as follows: "And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord." Here we see who the Israel are to be saved and the conditionality of their salvation. They are those who "TURN FROM TRANSGRESSION." This salvation, then, is predicated of God's spiritual Israel, and not of the whole Jewish race. But should it be contended still that the apostle has virtually said that the Deliverer (Christ) promised he would turn away ungodliness from all the Jewish race, i. e. all of them who have ever lived, now live, or may hereafter live, we ask when this is to be accomplished? Is it to be accomplished upon the Jews before death? This will not be pretended, for tens of thousands of them have died in their iniquities, Universalists themselves being judges. Now this must be brought about either before or after death, for we cannot possibly conceive of the soul as existing neither in the body nor out of it. As it must be admitted that all the Jews are not turned from their sins in this life, it follows that, if ever, they must be turned from ungodliness after death; and if so, ungodliness or sin, and consequently misery, must exist after death, and thus the favorite doctrine of modern Universalists, that death puts an end to sin and misery, is all a fable. Truth never contradicts itself. All God's faithful Israel will be saved both in this world and that which is to come; and there is no authority, as we conceive, for denying that the time is coming when all the Jews then living upon the earth shall embrace the Messiah. But this idea furnishes no evidence that all men, or even the Jewish race, shall be saved in the future state. In view of the very common perversion of this text, how timely the rebuke of Mr. French, one of the ministers of the order, in a sermon before the Maine Convention of Universalists, as follows: "We as a denomination, have advocated the doctrine that all men shall be saved. But in our zeal to bring an abundance of evidence, have we not caused some of our proof texts to bear the marks of violent wresting? For instance, these words of Paul have been adduced as proc

66

that all the Jews shall be happy after death: and so all Israel shall be saved." Rom. 11:26. But does this passage have any more reference to their future state, than it does to the preservation of Noah and his family in the time of the flood? And yet, as if we had not enough of our own, we are at the expense of importing such arguments and such methods of proof."-Banner, Aug. 5, 1844.

VI. "He that is dead is freed from sin.”—Rom. 6: 7.

If a man availing himself of his Universalist license, dies by drunkenness or suicide, this text is called into requisition on the funeral occasion, to prove most conclusively that he has been so wise as to rid himself of sin and all its consequences by his hasty departure. In an able work before us the perversion of this passage is exposed as follows: "Persons are said to be dead in several different senses. A person is dead when the connection between body and soul is dissolved; at other times a person is said, in Scripture language, to be dead when his soul has lost the favor of God; and at other times, a person is said to be dead who is crucified to the world and the world crucified to him. Now the question is, in which of these senses does the apostle use the word dead in this text? I answer without besitation in the sense of being crucified to the world. Look at the context. See how the apostle introduces the figure: "How shall WE (Christians) that are dead to sin live any longer therein?" ver. 2. Here then you see that the persons who were dead were the living apostle and his Christian brethren at Rome, and the death which was upon them was a death to sin. So in the following context, the same idea is repeated: "Now if we (Christians) be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him." Here then you see that the apostle is not speaking of the death of the body, but on the contrary, of that death which is a crucifixion to the world.”—Russell.

VII. "For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord; whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's."-Rom. 14: 7-8.

66

Mr. Whittemore builds one of his arguments upon this passage to prove the salvation of all men, and says: "The terms dead and living evidently signify all the race. Of course all the human race are Christ's forever.”—Guide, p. 48. Here is another instance in which the children's bread is cast to the dogs. Now we say that these terms do not evidently signify all the human race. Suppose that after a battle an officer should receive orders to repair to the field and take charge of "the dead and living ;" should we infer from that that he was to take charge of the whole human race? By no means. Paul is speaking of Christ's lordship over believers and none else, as we conceive. The context binds us to this. He is addressing Christians and not all men. He is cautioning them against uncharitably judging each other concerning things indifferent, and adds, "For none of US," Who? All men? No, but Christians, “liveth to himself," &c. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord." Do all men live and die unto the Lord? Does the drunkard, the swearer, the neglecter, the self-righteous live unto the Lord, and do such die unto the Lord? But suppose we admit that Christ's lordship over the whole human family is intended, what then? Does it follow as a conclusion that all will be holy and happy? Certainly not; for according to this assumption he is now Lord over the human race and has been for ages past, but the whole of mankind are not saved. This being the fact, we can see no reason why he may not exercise his lordship to all eternity, and still the sufferings of some of the race continue. For all men to be subjects of God's government is one thing, but for all men to be made holy and happy in the future world is quite another. So we see that take either view of it we please, Universalism cannot be possibly wrung out of the passage.

VIII. "But the heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men."-2 Pet. 3:7.

Instead of an explanation, as the purchasers of his book had a right to expect from the statement in his preface, the author of the Guide has given this striking text the go-by as follows: "This passage has been frequently used to prove the destruction of the material earth, and a day of judgment in the future state. We have shown repeatedly in these pages that God's judgments are in the earth. But as this text is not generally adduced in support of strict endless misery, we pass it here." He then refers us to three or four works where he says the text is explained; works which not one in a hundred of his readers will ever see. "God's judgments are in the earth." The reader will turn to Sec. LI. where this idea is examined. He says, "But as this text is not generally adduced in support of strict endless misery, 'we pass it here." Observe, the apostle speaks not only of the day of judgment, but also of the "perdition of ungodly men." Do not Christians generally believe the perdition of ungodly men to be endless misery? Most certainly they do, and Mr. Whittemore must have known it. We go to Balfour's Essays, one of the books referred to by Mr. W., and he says, this passage refers to the day of God's temporal vengeance on the Jews."-p. 260. He also states with much confidence respecting ver. 13, that "it is universally allowed, that the new heavens and the new earth refer to the kingdom of the Messiah, which was to succeed the Jewish dispensation, and was predicted in the Old Testament."—p. 261. Mr. Balfour was either wanting in honesty, or ignorant of the subject upon which he wrote, for we find by consultation that instead of its being "universally allowed," such commentators as Clarke, Scott, Chalmers, Dwight, Wesley, Storr, Rosenmüller, and Benson are directly against him, and yet this baseless assertion comprises the main force to be found in his evasion of this passage. Universalists profess to be full of wonder that

66

men.

the word hell occurs no oftener, if there is any future punishment taught in the Bible. But we ask, if the glowing descriptions of judgment and punishment found so often in the Bible had their fulfilment in the destruction of the Jews, is it not very strange that the expression Jerusalem, or Jerusalem's destruction, is NEVER found in connection with such descriptions in the New Testament? Yet such is the fact. Examine the context, and it will be seen that there is not the least evidence that the apostle is speaking of Jerusalem's destruction, or that those for whom he wrote once entertained the thought that that city would be spoiled by the Romans. The people addressed were Hebrew Christians, who had been educated in the belief of a future day of judgment and perdition of ungodly These doctrines were believed both among Jews and Gentiles. This is admitted by Universalist writers. Now can it be entertained for a moment that Peter would take this great event believed in by them, and use it as a figure to represent the destruction of one city? He brings up historical facts, viz: the creation and the deluge, and then institutes a comparison, not between those events and the destruction of the Jewish city, but between those events and the passing away of the heavens and the earth, and the appearance of a new material system in their place. The thoughts are majestic, but they are not the dress of fiction or poetry. The context, the comparison, the language used, the belief of the people addressed, the absence of every thing indicating the Jerusalem catastrophe, all bind us to believe the apostle is speaking of the day of judgment, as commonly understood, and of the eternal perdition of, not merely Jewish men, but, all ungodly men.

IX. And the times of this ignorance God winked at, but now commandeth all men every where to repent; because he hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness, by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof