; have paid the very last mite; and come out of hell on the score of justice and not of mercy, and go to heaven without any help from Jesus Christ. For it would be idle to talk of shewing mercy to those who were no longer guilty, and against whom the law has no demands. They come out of hell on the footing of strict justice; and can claim exemption from punishment on the footing of strict justice; and are conformed to the law of God, and in friendship with their Creator, and must of course be happy. But on this supposition more absurdities present themselves than I shall have time to enumerate. If any men do satisfy the

divine law, and are received to happiness, they are received, not on account of what Christ has done, but on account of legal righteousness of their own. Besides, they are not saved from any thing which is threatened in the divine law. Universal salvation, therefore, is an unmeaning term; and that all men are raised up from their defectible state, is also without meaning. They are punished in hell till justice is satisfied; and they, (if you will permit me to quote one of your brethren) are whitened in hell, till they become fit for heaven! There is, I believe, but one supposition more which you can make; it is that the curse threatened in the divine law is endless misery. Thus, sir, I have done for the present with your first answer.

Your fourth answer will now claim some attention. You write thus: "I believe a future punishment is inflicted for the same purpose as punishment in the present life. I believe the sinner who is subject to this punishment, with other means, is made better, and brought to repentance." This is plain enough, only I do not know what you mean by the "other means" of which you speak; but that is no matter. You go here, I presume, on the supposition that the punishment which is inflicted on the wicked in a future world, is merely disciplinary. I make this supposi

tion, because you say in your second answer to my ques. tion, "I believe all mankind will be delivered from this curse [curse of the divine law] by the only name given whereby men can be saved.”

If all mankind, as you say you believe, will be delivered from the curse of this law, it must follow then, that no one will ever suffer or be punished according to his demerils; of course, they will not suffer all which according to strict justice might be inflicted on them. I have already hinted that this sentiment is at war with the word of truth, which you have professed to follow. That says they are judged according to their works; are tormented day and night for ever and ever; have judgment without mercy; are confined in prison till they have paid the very last mite; and no greater punishment is threatened in the law, than that which the scriptures declare the wicked shall suffer in hell. But this argument is so plain I need not pursue it further. Your idea that the torments of hell are inflicted on man in a future state merely as a wholesome discipline to make them better and bring them to repentance, inust be considered.

1

I had always supposed that the language of the Bible was intended to be understood by common people; and that it meant something different, when, what a common man, like myself, would suppose, were the most dreadful threatenings, and curses, and woes, pronounced on wicked men, from what it did when it spake of the chastisement of the child of God. Why, on your plan, are those who are sent to hell, said to be cursed; to lament; to be cast off forever; to be reprobates; to have judgment without mercy? Surely, they are lost, or cast off, or cursed, or out of the reach of mercy, according to your plan, in no other sense than the children of God are while in this probationary state. For some reason which you have not mentioned, they, you suppose, are sent to hell, and are put under more powerful means of grace. Now, as we understand language, can this be said to be a curse? It is a painful trial,

no doubt; so it is for the sinner to be under conviction in this world. But should I see an unregenerate sinner under the most poignant anguish from a sense of his sins, I could not believe that he was accursed, por that God had

D

withdrawn his mercy from him; and even if I could know that his probationary state would be lengthened out to a million of years, and the sinner would continue till the last hour of his probation, in the most intense pain, if this pain were absolutely necessary to make him better, and bring him to repentance, and qualify him for heaven, I could not call him accursed, nor believe that God had ceased to show him mercy. Certainly, if it be a mercy or a blessing to carry an intelligent being to heaven, and make him eternally happy there, it must be a blessing and not a curse to use those means which are absolutely necessary to qualify him for that place. If a man were sick, and must die unless some blood were taken from him, although the taking of the blood might be an operation somewhat painful, yet no one, I think, would call it a cursed remedy, if nothing else could save the man's life. If your construction of the scriptures be correct, they speak a language totally different from what we suppose they mean. By we I mean common aen. By a curse common men mean an absolute evil, and those who are cursed suffer real evil; but to put men under an administration of grace cannot be called an evil. It is certainly a great good, an unspeakable blessing, if no other means can bring them to endless felicity. Hear David; "Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest, O Lord,” &c. Also, St. Paul, "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth: if ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards and not sons.

Now, sir, I would ask, why this distinction in the language of the Bible, between saints who are disciplined on the earth, and the wicked who are sent to hell, to be put there under a course of discipline? If their punishment is inflicted on them for their own good, everlasting good, why are they not said to be blessed? Why are they not called sons and said to be loved of God? It appears to be the idea of the Apostle, that there were some who did not receive mere chastisement, whom he calls bastards; all who are sons partake of chastisement; the wicked in hell, then, if they are only chastised for their own good, are sons, and

where to find the bastards, is uot for me to determine. No where can you find I believe, in the word of truth, the saints threatened with fiery indignation; the vengeance, the fury, the wrath, &c. of God. He will, he says, visit their iniquities with stripes; but his loving kindness will he not take from them, nor suffer his faithfulness to fail. But dreadful indeed are the denunciations of woe against his enemies, or the despisers of his Son and the gospel. Isaiah, lix. 18. "According to their deeds, accordingly he will repay, fury to his adversaries, recompence to his enemies." St. Paul says, "God will render indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that doeth evil. "Vengeance is mine and I will repay, saith the Lord." "The Lord will be revealed from heaven in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Jude speaks of some who are set forth as an example, “suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." I should find no difficulty in filling my paper with similar quotations, both from the old and new testaments. But sufficient has been adduced to show the different manner in which the s.cred writers speak of the children of God, and the impenitent despisers of his Son; a difference wholly unintelligible on your plan of disciplinary punishment in hell. But again, The scriptures uniformly speak of God's peculiar and distinguishing mercy to his saints. He keeps them as the apple of his eye. He is their God, and no good thing will be withhold from them; while he sends wrath upon his enemies. But on the supposition that future punishment is inflicted to make those who suffer it better, I cannot understand why God is not equally merciful to all. controversy he is infinitely merciful to those in a future world, merely for their own good. be infinite losers if not sent there; because we the supposition that no other means could produce the desired effect. These are, of course, the best possible means which could be applied. Because if you suppose that milder means would effect the object; would bring these unhappy sufferers to repentance, you charge God with cruelty; charge him with inflicting unnecessary punishment without any good object. Possibly you may say that

Beyond all he punishes They would must go on