ven to the other, i. e. ask all the nations, from the rising to the setting sun? And does not Abraham, when God appeared to him, and gave him gracious and comforting assurances in a dream, say of the place, This is the gate of heaven? Does not all this then, according to the Universalist way of reasoning, prove that heaven is here on earth, and enjoyed in this world? Does not our Saviour prove this, when he says, The kingdom of God is within you?-for the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are the same. Is not this also clearly asserted in the Old Testament, when it says, The righteous shall be recompensed in the earth? And does not our Saviour teach the same doctrine, when he declares that God, by coming in judgment upon Jerusalem, would reward every man according to his works? - Which he literally did, says the Universalist, by suffering the Christians to escape from Jerusalem to Pella; and by afterwards overwhelming the wicked Jews with destruction. And does not all this then prove, upon Universalist principles, that the reward, the heaven, and the happiness of the righteous, are enjoyed in this world?

In the same way it may be proved, by the same mode of reasoning, that everlasting life and happiness are enjoyed on earth-that we have no heaven, no life and happiness to expect hereafter-that there is not one single promise of future life and happiness in the whole Bible-but that, at death, the very righteous as well as the wicked perish, and are annihilated, like the brutes. For the words life and heaven are quite as indefinite in their meaning, and used in as great a variety of senses, as the words hell and everlasting. Isaiah says, that those who go down into the grave, cannot hope for God's truth, nor praise him; and Solomon declares, that we must, with all our might, do all we have to do now, because there is no work nor knowledge in Sheol, the invisible world to which we are going. Our Saviour says, He that heareth my word hath everlasting life-is passed from death unto life. For this is eternal life; to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. In fine, everlasting life, and

A

happiness, and rewards, are promised to the righteous; but, according to the Universalist, everlasting signifies only agelasting, or enduring as long as life; and therefore, upon his own principles, it is proven that the only heaven promised in Scripture, and the only everlasting life and happiness which the righteous have to expect, are in this world, and before they die. For all the other passages that seem to contradict this notion, may, by some of the various artifices of sophistry, and by the help of a fruitful imagination, be forced to speak a language consistent with the above notions.

The reasoning of the Universalist, then, on the subject of hell, and in favour of his system, is false reasoning-leads to dangerous consequences can only result in error-and never will nor can possibly lead the inquirer into truth. We have thus then, by three distinct arguments, proved, in three different ways, that the reasoning of Universalists is false. We are compelled, therefore, renewedly to infer, that their doctrine and their system of religion are false. We hasten now to establish our second position.

2dly. The Universalist interpretation of Scripture passages cannot possibly be the true, but must necessarily be a false interpretation, because it is contrary to the sense in which the inspired writers and teachers understood, and intended them to be understood. This is proved by these two considerations. 1st. The inspired writers and teachers understood, and intended their language to be understood, in consistency with other parts of divine revelation. 2d. The inspired writers and teachers understood, and intended their language to be understood, precisely in the same sense in which that language was commonly used and understood. When we have proved these two points, we shall have rooted up the Universalist system from its very foundation.

1st. The inspired writers and teachers understood, and intended their language to be understood, in consistency with

• For abundant specimens of their reasoning, the reader is referred to the Universalist Magazine, Kneeland's Gazetteer, the various other works of Kneeland, Ballou, Balfour, and Murray, M'Calla's Dispute, &c. &c.

other parts of divine revelation. This is so manifest as to need no arguments to prove it, to the satisfaction of all those who believe in divine revelation. All inspired writers and teachers were under the influence of the same Holy Spirit. That Holy Spirit is infallible and perfect. All his communications, therefore, must be consistent and harmonious throughout. He cannot possibly contradict, at one time, what he has revealed at another. And, therefore, though additional truths may be communicated-though a positive and ceremonial duty enjoined at one time may be abrogated at another-yet a moral doctrine or duty, plainly taught in some parts of the Scriptures, can never be contradicted in other parts. Positive and arbitrary institutions rest only upon divine authority, but moral truths and duties arise from the nature of God, and the nature of things. The former are, temporary and mutable; the latter are, eternal and unchangeable. The former depend upon the will of the lawgiver, the latter are as necessary as the nature and perfections of the lawgiver himself. The justice, mercy, and truth of God, are for ever the same ; and if, in some parts of his holy word, he has fully revealed the doctrine of endless future punishment, other parts cannot contradict this doctrine; for then the Scriptures would contradict themselves, and this is impossible. Now we have already proved the doctrine of endless future punishment, from various passages of the word of God. When, therefore, the inspired writers called the punishment of the wicked everlasting, and assured them that that punishment would be suffered in hell, they must necessarily have spoken in consistency with the rest of Scripture-they must necessarily, at least, in some instances, by the words everlasting punishment, have meant endless punishment; and by the word hell, the place and state of endless future punishment. Otherwise it would follow, that the Scriptures contradict themselves. But as this is impossible, it is likewise impossible that the Universalist interpretation of the words hell and everlasting, should be the right interpretation-their interpretation must necessarily be false,

2dly. The inspired writers and teachers understood, and interpreted their language to be understood, precisely in the same sense in which that language was commonly used and understood. We have already proved that this was absolutely necessary, because if they used their words in a sense different from that in which they were commonly used; and that too, without explaining clearly, the sense in which they did use them, they were guilty of betraying their trust-they were guilty of deceiving their hearers-they were guilty of teaching falsehood, instead of teaching the truth, for their hearers must have understood them in the common sense-a sense different from the true one, and consequently must have remained in error. But this is impossible to be true: and it is equally impossible that the inspired writers and teachers should have been ignorant of the meaning commonly attached to the original words translated hell and everlasting. It necessarily follows, therefore, that the Scripture writers and teachers used the words in the common popular sense-that sense which was ordinarily attached to them among those to whom they preached, and for whom they wrote. In what sense then were the words aionios, Sheol, Hades, and Gehenna, used at the time they were written, and by the people to whom they were delivered?

It is a fact which no scholar will dispute, that the Greek word aionios literally meaning and translated everlasting was always used by those who wrote and spoke the Greek language, in the very sense which we have attached to it, There were indeed some familiar exceptions, such as we have already noticed in our remarks upon that word. But as its natural and necessary meaning is everlasting, it was always understood to have that meaning, except, when from the nature of the case, such a meaning would have been absurd or impossible. And as it was uniformly used in this sense by all who used the Greek language, throughout the immense Roman empire, there is every reason to believe, that the

See pages 47, 48, and 49.

Jews themselves, and all the writers of the New Testament, who were Jews, and members of the Roman empire, used the word in this same sense. Accordingly we have already proved, that, excepting the passages now in dispute, it is used in the New Testament precisely in the same sense in which it was uniformly used by Greeks and Romans. The common and uniform meaning of the word, therefore, both among Jews and Greeks, was everlasting. Then the writers and teachers of the New Testament must have used it in this same sense, when they applied it to the punishment of the wicked; and consequently the punishment threatened against the wicked in Scripture, necessarily means endless punishment. The Universalist argument, therefore, about aionios, which he renders aionian, is necessarily false-our translators have correctly rendered this word everlasting-and those passages where aionios, or the still stronger phrase of for ever and ever, is applied to the punishment of the wicked, unequivocally and fully prove the doctrine of endless future punishment.

The reader is, we trust, now prepared to listen to the word of God on this subject; and we pray that its awful declarations may have a due and saving influence upon his heart. The first passage we quote is from the twenty-fifth chapter of St. Matthew. Our blessed Saviour had been foretelling, that, as governor and judge of the world, he would soon come in judgment upon Jerusalem, and destroy that wicked city. But that punishment, with which, as a righteous Judge, he visited the Jewish nation, was a type, a forerunner and a pledge, of that everlasting punishment, with which, in the great day of judgment, the wicked will be overwhelmed. As surely as the budding of trees, and the putting forth of the leaves in spring, is an indication and forerunner of summer, so surely the judgment upon Jerusalem, was an indication and forerunner of the final judgment. And, therefore, by a very natural transition, and a transition very common in the