or two. The Romanists divide sins into two classes, venial and mortal. Mortal sins are those which, in their estimation, expose the sinner to endless punishment, but venial sins may be expiated by purgatorial sufferings. Universalists have but one class of sins, and among them are no mortal sins, all are venial. And how are sinners to be purged from them? By punishment. Punishment is the "sine qua non" of human salvation. Every sinner must be punished to the full extent of his deserts. If it be not effected in this world, it must be in the world to come. And what is the nature of this punishment? Mr. Austin has told us, again and again, that it is inflicted, as a medicine is administered, and for the same end. And pray what is the object of medicine, if it be not to purge the system, and throw off the extraneous and corrupt matter which generates disease. And this is the object of the Universalist system of punishment, as to the depravity or moral disease of men. A purgatory is a purifying agency. The Roman Catholic purgatory is "a state or place after death, in which the souls of persons are purified, or in which they expiate such offences, committed in this life, as do not merit eternal damnation."-(Webster). The Universalist purgatory is "a state or place after death, (or in this life, or both,) in which the souls of persons are purified, or in which they expiate all their offences, committed in this life, which (Universalists contend) do not merit eternal damnation. The only material difference in the two cases is, that the Romanist purgatory provides only for expiating ven al offences, while the Universalist purgatory embraces all offences. The Universalist system is, therefore, more fully and emphatically a purgatory, than that of the Romish Church. Mr. Austin can avoid this conclusion, only by denying ali he has said on the first question, and much that pertains to the others.

There is another fact that must not be passed over, viz:-Romish purgatory is of Universalist origin. The man whom they claim as the most prominent advocate of their opinions, adopted a purgatory to help out his conclusion. Origen, of the third century, was the first man who broached the subject of purgatorial cleansings; and though the idea met with much opposition at first, yet it was subsequently adopted as a part of the machinery of the Romish Church. The Universalist system of punishment is a refinement upon this notion of Origen's, and through him is directly traceable to Plato. In this respect, Universalism and Romanism are off-shoots of the same parent stock. It is very evident the gentleman is becoming ashamed of his own theory-hence his sensitivness when its real purgatorial character is brought out, and hence, also, his attempt to explain it away, by calling it a "high course of salutary, elevating, purifying disipline and instruction. I know the public are perfecly competent to judge of this, and to their decision I cheerfully submit it, after giving the judgment of John Murray on the same point. He is speaking of

that system of punishment which began to be advocated in his day, and has been taught by all the principal Universalists (with some variation as to place and circumstances, not nature or design) from Winchester to J. M. Austin.

"But as this does not seem to be glad tidings to every creature, we would say to the unjust who must suffer for their sins, that their sufferings shall finally bring them to God; that when they have suffered as much as the justice of God shall demand, so that on scrutinizing the account, it shall appear that the sinner has paid the uttermost farthing, then they shall come forth from the deep dungeon where, by the grace of Jesus Christ, they have been enabled to suffer so much, and give glory to him, who, by suffering so much in his own person, rendered it possible for them to obtain salvation by their own deeds and sufferings.”—(Life of Murray, page 295)

Mr. Austin seems inclined to cavil as to the word contingent or contingency. As a theological term, it implies conditionality. In this sense alone, is it used in this discussion respecting God's will or purpose. God willed the perpetuity of the Jewish nation, but only on condition that they obeyed the law. God wills the salvation of every sinner, but only on the conditions set forth in the gospel. The contingency of human actions, implies no degree of uncertainty in the mind of God respecting the results of those actions, nor respecting his purpose to deal with men according to their works.

As I have now given the great body of those scriptural proofs I intend to adduce, I hope, if the gentleman has any of those strange and unnatural explanations to present, which are peculiar to Universalism, he will bring them out in his next speech. Fairness demands this, since if he postpones it longer, I shall not be able to reply. My closing speech must be devoted to other things.-[Time expired.

[MR. AUSTIN'S TENTH REPLY.]

GENT. MODERATORS:-Mr. Holmes' sixteenth Argument in the affirmative, he attempts to build on "the final condition of the sinful." There are some characteristics pertaining to this argument, which should be noticed. It will be seen the long string of passages he has introduced, is accompanied by little, or no comment, to show their meaning, or explain their bearing on the question in debate. Knowing as he does, that the great mass of community have been educated in the belief that certain passages of scripture inculcate the endless perpetuity of misery, he evidently depends on this early bias more than on any intrinsic force contained in the cited passages, on minds capable of thoroughly analyzing their true intent and meaning. I think, however, there must be a large class among those usually favoring his views, who will require more than this, to keep them in belief of a doctrine so revolting

to all the better feelings of their hearts as endless torment. They will see that simply to quote an array of passages where the words "eternal," "everlasting," and "forever" occur, is not sufficient. It will be borne in mind by them, that I have shown by the most abundant testimony, that these words are of a very indefinite and uncertain meaning; and that they are frequently used in the Bible to designate a limited period of time. Hence in introducing passages where they occur, it lies with my opponent to show that these words possess a meaning of endlessness, rather than of limited time. This is precisely the point for him to establish, in order to sustain the affirmative of this question. Unless he does it, his quotations will be of no avail.

He attempts to show in this argument, what the final condition of the sinful will be. But what connection have his scripture quotations with that point? They speak of the punishment of the wicked-in some cases declaring that it will be aionion punishment. But is there any intimation in these passages that they describe the final condition of those enduring punishment? Not in a single instance. My friend adroitly assumes this point. I insist that in no case do the scriptures describe a state of punishment, as being the final condition of the sinful. It cannot be. We have had abundant evidence during this debate, that the punishments of God's government are not vindictive, but reformatory. Those, therefore, who are enduring them, are in a state of transition, instead of being in a fixed and final condition. This phrase final condition of the sinful," is very similar to another, so frequently heard from the orthodox pulpit-" the finally impenitent." These are words coined by men. They never occur in the Bible.

Christ was sent by his Father on a great mission in behalf of sinners, and indeed, of all men, viz:-to save them from sin, evil, and death. I know of no better way to learn the "final condition" of mankind, than to ascertain the state they will be in, when Christ shall have concluded his great and good work. That must necessarily be their final condition. The Apostle gives us full information on this point. He declares the Savior shall succeed in causing all men to bow in submission to his peaceful reign, and confess him Lord, to the glory of God the Father.-(Phil. ii. 10, 11.) He also informs us, that at the conclusion of the reign of Jesus, having brought all mankind into willing subjection to his gospel, he will deliver up his Mediatorial kingdom into the hands of the Father, and God shall be " ALL in ALL!!" Here is the "final condition" of all men! They are brought to the enjoyment of light, truth and love; and the spirit of God fills every capaci ty of their souls. If it can be shown that any are in sin and misery after this period, I will abandon my doctrine.

It will not be possible in the limited time allotted me, to notice all the passages my friend has collected, whether relevant or irrelevant, and thrown together in the argument now under consider

or "

་་

ation. But I pledge myself to the audience to take into consideration as many of the most important of them, as opportunity will allow. He first introduces a class of passages which speak of the "kingdom of heaven," and endeavors to show that there are some men who will never be permitted to enter it. Let us briefly consider this subject. 1. What is "the kingdom of heaven ?"— the kingdom of God?" It is the Mediatorial Kingdom which which was given to Christ by his Father for certain specific purposes, and which he established at his advent on earth. In other words, it is the reign of truth, righteousness and love, which was introduced by the Redeemer among men. "The kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost."--(Rom. xiv. 17.) Dr. Adam Clarke saysThe kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God, mean the same thing, viz: The dispensation of infinite mercy, and manifestation of eternal truth, by Christ Jesus." 2. For what purpose was this kingdom established? It was to bring all mankind into a condition to serve, love and obey their Redeemer and their Creator."I saw in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that ALL People, Nations and Languages should serve him." (Dan. vii. 13, 14.) 3. Where is the kingdom of heaven, or the kingdom of God? tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they SEE the kingdom of God."-(Luke ix. 27.) "The kingdom of heaven is at hand.”—(Matt. iii. 2.) "Neither shall they say, lo, here! or lo, there! for behold the kingdom of God is within you.”—(Luke xvii. 21.) The kingdom of heaven is here on the earth. It can be entered, it can be enjoyed, here. Yet as Christ does not finish his work in behalf of mankind in this life as he completes in the world to come, all the influence he is appointed to exercise over them, and all the instruction he is to impart, to fit them for their high destiny-his work, his reign, his kingdom extends to the future world, and will endure until the purpose for which it was established, shall be fully accomplished. 4. When will the kingdom of heaven, or the Mediatorial reign of Christ, cease? It will cease when the grand and desirable object for which it was commenced, is perfectly completed-when Christ shall have destroyed unbelief, error, sin, and every enemy of man's happiness-yea, even the last great enemy, death itselfwhen he shall have subdued all wills to the Will of the Supreme all hearts to God, and fitted all souls for the residence of Jehovah spirit of Infinite Love!! Will this period ever arrive? It will if there is truth in God's revealed word, "Then cometh the end; when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and power-[all the power and influence of error and sin.] For he

The last enemy that
And when all things
Son also himself be

must reign, till he hath put all enemies [all that can oppose or interrupt man's happiness,] under his feet. shall be destroyed, is death. shall be subdued unto him, then shall the subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be ALL in ALL!!"—(1 Cor. xv. 24--28.)

Elder Holmes maintains that there is a class of men who will never enter the kingdom of heaven, and hence their final condition must be one of endless wretchedness. To sustain this position, he quotes several passages of scripture, which declare that the wicked and unbelieving shall not enter or inherit the kingdom of heaven. But it will very easily be seen that he seeks to make more of these scripture declarations, than they warrant him. What are we to understand when the Bible says wicked men shall not enter the kingdom of God? That they will never attain to that blessing? Not at all. The meaning is that they can in no wise enter the kingdom of heaven, while they REMAIN in sin and unbelief!! Not a word in the scriptures goes farther than this. The moment they forsake sin, abandon their unbelief, and become converted to to the truth, they are allowed to enter and enjoy the kingdom of God-whether in this world or the next. This is the fundamental principle of the gospel. The Elder himself believes a man who is a sinner, may enter the kingdom of heaven, on repentance. Let him not deny it here, for the sake of gaining a point. St. Paul corroborates the view I have taken. "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And SUCH WERE SOME OF YOU! But ye are WASHED; but ye are sanctified; but ye are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the spirit of our God.”—(1 Cor. vi. 9--11.) This shows us that although at one time, men may not be allowed to enter the kingdom of God, owing to their moral and spiritual unfitness, yet at another time, the same individuals, having turned away!from sin, will be permitted to enter and participate in the enjoyments of that kingdom. This principle extends through all worlds-all existencies. It directs to the way by which men can enter the kingdom of God here, and the way by which they can enter that kingdom hereafter-for remember it is the same kingdom both in this world and the next. Though men may be so long blinded by sin and unbelief, as to die under their influence, yet hereafter they will still have the privilege of entering the kingdom of heaven on the same terms-through repentance and faith. This is the rule of the kingdom of heaven here, it will be the rule of the same kingdom of heaven hereafter! Does my opponent deny this? Then it devolves on him to show to the contrary. Let him point to the passage which declares if a man