should infer that they were designed as a spur to excite us to make our escape, and to stir us up in our endeavours to urge others to flee the wrath to come. This looks consistent and natural. And in this view of the subject I can see they have their use, and are designed to answer an important purpose in the economy of God. But this purpose is entirely frustrated, and these sympathies prevented, when, instead of being used as excitements to our attention to that, which by a proper standard has been found to be truth, they are themselves used as a standard of truth. What were designed to prompt us to action, are the cause of our inactivity What miserable philosophy (not to say divinity) is this! If we had nothing within that would shudder at the idea of punishment, we should have no inducement to make our escape, or persuade others to escape. And yet because we do shudder at the idea of endless punishment, we conclude there is no such thing. What a faculty man possesses of turning the good gifts of God into instruments of his own destruction! Of perverting the truth of God into a lie! But let us try this famous touchstone of truth by matter of fact. If I understand the argument, it is this:- My feelings, and all the tender sympathies of my nature, are shocked at the idea of endless misery; therefore endless misery is not true. God, whose tender compassion far exceeds mine, will not suffer it," To this I answer:-My feelings, and all the ten

der sympathies of my nature, are shocked at the idea of the horrible tortures and cruelties of the inquisition; therefore I believe there was never any such thing. God, whose tender compassion infinitely exceeds mine, never could have suffered it. Again, when Christ approached Jerusalem, the idea of its speedy and final destruction shocked the sympathies of the man Christ Jesus, and so harrowed up the feelings of his soul, that he wept over the devoted city. Now as Jesus Christ had all power in heaven and earth, and as the emotions of his holy and sanctified sympathies were a much surer standard of right than ours can be, therefore, on the above principle, we must conclude these evils never did come upon that city; Jesus Christ would not have suffered it. We know Jesus Christ predicted the event, and we have very particular accounts that it came to pass as predicted. But what does that signify? Do not our feelings revolt at it? and must we not believe our feelings? Christ's feelings revolted at it, and are not his feelings a standard? Who does not see the fallacy of such reasoning? and yet such reasoning as this entirely does away the force of Scripture in the minds of Universalists; or so far invalidates it, as to render it of little use in the controversy. It causes them to look upon these passages which prove endless punishment, as meaning nothing, or any thing, but what their most obvious construction requires; and those passages that

appear to have some bearing upon their side of the question, are to them strong proof. For this reason, and for the other stated under this head, we object to Universalism. That system which cannot be supported by the Bible is false. That system which has manifestly led to a false construction of the Scriptures, or has evidently weakened the force of Divine truth upon the mind, is manifestly and evidently false.

OBJECTION V.

THE doctrine of universal salvation is the religion of the natural heart; and therefore cannot be the religion of the Bible.

I suppose, not even Universalists themselves will deny that the Bible plainly declares, not merely in particular passages, but in the general scope of its doctrine, that the carnal mind is enmity against God;—that men are strangers to God, and enemies by wicked works;--that sinners are represented as loving sin, and as employed in the service of Satan, and "hate Christ" and "his words;"-that they teach the necessity of being renewed in the spirit of their minds, and that, in order to this, self must be denied, and the cross of Christ must be borne ;-the deeds of the flesh must be mortified; the pride of the heart must be humbled ;-unholy emotions must be resisted; -unhallowed propensities must be restrained,

&c., &c. All of which are represented under the figures of dying to sin ;-crucifying the old man ;-contending with our spiritual enemies;-fighting, wrestling, running, striving, watching, &c.,-implying not only a vigorous discipline, and great exertion, but also a painful exercise of soul, crossing to the feelings of the human heart, and in direct opposition to the natural bent of the mind.

To impenitent sinners of both Jews and Gentiles this doctrine was always as obnoxious as Jesus Christ himself was to the Jews. It was to the Greeks foolishness, and to the Jews a stumbling block. Those who felt the sinfulness of sin, and resolved to forsake it, received this doctrine with joy; but those who determined to live according to the course of this world, hated and opposed it; because it testified against its works, that they were evil. And our Lord has taught his disciples that it would be so. For, says he, "Ye are not of the world, therefore the world hateth you." But it is not so with the doctrine we are opposing. No man rejects it, and feels opposed to it, because he means to live in sin. But this is rather the cause of his receiving it with joy. The very vilest characters, the most abandoned sinners, can receive this doctrine without any opposition of heart. You may vindicate it with all the zeal you can manifest, and with all the arguments possible, from morning till night, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, to as an abandoned a congregation as

can be found, and it don't offend them. And can this be the doctrine for which Christ was hated, and for which he testified to his disciples that they should be hated by the wicked world?

But it is said, "Such do not receive the doctrine of universal salvation; they only hear the theory, but do not spiritually discern the nature of the doctrine. Universal salvation is universal love and universal holiness; and all who properly receive it will feel that it is opposed to sin of every kind." How many times, in some form or another, has this plea been made in favour of this flesh-pleasing doctrine? But it is as unsound as it is pleasurable. Let us examine it.

It has no weight against the objection we have brought up. The objection states, that impenitent sinners are, and ever have been, opposed to the Gospel, as preached by Christ and his apostles; but they are not opposed to the doctrine of universal salvation; therefore that is not the doctrine taught by our Lord and his apostles. The reply is, "Wicked men, who rejoice in the doctrine of universal salvation do not properly and experimentally receive it." Neither did those who opposed the apostles' doctrine, properly and experimentally receive it. Their hearts were against the very theory of the doctrine. But the foregoing reply acknowledges, that impenitent sinners are pleased with the preaching and theory of Universalism, and if so. one objec