lates that fundamental Rule in God's Government, which ordains that men shall be punished according to their deeds. "Thou renderest to every man according to his works (Ps. Ixii. 12.) God "will render to every man according to his deeds.”—(Rom. ii. 6 ) "Then shall he reward every man according to his works."-(Matt. xvi. 27.) Now the doctrine of Endless Punishment violates this rule, in that it consigns all the wicked of every age, of every grade, those guilty of every different degree of crime, to the same kind of Punishment-the same heli-the same eternity of woe!! It torments the man who commits but ten sins, as much as it does the one who commits ten thousand! Together it plunges them into the same wretchedness-together it inflicts its agony upon them during the same ceaseless eternity! It punishes the young sinner of twenty years of age, who had but just fallen into the slightest transgressions, in the same place, and for the same length of time, as the hardened wretch of three score and ten, who has trampled on God's law through life!! We maintain that these proceedings destroy all degrees in punishment, and trample under foot every dictate of justice and equity!! What would be thought of the intelligence, the wisdom, the sense of justice, of an earthly government, which should enact a law inflicting the same punishment for every grade of crime-who should commit the youth who should steal a pin, to the same perpetual imprisonment with the man who has ended a long career of wickedness by dying his hands in the life-blood of a fellow being? Should we not declare there was an absence of every particle of consistency and equity? Yet this is exactly the representation which Mr. Holmes makes of the proceedings of God's government. And he actually expects you will receive it as truth!!

My sixth Negative Argument is, that Endless Misery destroys all certainty in the admin stration of Rewards and Punishments. The Scriptures assert that God WILL [not may sometimes,] render to every man according to his deeds."-(Rom. ii. 6.) Here is certainty. And it is certainty and not severity, that gives punishment efficiency. The doctrine which my friend advocates throws the greatest uncertainty around both the rewards and punishments which men richly deserve. Here is an individual who has lived through a long life in the exercise of the strictest honesty, righteousness, and piety. But near its close, in an unexpected moment he is beset by sore temptation, falls into heinous sin, and soon dies. According to the Elder's doctrine, he sinks immediately to an endless hell! If this is true, then he receives no reward for all his good deeds, and for one or two sinful acts is tormented forever! Is this rendering to every man according as his deeds shall be? Where is the equity of such a transaction? Another man pursues a course of sin throughout life, but near its close, he repents and becomes a professor of partialist religion. He dies, and according to that doctrine, is rececieved into heaven.

In this in

stance, has the great principle of God's government been carried into execution? Has this death-bed repenting sinner, been dealt with according to his moral desert? He has received no punishment for his long career of sin-or according to my friend opposite, his punishment has been so light he does not know that he has received any-which amounts to the same thing! And for the simple act of repenting at the last moment, is rewarded with an eternity of bliss! Here is a double imperfection which the Elder's system attributes to God, viz: uncertainty in the administration of rewards and punishments, and the rank injustice of refusing to compensate the righteous, and neglecting to punish the wicked.

The case can be stated still stronger. According to the system which Elder Holmes supports in this discussion, a man may riot in blool and carnage all his days--may send scores of victims suddenly and unprepared, into eternity. But when he is arrested, and condemned to death for his crimes, he repents in prison--acknowledges his faith in all the points of evangelical religion-receives the communion at the hands of the orthodox clergyman -and swings from the gallows into heaven, to shout hallelujah forever! in the very midst of the angels of God!!! And where are the victims whom his murderous hand deprived of life?—If this doctrine is true, they have descended to hell, to wail with demons forever? This is called justice, and an equitable and salutary administration of rewards and punishments.

Let none imagine I have overdrawn this picture. Multitudes of cases might be cited in proof of its truthfulness. How very common it has been for ages, for culprits to repent in prison, and profess to have become thoroughly converted previous to their execution. Hence, upon orthodox principles, while they escape all punishment for their wicked deeds, they enter upon the joys of endless beatitude! McCurry, who was hung for murder in Baltimore, in 1845, passed through a process of repentence in his cell. He declares in his confession, "that it was the murder of Roux, which brought about his soul's salvation, and that had he not committed the act, he never would have been saved!!!" According to this murderer's confession, the partialist plan of salvation not only enables blood-stained villains to escape God's punishment by repentence in their cells, but allows the most heinous crimes to become the immediate cause of their eternal happiness! McCurry the murderer was sent to heaven, by the same sanguinary and cruel act that consigned Roux, a man probably much less sinful, to the torments of an endless hell!!! Such are the consistencies and beaucountenance a system which leads to absurdities so abhorrent!!

My seventh Negative Argument, is, that the doctrine of Endless Punishment represents the character of God, in a light most repulsive to all the better feelings of the human heart. The Scriptures describe the Deity as a being of wisdom, holiness, goodness,

and mercy-as possessing every adorable perfection, every lovely characteristic, that man can approbate and admire-as the Father of the race, cherishing no other emotions towards his creatures, than infinite good will, benevolence, and love! But the doctrine my friend is endeavoring to defend, draws a dark veil over all these beautiful characteristics of the Most High, which permits them to be seen but dimly-it degrades the Godhead from its high position of moral perfection, to a state even below the standard of human goodness, and clothes it with the most hateful and depraved passions of the vilest of men! With a stupidity and ignorance which is marvelous, and even ridiculous, it makes a literal application of such Scripture phrases as "wrath," and "anger," when spoken in reference to God-declaring him to be infinitely wrathful and angry with his own offspring, and violating in his proceedings with them, every injunction of forbearance and forgiveness-every precept to return blessing for cursing, and good for evil-which he has called upon them to practice in their intercourse with one another. In proof of these declarations, I ask your attention to the descriptions of Jehovah, which have been given by some of the most eminent theologians of the Evangelical school, in modern days. Listen to the character of the Deity, as described by the noted orthodox President Edwards :

"Thus it is that natural men are held in the hands of God, over the pit of hell. They have deserved the fiery pit, and are already sentenced to it. God is dreadfully PROVOKED. His ANGER is as great towards them, as those that are actually suffering the execution of the fierceness of his wrath in hell!

The devil is waiting for them. Hell is gapping for them. The flames gather and flash about them, and would fain lay hold upon them, and swallow them up." In another place, addressing the natural man, [i. e. men as God made them,] he says: "The God who holds you over the pit of heil, much as one holds a spider, or some louthsome insect over the fire, ABHORS you, and is dreadfully provoked. His WRATH towards you, burns like fire! He looks upon you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the fire. He is of purer eyes than to bear to have you in his sight. You are ten thousand times as ABOMINABLE in his eyes, as the most hateful and venemous serpent is in ours!!"

The Rev. Mr. Patten, another orthodox clergyman, of Enfield, Mass., in 1771, described God as follows:-"There God will pour out the full vials of his wrath upon you. But what will this wrath be? It will be the WRATH of Almighty God! Such wrath as an OMNIPOTENT JEHOVAH IS ABLE to inflict ! How will you tremble when that meek and compassionate Lamb of God, whom you have rejected, shall say to his angels, bring hither mine enemies, and SLAY them before me."

Strange proceedings, surely, for a being represented under the figure of a Lamb!! The Lamb of God, of whom the Bible speaks,

instructs us all to love our enemies-not to "slay" them! Does he violate his own injunctions, O consistent Orthodoxy? Again hear this Rev. Mr. Patten, speak of God :—" Is not the Lord saying to you, as he said to sinners of old, I will TREAD you in my anger, and will TRAMPLE you in my FURY, and your blood shall be sprinkled on my garments, and I will stain all my raiment." That is, as orthodoxy interprets it, God will literally stain his garments with the blood of his own offspring!!! My brother opposite, believes in a malignant, infernal Devil, full of every thing hateful, cruel, malicious!! I have a question to ask that brother: Could such a Devil cherish any more malignant, revengeful and savage feelings against sinners, in his black heart, and act in a manner more diabolical and absolutely fiend-like towards them, than these extracts represent God as feeling and acting? Yet the Bible says, "God is Love," and declares that "his TENDER MERCIES are over all his works!!" Many like descriptions of God could be given from the writings of leading orthodox divines, but time will not allow. What was it led these clergymen to give such abhorrent views of God, and so libel and blaspheme the name of their Heavenly Father? With an honest candor, which puts to shame modern preachers of It was their belief in Endless Misery! the same sentiment, they were simply describing Jehovah as that doctrine represents him. In the words of a pungent writer, "The doctrine of Endless Suffering, represents the Sovereign of the Universe, as a Tyrant, who seeks to rule his subjects through their fears. Serve me, or I will BURN you," is the language it puts into his mouth. "For your finite offences, I will be infinitely angry, and for your disobedience of a moment, I will punish you with the pains of an eternity." Is it to be wondered at, that such a system has generated so much driviling superstition? So much morose and gloomy fanaticism? ject self-degrading sychophants, who lie at the feet of Almighty So many whining, cringing, abPower, professing to adore its every act, however unintelligible the object-for the contemptible purpose of securing themselves from the weight of its apprehended wrath !!"-(Rogers' Pro. and Con.) Sabbath after Sabbath is the character of our heavenly Parent even now, represented from orthodox pulpits, in a manner quite similar to that exhibited in the extracts I have read, for the purpose ot urging men of religious life, through the sheer influence of base fear! And thus presenting God in a light every way repulsive, great amazement is expressed, and great lamentation is uttered, that men will not love and obey their Creator!-[Time expired.

[MR. HOLMES' FIFTH SPEECH.]

When I closed my last speech I was upon my seventh argument in proof of the affirmative of the question in debate. This argument is founded on the nature and des gn of the atonement by Christ. After a few preliminary remarks, which I need not repeat, I laid down the following proposition, viz. that the object of Christ in coming to our world, was to make an atonement for the sins of men, in view of which the penalty of the divine law against transgression might be waived, and a dispensation of grace and pardon granted to a guilty world. In support of this proposition, I offer the annexed considerations.

1. The Sufferings of Christ. That Christ suffered, none will dispute; and the fact of his suffering, can only be accounted for, by supposing he made a vicarious atonement. He did not suffer for his own sins. for he was in no sense a sinner; therefore not the subject of suffering on this account. Nor was he necessarily liable to suffering on account of his humanity. His human constitution had never been deranged—he had violated no law, physical, intellectual or moral, and hence, was obnoxious to no penalty. It is equally clear that his sufferings did not arise necessarily out of his work of benevolence, if we exclude the idea of expiation. Nor yet was he so in the power of his enemies, that his suffering and death were unavoidable. All power was given into his hands. He could have called "twelve legions of angels" to his assistance; and yet he yielded to suffering and death. Why? Let Mr. Austin explain this subject, if he can, upon any >ther supposition than that he suffered and died voluntarily, to nake an atonement which contemplated the sinner's release from he penalty of transgression. He suffered the penal consequences of sin, as the sinner's substitute. To use the words of scripture, he was "set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood," that God "might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus." "He was made sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." Still further in conformation of this, the scriptures say in so many words, that "Christ died for our sins-he died for us-he was delivered for our offences-he was made sin (a sin offering) for us—he tasted death for every man-he bore our sins in his own body on the tree." The Greek prepositions anti and uper, translated for, signify, in the room and stead of another, and for the benefit of others. St. Paul illustrates the meaning of the preposition, (uper,) and by consequence, the sense in which Christ died for sinners, when he says, "scarcely for a righteous man will one die, yet peradventure, for a good man, some would even dare to die." So King David, would to God I had died for thee," that is, in thy stead.

66