and publicly profess to believe a different doctrine. I have concluded, that this passage of your letters, must have been inadvertantly written, or you must have some way of getting rid of difficulties from the texts you have quoted and your comments, of which I candidly confess my ignorance. The object of this correspondence, is to state what has occurred to me, and to request further information from you on this subject.

I am unable to controvert what you say, that, 'things in heaven, earth, and under the earth, is a common periphrasis of the Hebrew and New Testament writers, for the universe.' My present degree of knowledge leads me to think, that this statement is correct. If it be not, I should be glad to see the evidence by which it is disproved. Neither can I, nor am I disposed to dispute that the worship spoken of in the texts quoted by you, is spiritual worship. So sure you are of this, that you say, 'if this be not spiritual worship, I am unable to produce a case, where worship can be called spiritual and divine.' Now, my dear Sir, if it be true, that things in heaven, earth, and under the earth, is a common periphrasis for the universe; and if it also be true, that this worship is spiritual and divine, you certainly have told us, that the universe is to worship Christ with spiritual and divine worship. The worship is spiritual and divine, and the universe are the worshippers. Are we able to avoid this? The mind must be differently constructed

from mine, that can avoid it. Is it, or can it be believed by any one, that any beings in the universe, who worship Christ thus, shall be punished forever? I am sure I never had any such idea; and I have always understood, that it was on account of persons not worshipping Christ in this way, that they were punished. You certainly cannot think, that the punishment of the wicked forever, is in whole or in part to consist, in rendering to Christ spiritual and divine worship. If this be punishment what is happiness? If this be hell, what is heaven?

It is pretty evident to me from these texts which you have quoted, and the explanations you have given, that the universe is to worship Christ with spiritual and divine worship. Notwithstanding this, I presume you profess to believe, that some, if not many in this universe, are to be forever miserable. How to reconcile these things, has been a subject of consideration with me. After turning, and looking at these things on all sides, I am unable to devise, how you can reconcile them to your own mind, but in one or the other of the three following ways. But as each of these ways, present to me some difficulties, I shall state them, hoping that you will assist me, if possible to remove them. But this must be the matter of another communication.

I am yours, respectfully,

W. BALFOUR.

LETTER II.

February 19, 1820.

SIR,-I stated to you in my last communication, that there were only three ways which had occurred to me, by which you could make the everlasting punishment of the wicked, consistent with the quotation I made from your letters. As each of these ways, present difficulties to my mind, I shall proceed to a statement of them, relying on you for some explantion.

1st. It occurred to me, that you might believe the universe, would render spiritual and divine worship to Christ, yet hold the doctrine of the eternal punishment of the wicked, by saying, that, the place of their punishment, was without the bounds of the universe.' Admitting this to be your view, I admit your statements to be consistent with your belief in the eternal punishment of the wicked. My mind however asks, 'Is this true?' Do not you think, that this is a very fanciful idea? If you indeed suppose, that the place where the wicked are to be punished, is without the bounds of the universe, please inform us, in whose dominions this place is? But as I do not believe you capable of entertaining such a foolish idea, I pass this, and notice,

2d. That it further occurred to me, you might

attempt to extricate yourself from the difficulties in which the paragraph quoted involves you, in the following manner. In commenting on the passage quoted from Phillipians, you say, Christ is the proper object of universal adoration.' Did you mean by this to inform us, that Christ was the proper object of universal adoration, but that he was not universally adored? If so, I can easily understand, how you hold to the everlasting punishment of some, but then I am unable to reconcile this with the comments which you have given in the paragraph of your letters on which I am remarking. Remember Sir, you have told us, that, things in heaven, earth and under the earth, is a common periphrasis for the universe.' Besides, the texts quoted, and your comments upon them seem to prove, that this very universe, renders spiritual and divine worship to Christ. Should this seem the least doubtful from the text in Phillipians, all doubt seems to be removed by the one you quote from Revelation. Notice its language, Sir, 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 honor, &c.' Observe also your own language in commenting on this passage. Do you speak of Christ being only, the proper object of universal adoration, but not universally adored?' No, you say, 'if this be not spiritual worship, I am unable to produce a case where worship can be called spiritual and divine.' John's language does not, and your

6

comment on his, does not deny, but as the worship is divine, the universe are the worshippers. On the contrary, have you not said, things in heaven, earth, and under the earth, is a periphrasis of the Hebrew and New Testament writers for the universe.' If this indeed be true, and you are confident that the worship rendered by this universe is spiritual and divine, where do you find your subjects for everlasting punishment, unless among spiritual and divine worshippers of Christ? Are any of them to be the subject of this? As I am confident you do not believe any such thing, suffer me to appeal to your candor, if there is not a difficulty, which requires your consideration here, and which I hope you will condescend to resolve. You are a man of too much mind, not to perceive the difficulty, and my opinion of you is, that you are possessed of sufficient humility to say something by way of explanation.

3d. But it occurred to me, that you reconciled the paragragh on which I am remarking, with your belief of endless punishment, by explaining the universal language of Paul and John in the texts in a restricted sense. Presuming, that this is the mode you take of extricating yourself, my desire is to see you do it honorably. The difficulties which have presented themselves to me on this mode of interpretation, will be best presented to you by considering the two passages which you quote, in order.

In Phillip, ii: 10, 11, the word every is found