undoubtedly expressed it in clear and emphatic language. Did he do so? Look at his explanation of his own parable.

'He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world, the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;' the enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that of fend, 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.' Matt. 13:37-43.

Here we are taught by one that cannot lie, (1). That the good seed, or wheat, when ready for harvest, is not Universalism, but the children of the kingdom,' called the righteous,' in verse 43. Here a figure of rhetoric is used, called a metonomy, in which the cause is spoken of as the effect, or the effect as the cause. The seed sown by Christ in person, or by the agency of any of his true ministers, is the truth; the crop, or result, is, the children of the kingdom.' (2). The tares in harvest, are not false doctrine; but ' the children of the wicked one,' the natural product of false doctrine. False doctrine produces depraved hearts.-Here the same figure is used as before. The wicked are frequently spoken of as the children of the Master whom they serve, or the principles they adopt. They are called the children of disobedience,' children of their father the devil.' Now, in saying that the tares and wheat, not when sown as seed, but when reaped in as a harvest, are false and true doctrines, you contradict Christ, who says, 'The tares are THE CHILDREN OF THE WICKED one; The wheat, the children of the kingdom,' the righteous.'

'

2. I object to your exposition agaiu, because it is absurd and nonsensical. Look at it. Did Christ. employ the Roman soldiers, a wicked and bloody set of men as ever lived -to purge his church and gather out of it all false doctrine? Did they, as a matter of fact, gather out the tares, -the doctrine of future punishment-from the field, the material universe, and burn it up in fire? If so, then it follows that the Roman army which destroyed Jerusalem, a wicked crew of heathen monsters in human form, were the most successful preachers of Universalism, which the world has ever beheld. They reaped down and burnt up the doctrine of future punishment, not only under the walls of the holy city, but through the material universe. Nothing but pure Universalism of course, could have been left throughout the material universe.

We

It is surprising that some ancient historian has not chronicled this wonderous harvest time of the Roman army, when they so effectually, as the "mighty angels" of the Son of man, cleansed not only the sanctuary, but the material universe from false doctrine and wicked men. should naturally suppose that Josephus, Philo, Tacitus, or Seutonius, or some other historian of those days, would have noticed so extraordinary an event. But no. They Behave left us in the dark, both as it respects the modus operandi and the fact of this marvelous circumstance. sides, if the tares-false docrine-were gathered out of the field-the material universe and burnt up at the destruction of Jerusalem, is it not a little extraordinary, that the whole field--the material universe was so quickly covered over again with tares? For it is a matter of fact, which you will not presume to deny, that the doctrine of future retribution, your tures, has been adopted, so far as we can learn from ecclesiastical and profane history, by the entire mass of Jews (the small sect of Sadducees excepted) and Christians, Pagans and Mahomedans, from the days of the apostles down to the beginning of the present century. Where did these tares all come from? I think your reapers must have acted the part of eye-servants, and

left large patches of the old crop standing; with which the enemy seeded over the whole field again. Besides, it is a circumstance which I cannot account for, that the entire harvest or wheat, true doctrine-Universalism, gathered in by the angels, Roman army, should have been so soon lost and that for nearly 1800 years; for you are probably well aware of the fact, that the peculiar system of Universalism has not a single advocate in all antiquity. True, your authors tell us that Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and some other christian fathers, were Universalists; but this is deception. These men believed in the doctrine of a judgment to come. They were Platonic philosophers, and their error consisted in blending the speculations of that vain philosopby in relation to the pre-existence and transmigration of souls, with christianity.

3. It is not true that the end of the world took place at the destruction of Jerusalem. The word aion, world, here I admit, does not mean material world. The material world I have no reason to believe, will ever have an end. It denotes age or dispensation, the gospel age, or dispensation. The Jewish age, or dispensation closed long before the destruction of Jerusalem. It closed at the commencement of John's ministry, if Christ is to be believed. The law and the prophets (the Jewish age) were until John, since that time the kingdom of God (gospel kingdom) is preached, and every man presseth into it. Luke 16:16. When the end of the Jewish age is referred to by the New Testament writers, it is spoken of as having already arrived.

'Now once in the end of the world (Jewish age) hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." Heb. 9:26. Now when did Christ appear to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself? Not at the destruction of Jerusalem, for he had appeared, been sacrificed, aud reascended to glory, more than thirty years before that event arrived. He appeared first as the Messiah, on the banks of Jordan, where John was preaching and baptizing, when

John said- Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.' John 1:27.

4. Mr. Whittemore's exposition as to what is meant by 'the righteous shining forth in the kingdom of their Father,' will not stand the test; for (1) It is not true that the Jews, the enemies and persecutors of the Christians, were destroyed at the destruction of Jerusalem. Multitudes of the Jews survived the destruction of their city and temple, nor does it appear from the page of history, that their calamities purged their hearts of prejudice against Christ or his followers. (2) It is not true that Christians, in consequence of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman army, experienced any remarkable degree of earthly felicity. On the contrary, the Christians in Judea were separated forever from their unconverted friends, driven out from their houses and homes; their property given to the flames, and they were obliged to take shelter in the dens and caves of the earth. Is this shining forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father? Is this experiencing earthly felicity?' It is such earthly felicity,' such shining forth in the kingdom' as Mr. Whittemore would be unwilling to receive as his reward for well doing. Let a company of furious savages be let loose upon the city of Boston-and with sword and torch in hand, let then butcher the helpless, burn the city, Trumpet office and all, break up the editor's family, and chase `him into the mountains of Vermont-and he would be the last man who would call such a retreat-such a disaster, shining forth as the sun in the kingdom of his father,' or compartive earthly felicity!!' (3) Nor is it true that the church was separated from hypocrites and became pure,' at the destruction of Jerusalem. No such fact can be proved from history. It is a fact invented to help out with this explanation. On the contrary, the Church was more pure before than after the destruction of Jerusalem. While the Apostles were alive, the Church was more pure in doctrine and discipline, than at any period since. As these holy men, one after another, passed away, men continued

6

to rise in the Church, who brought in damnable heresies.'

5. I cannot adopt your exposition of this parable, because it requires me to violate an important rule of biblical interpretation, viz :- That every explanation of scripture should be regarded as false, which does not harmonize with well known facts, or with itself.

Well, now your exposition of the parable of the tares and wheat, does not harmonize with well known facts ; -well known historical facts are against it. It does not harmonize with itself; hence it must be false.

6. I cannot adopt your exposition because it is supported by sophistry and false application of scripture. 1 Cor. 3: 12-15, is commonly brought forward to prove that the tares represent false doctrine, and not wicked men, and that while their false doctrines were burnt up at the destruction of Jerusalem, they themselves will be saved.

'Now if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man's work shall be made manifest; for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is.' If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. 1.Cor. 3:

12-15.

Now, if you will consult the preceding context, you will readily perceive that the Apostle is speaking here only of believers, those who have built their hopes upon Christ the right foundation. For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ; now if any man build on this foundation,' &c. Now as all men do not build on this foundation, so the text affirms nothing as to their destination. Again. We are gravely asked, when we listen to a Universalist exposition of this parable, if tares can become wheat, or wheat tares. I answer yes. Dr. Clark tells us that tares are a bastard, or degenerate wheat. Wheat then in Ori