Reply. "The judgment in the text is the same mentioned John iii, 18, 19, ' He that believeth not is condemned already,'" &c.

Ans. The judgment in the one text and the condemnation in the other are not the same, 1. Because the condemnation was then present, the judgment was then future. 2. Because in the one, Jesus Christ himself is to be the Judge, but the other relates to the time when he came, "not to judge and condemn the world, but to save the world." Thus this passage is found to support future judgment after all. Rom. ii, 12, 16, "As many as sinned without law shall also perish without law-in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ." The reply passes this without remark, 66 as it says not one word about judgment after death." But why so hasty, sir! If "it says not one word about judgment after death," it proves that fact in another way beyond the possibility of doubt. It will entirely clear up what is said of God's "winking at the times of ignorance," and show that those who lived in those times are not excluded from the judgment, as you suppose.Speaking of them the apostle says, "As many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law-in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ," &c. This text, therefore, proves two things, 1. That the. judgment was future in St. Paul's day; and, 2. That those Gentiles who lived hundreds and thousands of years before his day were reserved unto that future judgment. Does not this prove judgment after death?

John v, 28, 29, "The hour is coming when all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and come forth; they that," &c. As this passage is a very formidable one to Universalism, my opponent has laid out all his strength upon it. We will hear him patiently.

My opponent thinks this passage cannot relate to endless life and misery, "because we can discern no proportion between the virtues of men and endless happiness, nor between their sins and endless misery, which would induce us to believe the one to be according to the other."

Ans. In the case of the righteous we never supposed the proportion to lie between the proper merit of their virtues and endless happiness, but between endless happiness and the evidence their virtues shall give of their having performed the conditions of salvation, upon which the reward, as of grace, was promised; but in the case of the wicked, we do suppose an exact proportion between the demerit of their sins and endless misery. Between the guilt of rejecting eternal life, when offered upon gracious terms, and eternal death, there is an exact and manifest proportion. And on these principles the reward and the punishment are according to

works.

Reply. "If this be the meaning of the text, it clearly follows that salvation is of works."

Ans. It clearly follows" that salvation is of the evidence of works, not of the merit of works. Reply. "This explanation of the text is contradictory to the account of the resurrection

given by Christ and St. Paul." See Luke xx, 33-36; 1 Cor. xv, 42-50; 1 Thess. iv, 13-18. Ans. There is not the shadow of a contradiction; for in these places the resurrection of the righteous is treated of; in the other, the resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

Reply. "Christ said in the same connection, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice,'" &c.

Ans. Why not speak out plainly, and say, as it is a figurative resurrection which is spoken of in the 25th verse, so it is the same in the 28th and 29th verses? I allow it to be a figurative resurrection in the former, but I deny it in the latter passage. The subject is changed in these verses from a figurative to a literal resurrection. As my opponent understands these passages, they must be read together thus: "The hour is coming, and now is, when those who are dead in sin shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live.-Marvel not at this; for the hour is coming when all that are' in the graves of sin shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and shall come forth," &c. This would be pure tautology. Beside, if by "all that are in the graves" is meant "all who are in' their sins," then their "coming forth" from that state would be " coming forth" to a holy, happy. life, and not unto “damnation," as our Lord' declares.

:

Heb. ix, 27, " And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment so Christ," &c. My opponent goes round and

round this text, as though he were afraid to speak his sentiment upon it. This I will do for him. He understands the text thus: "It is appointed unto men, who are high priests, once to die in their sacrifices; and after that the holy place." Mr. H. Ballou, I believe, has the honour of inventing this text, and all his brethren have adopted it after him. Now I will at once admit all that he says of the scope of the chapterall, respecting the high priest going into the holy place with the blood of his sacrifice, and of his returning with the breastplate of judgment, &c, but I cannot consent this new text should be foisted into the Scriptures: I object to it, 1. Because it is far fetched, and forced. 2. Because it is false. It is not true that it was appointed unto the high priest to die once in his sacrifice; but, if we must use that language for the sake of confuting it, it was appointed unto the high priest to die in this sense perpetually, year after year. 3. Because there is no such connection between the 27th verse and the foregoing part of the chapter, as he supposes; but the text is put absolute, and forms an antithesis to the 25th verse. This text is, therefore, proof direct of judgment after death.

2 Cor. v, 10, "We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in his body," &c. The

Reply finds fault with the translation here, and after throwing out the words added by the translators, presents the text to us in this form:

"That every one may receive the things in

body," &c, and says he " doubts not that I shall agree with him." But though we may not all be judges of correct criticisms on the Greek, yet, since he has set the example, I must be allowed to say, that I do doubt very much the correctness of his translation, and of using the preposition in, at all. The Greek is truly translated by, and not in, as in the common version. And so Dr. A. Clarke comments it, "The soul," says he, "is the agent, the body the instrument by which we act." This text, therefore, gives good testimony for the future judgment after all that has been said to the contrary.

2 Pet. iii, 7. I produced this passage for the double purpose of proving a day of judgment, and pointing out, by certain adjuncts, the time of the judgment. The

Reply merely glances at the passage, making it all figurative as in other cases.. But the text speaks in strong terms of " the day of judg ment and perdition of ungodly men," as future. The adjuncts whichmark the time of the judgment are, "the heavens and the earth being reserved unto fire." We learn from the context that the earth in this passage is the same that was once destroyed by water. We learn from this context also that "there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of his coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were." And while all things go on in their usual course, (for a thousand years with