God hath given to us eternal life; and this life is in his son." v. 11.

We have here quoted almost all the passages in the New Testament which have the words eternal and everlasting. In all these passages the Greek adjective aionion stands in the Greek Testament for eternal and everlasting in the English. The reader is requested to turn to them, and read them in their connexion; and then judge if this word was not used, in most or all of these passages, to denote the endless continuance of the objects to which it is applied.

Let him also read them with the universalist definition of the word, age-lasting in his mind, and see if they appear to have been so intended. Thus, "while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are age-lasting !" "We have a building of God, a house not made with hands, age-lasting in the heavens !!!! "Good master, what good thing shall I do that I may have age-lasting life? !!!" It may be contended that this aionion life was sometimes represented as something the believers already possessed. This is true. But their having already entered into the enjoyment of it, does not disprove its endless duration, any more than our having entered into the enjoyment of God disproves his endless existence. The disciples of Christ are represented in some expressions as being already the participants of eternal life in Christ Jesus; but so far from limiting the duratic of that life, on that account our Saviour expressly decred in reference to the same life, "this is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever." John VI. 50, 51. This death, which his disciples were not to suffer, must be supposed the opposite of the life they were to enjoy, and which was to continue for ever. spiritual and eternal death, or the second death.

That is

We in

sist that this is a fair construction of the language; and we cannot see how it can admit any other construction. But after all; if it can be proved, that all men will, in some distant future period, become holy and happy, we shall probably be there with the rest, and we should be very glad to have it so; but certain it is, that a great change must take place in the dispositions of men, if that should ever be brought about. And we feel pretty confident, that universalist preaching and writing is never very likely to accom plish it.

4. Suppose the universalists of this country were to send one of their ablest and most learned and gifted preachers, as a missionary, to a region of country where the people generally believed in future endless punishment. He goes to teach universalism to that deluded, fanatick, and crazy people. He spends years in preaching and conversation with them; but never in a single instance, tells them of the great errour of endless misery-says not a single word against the errour from which he came to reform them! Would not the universalists condemn him as a traitor to their cause? Certainly. Yet Jesus came from heaven to such a people. He came to teach the truths-the great truths of the gospel of God, to suppress the errours, correct the sentiments, and reform the lives of mankind. He knew that not only the religious Jews, but Gentiles also, believed in the endless perdition of the wicked. Yet not a single word did he ever say against that errour! The Pharisees complained of many innovations which he was teaching contrary to their views; but never did they complain, that he was a universalist, and denied the endless punishment of the wicked! Had it been so they would have made it matter of serious complaint and crimination. We challenge the whole world again, to show a single word which our Saviour uttered against the common belief on this point. Now did Jesus forget his errand? Did he shrink from the responsibility of his mission; and leave

it for the present, more wise, more patriotick, more tenderhearted men of the nineteenth century to accomplish?

Again. Suppose this universalist missionary should speak often of the righteous and the wicked, and of their rewards and punishments; and in so doing should use the same language which they used, and by which they meant endless blessedness and endless misery. And suppose the good people should understand him to mean by the language, exactly what they meant by it; and he should know that they so understood him. Would universalists think him an honest universalist missionary? Yet this is exactly the course pursued by our Saviour on earth, as we have shown. And it cannot be denied, that the early christian fathers all believed in future retribution; and most all of them in an unending state of happiness for the good, and of misery for the bad. Had Jesus corrected this errour (if it were an errour) we could not account for it, that his immediate followers should all fall back into the errour, who had all his instructions before them; and who were well acquainted with the usus loquendi, all the words and phrases used on that subject in the New Testament; and all this without the least discussion, debate or schism among them!

We may put the argument into the following syllogisti

cal form.

1. If Jesus Christ were honest and fearless; and if he came to suppress the errour of endless punishment; he would have said something against the errour.

But he was honest and fearless; but did not say any thing against the errour of endless punishment; therefore, he did not come to suppress that errour.

2. If Jesus Christ knew the doctrine of endless punishment to prevail extensively in the world, and did not undertake to suppress it; he must have been willing it should prevail.

But he did know it prevailed extensively in the world, and

did not undertake to suppress it; therefore, he was willing it should prevail.

3. If Jesus Christ had not known the doctrine of endless punishment was the truth, which he knew prevailed extensively in the world, he would have attempted to suppress it. But he did not attempt to suppress it; therefore, he did know it was the truth.

4. If Jesus Christ knew the people used certain words and phrases to denote endless punishment; and he did not mean to teach endless punishment; he would not have used the same words and phrases without explaining that he used them in another sense.

But he did know they used certain words and phrases to denote endless punishment; and he did not explain that he used them in any other sense; therefore, he did mean to teach endless punishment.

5. If Jesus Christ was the son of God he must have taught the truth; and all attempts to improve his doctrine are a blasphemous assumption of superiour wisdom and goodness.

But Jesus Christ was the son of God; therefore, he taught the truth, and all attempts to improve his doctrine, are a blasphemous assumption of superiour wisdom and goodness.

The same arguments will apply, in all their force, in the case of the apostles. If the facts on which this reasoning is founded are denied, (which I think will not be done from any respectable source,) we will give incontestible proof of them in another work. For we are very careful, not to assume as facts, any thing of any consequence, which is not susceptible of proof.

But as this work is designed only as a compendium, it is not thought necessary to take up room with proof of facts generally admitted, and which will not probably be denied. Much, both of fact and argument must be omitted, for want of room in this volume, which we consider only a beginning to what may be done.

22 *

SECTION X.

Several classes of Scripture, which indubitably prove universal doctrine untrue, considered.

“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, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was an bungered and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink I was a stranger and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick and ye visited me: I was in prison and ye came unto me.

Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered and fed thee? or thirsty and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger and took thee in? or naked and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, verily, I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, depart from me, ye cursed, into (aionion) everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was an hungered and ye gave me no meat I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, verily, I say unto you, inasmuch, as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into (aionion) everlasting punishment; but the righteous into (aionion) eternal life." Mat. xxv. 31-46.

Then

Thus reads what is generally called "the parable of the sheep and goats."

That it is a parable, or at least, clothed with a kind of parabolical imagery, all will agree. But as a parable, its