He next enquires" what perio of time is meant by the end of the world." To determine this point he refers to the 24th chap. of Mat. And assuming that our Lord's prophecy contained in that chapter, refers only to the destruction of Jerusalem, he presumes that the phrase under consideration also refers only to that event. But this assumed position" we shall by no means concede to him.

66

We will now carefully consider the evidence upon which he relies, as limiting this prophecy to the destruc tion of Jerusalem.

6

His main argument is founded upon the 34th verse:-This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled". -It is allowed that these things' were in some sense fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem, but this does not prove but that they are still to be fulfilled, in a more strict & literal sense, on the final judgment.-Prophecies are often said to be fulfilled, in certain events, when they are only fulfilled in an accommodated sense, in those events.

But were we to admit that a strict and literal fulfilmeut is here intended, we may still contend that the word generation does not necessarily refer to the lives of the individual persons then in being. This word is rendered from the greek word genea which signifies a stock, a race or progeny. (See Hed ricus' and Parkhurst's Lexicons.) Agreeably to this sense of the word, Dr. Clarke explains the passage under consideration. He genea aute this race; i. e. the jews shall not cease from being a distinct people, till all the councils of God relative to them, and the gentiles, be fulfilled.' (See Clarkes Commentary.)

(See JOCEPHUS' DISCOURSE to the Greeks concerning Hades.) Jocephus here gives us the opinions of the Jews upon the states of the righteous and the wicked after death-and if indeed it is so erroneous as the Univeralists suppose, it is marvelous that our Lord not only did not censure it, with other Jewish errors, but gave his sanction to the most material circumstances of it: even allowing what he says in the place above referred to, to be a parable;-All the parables of Christ are founded upon facts: & we cannot suppose that he would frame a parable upon so erroneous a model, as these notions of the Jews must be, upon the supposition that Universalism is true!!!

This passage constitutes the basis upon which the Universalists rest their explanation of the 24th and 25th of St. Matthew. But properly understood, it affords them

no support whatever.

The disciples enquired: "When shall these things be and what shall be the sign of thy coming and of the end of the world" (xxiv. 3.) This question was asked on Christs having (in the 2d verse,) predicted the destruction of the temple. It is the opinion of some Commentators, that the disciples supposed, that the end of the world and the day of judgment, would immediately succeed the demolition of the temple:-they consequently blend the two events in their question. And as one event was to be a striking type of the other, Christ does not separate them in his answer. But if it be admitted that the disciples asked only of the end of the Jewish dispensation, it must still be clear to every attentive observer that Christ did not confine himself to that event. But in the true spirit of ancient prophesy he rises in his subject from less events to greater. The prophets often commence with David, & conclude with Christ-& commencing with the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, they almost imperceptably pass to the final return of the ransomed to glory. So Christ commences his discourse with the end of the Jewish city and temple, priesthood & polity, and by an easy transition, passes to the end of the world, and the general judgment. Being asked by the disciples" says Tertulean when these things which he had intimated concerning the destruction of the temple should take place, he set before them the order of the times, first concerning the Jews, till the destruction of Jerusalem, and then concerning men in general, till the end of the world." (See Scott's Commentary.)

66

The Editor finally asks: "Do not ancient prophesy the words of Jesus and his apostles, and well known fact teach in unison together, that the separation which then took place was between Jew & Gentile." (Ibid.) We scarcely know what he means by "a separation between Jew and Gentile"We have been in the habit of thinking

*For further specimens of the dependence which is made upon these words, see Ballou on the Parables, Pages 148, 162, 164, &c.

that all these high authorities to which he refers, teach that the Jews and Gentiles had been separate, at enmity, &c. & that by the gospel they were made both one- -the middle wall of partition between them" was broken down,” &c. (See Eph. ii 14-17.) But that they had grown together, till the destruction of Jerusalem; and were then to be separated, to us is new divinity!

He next enquires "what was the punishment represented by the furnace of fire"--and thinks it refers to "those judgments which Christ pronounced upon the Jews the destruction of their city & temple," &c. [Ibid,] To support this explanation he introduces two passages from the prophets. The first is Isa. xxxi. 9. Whose fire is in Zion and his fireman in Jerusalem'--This refers to the perpetual fire which was kept up in the temple:-or it may mean, who will appear in Zion like a fire to defend his people and consume their enemies. The other pas sage is Ezek. xxii. 19. 20. [Which see.] God's vengeance is often compared, in the scriptures, to fire, but here it was so literally, when both city and temple were consumed by him [See 2 Kings xxv. 9.] [On the above passages, see Pool's, Dr. Coke's, Dr. Clake's, and Mr. Benson's Commentaries.]

There is no evidence that these passages from the prophets, have reference to the same things that those which he is endeavoring to explain have. The similarity in the figures, is in no wise conclusive evidence of this. But if the furnace of fire' in the passage under consideration has any reference to the judgments which Christ pronounced upon the Jews," this does not prove but that it has a still more literal reference, to the punishment of the finally impenitent.

"

He proceeds to meet a few particulars under our 3d re mark. [The remark is in P. 29.] Under this, it was urged that upon the supposition of Universal Salvationthe expectation of the wicked shall not perish, but shall issue like that of the righteous, in gladness--To this he replies: "Our doctrine does not suppose that the false hope of the wicked will be realised in life or death. The hope of the Mahomedon founded on Mahomet, the hope of the heathen founded on their idol Gods, shall perish & shall not be realised." [P. 166.] But supposing the ground of their hope, or the particular way in which they are,

expecting salvation to fail; upon the universalist hypothesis the end will be sure. If the wicked are saved in any way, their hope will indeed" "issue in gladness," & will by no means perish!"

He proceeds: "What were the hopes and expectations of the persecutors and murderers of Jesus Christ? Their hope and expectation were to destroy the influence of his doctrine. Did not their expectation fail? It certainly. did. What is the hope and expectation of those who are opposed to the universal doctrine? If their expectation and hope correspond with their faith, they are expecting and hoping for the endless damnation of a large portion of our race." [Ibid.] To all this we answer. 1. It was not intimated that upon the universalist hopothesis, every thing that the wicked hope for. in this life will be realised. And 2. As to our 66 hoping for the endless damnation," &c. we would ask: may not we believe a coming event without hoping for it? If not the holy prophets, yea Jesus Christ himself, and his apostles, when they denounced the most terrible judgments upon the Jewish nation, if their hope correspond with their faith" must have hoped for these fearful events! In what light then, must their bitter lamentations over the ap proaching desolation be regarded, [may the gracious God pardon the supposition] but as the most monstrous hypocracy?--These are the consequences which flow from this mighty effort of our Candid Examiner to fix an odium upon our theory! But 3. As to the portion of our race" which we are expecting will be lost," we by no means suppose that it will be large," in comparison with those who will be saved.-Considering the num bers which die in infancy, idiocy, and invincible ignor ance:--The numbers of pious persons in all ages who live and die unobserved:--And also, that there is an age approaching when righteousness will be universal: [See Is. xi. 9.] Considering the myriads that will be translated to heaven during this happy period, and it will not excite surprize, if the number of the lost of mankind will bear no greater proportion to the number of the saved, than the executions at Newgate, do to the inhabitants of the metropolis." (See Isaac, Pages 48, 49, 50, 51.)

66

The Editor continues: They are sowing the doctrine of eternal wrath and misery. Well what a man soweth

that shall he also reap." (Ibid.) Did not this gentleman perceive that this reflection, (for it cannot be called an argument) bears as heavily upon himself as upon us? This he must perceive upon a little reflection. He believes & teaches that sinners shall be punished, and that too with such severity, as to authorise the following strong lan guage of the apostle: "Who will render to every man according to his deeds, unto them who are contentious &c. indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish”. "Well what a man sows such shall he also reap:"-The more he preaches this doctrine, the more dreadfully will the storm beat upon his own head, and his violent dealings come down upon his own pate! With what mighty effect does this deadly stroke recoil upon himself?

He next gives us the following smart rebuff. "And if he thinks it strange that tares should be turned into wheat, we enquire where is the saint who was not made out of a sinner?” (Ibid.) In his reference here to a remark of ours, he has got tares for chaff:--this however is but the mistake · of a word,--if all his errors were as harmless it would be well!--But if the gentleman will be so good as to tell us where the saint is, who was made out of a sinner, who had been consigned to • unquenchable fire' he will gain his point!

He proceeds to advance the following sentiment, and what he thinks proof of it: It is expected that a man will reap his harvest where he sows his seed. There is no intimation in the above passages that he who soweth to the flesh shall reap the fruits of the seed which he sowed in the spiritual and eternal world. • Behold the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth: much more the wicked & the sinner." "(Ib.) Whether the passages refered to, refer to this world or the next, we shall enquire more particularly in the sequel. We would 1. observe: as to the passage which he has quoted to prove his principle, that the righteous do receive some recompense; & much more that the wicked and the sinner are visited, in this world, more or less, with divine judgments, by which the holy God testifies his displeasure against their evil ways, is what we have never denied: and this is all that is intended in the above text. It does not assert that their whole recompence is received in this world, and if it did, it would contradict the whole tenor of scripture

J