are exhorted to faith and piety by the hope of rewards in the heavenly world. For example, Christ exhorts us thus:

"Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt and where thieves do not break through and steal." Math. 6: 19, 20.

Now if your system is true, how can you account for the fact, that Christ, the wisest and best of all teachers, did exhort his hearers to lay up treasures in heaven? You believe that

nothing that we can say or do in this world, will have any influence whatever upon our future condition. How then can one lay up treasures in heaven? A long life of self-denying piety will not add one ray of glory to the immortal crown of the saint. A long life of heaven-daring and blasphemous impiety will not diminish one iota of the bliss and glory of those who live and die in sin. How then can we lay up treasures in heaven? Your doctrine charges Christ with folly for uttering such anunmeaning exhortation. Again; we hear the Saviour breathing forth the following exhortation to a company of selfish Jews who followed him for the loaves and fishes: "Labor not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life." John 6:27.

Here the hearers of Christ were laboring for the good things of this world exclusively. Christ gently rebukes them for this, and exhorts them to labor for those undying blessings which endure-abide, unto everlasting life. How would such an exhortation sound from the lips of a Universalist preacher?— Had Christ been a preacher of Universalisma, the Jews might have turned upon him and said:

"You acknowledge that our present business is to provide for our temporal wants, our eternal wants being above and beyond our reach. In seeking loaves and fishes, the n, we are in our "appropriate sphere." Why then do you exhort us to labor for the meat that endureth unto everlasting life? Everlasting life is an unconditional gift of God, and its felicity can in no sense or degree be increased or diminished by our labor. Our present characters have nothing to do with our future destination,"

Such an appeal would have exposed the folly of such an exhortation. Did Christ ever utter such nonsense? Never.

Hear the Apostle Paul to Timothy: "But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness, for bodily exercise profiteth little (or for a little time,

as the margin reads) but godliness is profitable unto all things, having the promise of the life that now is and of that which is to come." 1 Tim. 4: 7.8.

Here the fact that a connection exists between present moral character and the future destination of man is fully expressed. According to Modern Universalism, neither godliness nor ungodliness has any thing to do with the "life which is to come." Godliness is not profitable; nor ungodliness unprofitabl to it. But the inspired Apostle, who seems to have been a stranger to the inventions of these last days, affirms that the profits of godliness extend to the life which is to come. This clearly implies future rewards and punishments. This text involves your system in a dilemma. Take which horn you please. Say that neither godliness nor ungodliness has any profits to be realized in eternity, and you make the Apostle a false teacher. Say the "life which is to come" denotes the present life,and you destroy the well known meaning of language. Hear St. Paul once more to the same point:

"To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means when I have preached to others, I myself should be a cast-away." 1 Cor. 9: 22, 27.

In the preceding context the Apostle tells us of his arduous and self-denying labors to promote the spread of the gospel and secure the salvation of men. Now taking text and context into the account there are several things here to my mind utterly inconsistent with Universalism. (1.) I cannot understand why Paul should labor so hard, suffer so much, become all things to all men that he might by all means save SOME, if all are on the road to heaven. If all are to be saved why should he suffer and labor so much to save SOME? Can you tell? Why should a man make incessant efforts to save a few at least, if he well knew that all were to be saved? Surely Paul was not a Universalist,if he was, he was a mad-man; for none but mad-men could be guilty of the folly of laboring to secure or save that which they know cannot be injured or lost.

(2.) The Apostle compares himself and his Christian Brethren, who are making this great and indefatigable effort to save some, to the competitors in the Grecian games. "Now they do it (run in the games) to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an INCORRUPTIBLE." Now I cannot understand how the Apostle and his Christian Brethren could labor for an incorruptible crown, if that crown is to be bestowed upon all in

discriminately without the least reference being had to their having run, or not having run the Christian race. Paul represents himself as on an agonizing race,-running for an incorruptible crown, which you will admit is the crown of glory.— See 2 Tim. 4: 8. James 1: 12. 1 Peter 5: 4. Rev. 2: 10,3: 11, 4: 4. Now, if Paul was a Universalist, he must have been a great simpleton indeed, to have made so much effort for that incorruptible crown, which will equally grace the heads of all, without any respect being had to the question, whether they have run or have not run the Christian race. If you should see a man endeavoring to nrge the sun forward or retard his progress by the motions of his hands, you would regard him at once, as a mad man, or a fool. But why? Because common sense and the well known laws of nature would teach him his efforts could in no possible way effect the object desired. Was the great Apostle to the Gentiles playing such a game when he run for an incorruptible crown, neither to be gained or lost by his race? Yes-if your doctrine be true, Paul either did not know it, or he was such a simpleton. Take which horn of the dilemma you please.

(3.) Again, the Apostle expresses a sense of his danger,when he says: "I keep under my body and bring it into subjection, lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a CAST-AWAY." "I myself should be a cast-away.' This was the danger; this thought animated the Apostle in his efforts to bring his body, all the passions and propensities of his whole nature, into subjection to the law of Christ. The figure here employed is most expressive. The word adokimos here rendered cast-away is taken from bad metals, and denotes those which will not bear the test that may be applied to them; they are found base and worthless,and are therefore cast away. Such the Apostle intimates will be the case with hypocrites in that great coronation-day when the incorruptible crown shall be placed upon the heads of the faithful. Then some, like base aud worthless metals, not standing the test, will be cast away. To save himself from this fate, the Apostle labored to keep under his body and bring it into subjection. He does not say that he is not influenced by other and even higher motives, but he simply affirms that this is one motive influencing his character and conduct. Now how could Paul have acted in this way, if he were a Universalist? Did you ever hear your preacher exhort his hearers to keep under their bodies and practice self-denial, that they might not be cast aways? Never. Let a Universalist preacher address his hear

ers in this manner and it would be thought at once, that he had renounced his system.

2. I cannot adopt your system because I find in the Bible, another class of texts, which represent the glories of the heavenly world as the reward of fidelity to Christ. As an example I refer you to the triumphant language of St. Paul, a short time before his martyrdom. Hear him:

'For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith; henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge will give me at that day; and not to me only,but unto all them also that love his appearing." 2 Tim. 4:6.

This text is utterly inconsistent with Universalism, because (1.) Paul's language is that of a dying believer, anticipating future blessedness, on the ground that he had faithfully served Christ, and was therefore, entitled, according to the grace of God, to the rewards of the righteous. "I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith." But if the present life has no moral connection with the future, such considerations could not have cheered the hopes of the dying Apostle. (2.) The text teaches us that Paul was not fully rewarded as he passed along in the journey of life. His labors were now over-they were passed; but his reward is in the future. "Henceforth there is laid up for me (have not got it yet) a crown of righteousness." (3.) This crown is to be given at a particular time-called that day. The demonstrative pronoun here points out a particular day, in distinction from all other days. (4.) The crown which Paul anticipated in his dying hour, is to be conditionally bestowed. "But not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." Can you reconcile these expressions with Modern Universalism?

Another passage properly belonging to this class is Rev. 2:10. "Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life." Now if Universalism is the truth of God, what means this conditionality in this promise? It is perfectly unmeaning. The passage would be just as true upon your system if it read, "Be thou unfaithful until death and I will give thee a crown of life." Take another passage of the same class.

"And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, writeBlessed are the dead, which die in the Lord, from henceforth, yea, saith the spirit that they may rest from their labors and their works do follow them." Rev. 14: 13. See also Rev. 3:21.

This passage I cannot reconcile with your views. I cannot understand why the righteous, who die in the Lord are any more blessed than the wicked who die in their sins. Nor can I understand how their works can be said to follow them into eternity, if the present has nothing to do with the future.These things are all unreconcilable solecisms, more enigmatical and blind than the hieroglyphics upon the Egyptian pyramids,upon the hypothesis that Universalism is the truth of God. There are other passages of this class, but these will suffice to illustrate this portion of the divine testimony.

Yours as ever.

LETTER XVII.

My Dear Sir:

I cannot believe in Universalism, because the promises of personal salvation are conditional. This has already been made to appear, but you will allow me to call your attention to this point once more for further illustration. I find in the scriptures two kinds of promises, which I will denominate, for the sake of distinction, prophetical and personal promises.— The prophetical promises are predictions of the future prosperity and blessedness of the Church, and as they are prophetical and not preceptive they proclaim the blessing to be enjoyed without expressing the conditions of personal salvation.To illustrate; the promise to Abraham-"In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed," Gen. 22: 18-is a prophetical promise, and will serve as an example of this class of promises; but when St. Paul comes to apply this promise to personal salvation, he explains it conditionally. Hear him.

"And the scriptures forseeing that God would justify the heathen thro' faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying-In thee shall all nations be blessed; so then they which be of faith (none others) are blessed with faithful Abraham." Gal. 3: 8, 9. None are heirs of this promise according to the Apostle, but those who are of faith and are Christ's, and none are Christ's but those who have the spirit of Christ. "If ye be Christ's then (not otherwise) are ye Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise." Gal. 3: 29.

As to the personal promises, which are conditional they are