dreds and thousands of early christians, who submitted to all manner of indignities-were afflicted, destitute, tormented, not accepting deliverance, "that they might obtain a better resurrection."— (Heb. xi. 35.)

Such is the uniform testimony of the Bible in respect to the influence which this life has on another, in regard to the interesting and efficacious doctrine of future retribution. Universalism s, that to admit and teach this truth, draws after it, necessarily, ondition of future punishment; and as the rewards of the righteous are endless, so, by fair inference, the punishment of the wicked will be endless also. To avoid these difficulties, the system proceeds deliberately to lay its sacrilegious hand on the word of God, and tear out, and cast away from the catalogue of christian doctrines, this revealed truth, which inspiration has taken so much pains to set forth in a clear and convincing light. To relieve himself of his difficulty somewhat, Mr. Austin attempts to raise a dust in respect to human merit-as though I had taught that men can merit heaven by their works. I have taught no such doctrine, and the gentleman knows it; he is not so ignorant of Methodist theology as his remarks would seem to imply. It is a mere "ruse," to divert attention from his own position, and in this, he reminds me of the ink fish, mentioned in natural history, who, when closely pursued by an enemy, emits from his body a substance which colors the water, and enables him to escape. My doctrine on this point is expressed by St. Paul-"not of works, lest any man should boast." And yet God promises his people a reward, not" of debt," but "of grace." That eternal life which is the "gift of God," is "of faith, that it might be by grace," and it cannot be by grace, on any other principles than those involved in faith; and thus again Universalism is incompatible with the scriptures. We close what we have to say on this point, in two

remarks.

1. In denying future retribution, Universalism robs the christian of all that encouragement and strength of motive, derived from the prospect of future and eternal reward. It teaches that christians have nothing to gain in the future world, by a life of holiness and usefulness here. There can in this case be no possible motive to piety, beyond what relates to the present time. Now, as christians are, in this life, often the subjects of severe persecution and great calamity, because of their religion, it follows, they are in this case "of all men most miserable." Obliged to sacrifice their earthly blessings, and often even life itself, for Christ's sake, and yet, present sacrifice promises no future gain. Were this the correct state of the case, christians might appropriately adopt the language of a heathen poet :

"Heu, heu, nos miserose: quam totus homuncio nil est.

Alas! alas! what wretches we are: we are all a worthless pack!"

2. In denying future retribution, Universalism removes from

the mind of the sinner, all that restraining moral influence derived from the danger of forfeiting happiness in another world. As there is nothing gained by self-denial and holiness, so there is nothing to be lost by self-indulgence and viciousness. Herod, Howard, Paine, and Paul, will enter upon their eternal state with precisely the same advantages; as much so as if they had all lived alike in this world. Blessed doctrine! It is the great balancewheel of the moral universe. It is the great leveler of (moral) distinctions. Away with the old antiquated notion, that this world is in any sense a probation for another. Let us cut loose from the disagreeable moral restraints which orthodoxy would throw around us, since it can be done without the least hazard to our future spiritual interests. And as the heart is inclined to love pleasure more than God, let us walk after the sight of our eyes, and the imagination of our hearts, without any fear that for all these things God will bring us into judgment:" practice literally upon the Epicurean principle-"seize the pleasures of the present day"-shout and sing,

"No Devil, no Hell, no angry God

The Gate, and Way, to heaven are broad."

O blessed doctrine! thrice blessed he who heartily embraces the gospel of impartial grace!!!!!

In the farther prosecution of this discussion, I invite your attention to another negative argument, based on the fact, that the scripture passages most relied upon by Universalists, do not estab lish nor teach their favorite dogma-the unconditional, ultimate holiness and happiness of all men.

I have not attempted to keep an exact account of all the Bible quotations introduced by Mr. Austin, to prove his proposition. But I have taken a little pains to select from their own writings, those scripture proofs most frequently appealed to, and on which Universalists depend most in the argument. Particularly, have I selected from a certain pamphlet, from which I find the gentleman opposed to me has drawn pretty freely-entitled, "an hundred arguments in support of Universalism." I believe in calling things by their right names, and would suggest that the next edi tion be denominated, as it really is, "an hundred sophisms, put forth to pervert the word of God, and mislead the minds of honest enquirers after truth.

i Tim. iv. 10-" For, therefore, we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those that believe." This verse affords no support to Universalism, because, on the principles of Universalism, Christ is in no sense the Savior of all men in this world. And it cannot refer to salvation in a future state, for two reasons. 1. There is no evil in a future state, from which men need be saved. 2. Mr. Ballou, Mr. Whittemore, Mr. Pingree, and others, say

salvation Christ came to confer, is wholly in this life: hence, Universalism itself being judge, this passage can have no application to the subject of Universal salvation. Besides, the text and context not only admit, but require a different construction; that construction is, that God is now the Savior of all men, inasmuch as he has provided for, and now offers salvation to all men, freely. by his word and Spirit, and those who accept it by faith, are specially saved.

1 Tim. ii. 4-"Who will have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth." This passage has been pretty thoroughly discussed already, and the idea of absoluteness, which Mr. Austin has attached to the will of God, has been abundantly refuted. It is only necessary to add here, 1. To suppose this verse expresses an absolute and unconditional purpose, contradicts the signification of the word. With all his knowledge of Greek, my friend has not been able to show that "thelei" means anything more than an entire willingness, accompanied with a benevolent desire and determination to employ such measures as are consistent with his attributes and government, to effect the salvation of all men. 2. The Universalist view of this passage is refuted by actual facts. Men are not all saved, neither do they come to the knowledge of the truth. 3. To understand "thelei " in an absolute sense, would violate the "usus loquendi," or the sense in which the term is usually employed in the scriptures. I have, in a former speech, illustrated this point by examples.

Titus ii. 11-" For the grace of God which bringeth salvation, hath appeared to all men"-or, as it may be read-" which bringeth salvation to all men, hath appeared." The audience may easily see a vast difference between saving all men, and bringing salvation to all men. The grace of God does not save all men in this world, even in the Universalist sense; and in the next world, there is nothing to be saved from: hence, Universalism being judge, men will not need grace. The passage must, therefore, have some other signification. Its plain meaning is, that God has graciously provided salvation for all men, and presents it to them, on condition that they live godly in Christ Jesus "soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world."

1 John iv. 14-"And we have seen, and do testify, that the Father sent his Son to be the Savior of the world." This I believe as fully and heartily as possible, though it is far from teaching Universalism. Christ came to be the Savior of the world, on terms specified in his gospel. "He that believeth shall be saved, but he that believeth not, shall be damned;" or, as the verse next following the one under consideration, has it, "Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Christ, God dwelleth in him, and he in God." Does Mr. Austin take the position that men will be saved, whether they confess him or not?

Gen. xxii. 15-18-"In thee, and in thy seed, shall all the nations of the earth be blessed." This promise, which is repeated in substance in several places, relates to the unconditional benefits flowing from Christ to the families of the earth, and not to the eternal salvation of men in a future state. And we contend that it has beca, and is now fulfilled. Not a nation or family ever existe 1, but has been the subject of blessings, through Christ, the seed of Abraham. They enjoy the common benefits of redemption, are placed in a state of initial salvation, and have the means of securing eternal life. All the nations of the earth are so far bencfited by Christ, that all who die in infancy, are unconditionally saved through the atonement, and all who grow up to be personal sinners against God, have the offer of salvation, on condition of repentance, and have power given them to repent and save their souls. But if we admit these promises refer to the personal salvation of men in a future state, still it does not follow that they are absolute and unconditional, but the contrary. The covenant made with Abraham was conditional. The condition was faith. "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." "So then, they that be of faith, are blessed with faithful Abraham."-Gal. iii. 6.

Moreover, the argument of Universalism from this passage, is, logically and theologically, false.

First-logically false, in making the conclusion broader than the premises. Let us state it sylogistically. 1. What God absolutely promises, he will perform. 2. He has promised absolutely, to bless all nations of the earth, in the seed of Abraham. 3. Therefore he will absolutely and unconditionally sive all nations. FAMILIES, and in lividuals of the human family, in the kingdom of heiven. Thus, the conclusion being broader than the premises, the argument is logically false.

Secondly-the argument is theologically false, in assuming that the promise to Abraham cannot be fulfilled, without the absolute and unconditional salvation of all men in heaven. Here is theological sophistry. The spiritual blessings embraced in this promise, are no more absolute, than were the temporal blessings promised, by the possession of the literal Canaan. Thousands, to whom the promise of Canaan was made, failed of entering that land, through unbelief. And St. Paul, writing to the Hebrews respecting the heavenly Canaan, cautions against the danger of "falling, after the same example of unbelief." I take the ground that the promise of God to Abraham has been fulfilled, and is fulfilled. Christ has come all men, through his redemption, have a personal existence-the influence of the Spirit, by which Christ is the "true light, that lighteth every man that cometh into the world"-and the promise of eternal salvation, on the improvement of the light of the dispensation under which they live. Hence, St. P "in every nation, he that feareth God and worketh righte

is accepted with him." All such will be saved, whether they live in heathen lands, where the gospel has never been proclaimed, or in christian countries, under the full blaze of gospel light. It is in this way, that all nations of the earth are blessed in the seed of Abraham. To take other ground, is an assumption wholly unsupported by evidence. Rom. v. 12th, and following verses: Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned," &c. The foregoing and its connection, are sometimes adduced in proof of the final holiness and happiness of all men. But what shall we think of the fairness and honesty displayed in taking proofs from a chapter which is contradicted by the whole system of Universalism? My friend, Mr. Austin, does not believe the plain, positive assertions of this chapter. He does not believe that sin entered into the world "by one man," or that the sin of Adam has any influence upon the character or conduct of other men. Nor does he believe that death came by sin. His doctrine is, that men would have died, if they had not sinned; thus directly contradicting the Apostle, who says, death reigned "by one man's offence." Nor is it embraced in Universalism, or believed by Mr. Austin, that men are made righteous "by the obedience of Christ." None of these things are believed by Universalists, and yet they quote this chapter to prove their doctrine.

But allowing them to believe the whole of this chapter, what does it prove for them? The salvation accruing to men through Christ, as set forth in this chapter, is clearly conditional. The inspired Apostle commences the chapter by saying, we are "justified by faith," and have "peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ;" that we have "access by faith into this grace, wherein we stand and rejoice in hope of the glory of God:" and concludes by saying, that "as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord."

Isaiah liii. 11-" He shall see of the travail of his soul and shall be satisfied." Universalism also rejects the unequivocal statements of this chapter. Mr. Austin does not believe that Christ was "wounded for our transgressions"--" bruised for our iniquities" that the Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all," or that "by his stripes we are healed." In all these respects, he flatly denies what the Bible affirms. The plain meaning of the verse referred to, is, that the atonement made by Christ should be a sufficient propitiation in behalf of such as repent and turn to God.-[Time expired.

[MR. AUSTIN'S TENTH SPEECH.]

Respected Moderators-I really entertain great sympathy for my brother on the opposite side, on account of his bodily exhaus