I would further

he would expofe mine. inquire; if God deals with man upon a fyftem of moral agency, is it God's revealed will, that all men fhould be faved, agreeably to their agency? If it be granted that it is, I further inquire, whether God's will, in the moral agency of man, will be eternally fruftrated? If not, no objection. flands against univerfalism; but the propofition, on which my opponent endeavors. to fubftantiate an objection, favors the doctrine, as far as it goes.

In my obfervations on the liberty of will, I have given fome of my ideas concerning agency, as it is generally understood; but moral agency may be very differently understood by different perfons. If, by moral agency, be meant an ability to love an object, or objects, which appears agreeable, I have no objection to make; but if it mean an ability to hate that which is agreeable and difagreeable, I contend no fuch agency exifts, in any being within the compafs of our knowledge. It is certainly reasonable to fuppofe, that all the agency poffeffed by man, was given him by his Maker; and that when God gave him this agency, it was for a certain purpose, which purpofe muft, finally, be every way anfwered, providing God is infinitely wife. And I cannot but think it incorrect, to suppose, that God ever gave any crea

türe agency to perform what he never intended fhould be done. Then, if any foul is made endlessly miferable, by its agency, it follows, that God gave that foul this agency, for that unhappy purpose ; and if any are faved, by their agency, God gave them their agency, for that bleffed end. If any wifh to make a different ufe of agency, let them ftate fairly, that God gave man an agency, intending man's eternal falvation thereby ; but man makes a different ufe of his agency, from what God intended, whereby the gracious de. figns of Deity are forever loft!

If my opponent will not fix his agen cy on fome of the above noted principles as it refpects the iffue of the argument, I am fure he can do nothing with it to a ny effect. If agency be stated on the principle of God's intending the creature's falvation, by it, and it be granted, that his will, in the affair, will be done, it is an ac knowledgement of the doctrine for which I contend. But if it be flated, that, although God gave man his agency, for the glorious purpose of his endless felicity, yet his purpose may fail; could this ftatement be proved true, it would not only refute univerfal falvation, but every thing elfe, as being a divine fyftem, on which we may, with any confidence, depend.

One of the objections, on which the enemies of univerial holiness and happiness put much dependence, and which they frequently urge againft the doctrine, is ftated from the force of unlimited words, as they find a few of them in fcripture applied to the mifery of the wicked. The force of this objection, I remove, by proving, that unlimited words are applied to things and events which are not firicly eternal or endless; and furely, the candid reader will acknowledge this way of reafoning is juft, and by no means evalive. I fhall not

labor this point largely, for it has been done faithfully by an abler author, whofe works are among us. I will only introduce a few fcriptures, and make fome obfervations on them, for the benefit of thofe of my readers who have not feen the mafterly works referred to. See Gen. xvii. 7, 8. "And I will eftablifh my covenant between me and thee, and thy feed after thee in their generations, for an everlasting covenant; to be a God unto thee, and thy feed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy feed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan for an everlasting poffeffion; and I will be their God." Verse 13, "He that is born in thy houfe, and he that is bought with thy money, muft needs be circumcifed; and my covenant shall be

in your flesh for an everlafting covenant." In the above paffage, the land of Canaan is called an everlasting poffeflion. Will my opponent contend the word everlasting, here means an endless duration? Will he contend, that Abraham now poffeffes the land wherein he was then a ftranger, or that his feed do, or will, poffess that land, as long as God exifts? If not, then the objection is given up.

Again, the covenant of circumcision in the flesh is called an everlasting covenant. Will the objector contend, that the covenant of circumcifion in the flesh is now in force, and that it will remain in force as long as God exifts? It is evident, from fcripture, that these ordinances and this covenant are removed, and fucceeded by a covenant which is called a better one; fee Heb. viii. 6, 7, 8. "But now hath he obtained a more excellent miniftry, by how much alfo he is the Mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promifes. For if that firft covenant had been faultlefs, then fhould no place have been fought for the second. For finding fault with them, he faith, behold the days come, faith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant, with the houfe of Ifrael, and with the houfe of Judah." Chap. ix. 10, the apoftle argues, that the ordinances of the firft covenant

were impofed on the people until the time of reformation. Gen. xlviii. 3, 4. "And Jacob faid unto Jofeph, God Almighty appeared unto me at Luz in the land of Cahaan, and bleffed me; and faid unto me, behold, I will make thee fruitful, and mul tiply thee, and I will make thee a multitude of people; and will give this land to thy feed after thee, for an everlasting poffeffion." And he further faid, in the bleffing of Jofeph, "The bleffings of thy father have prevailed above the bleffings of my progenitors unto the utmoft bounds of the everlasting hills." Exod. xl. 15, " And thou fhall anoint them (Aaron's fons) as thou anointed their father, that they may minifter unto me in the Prieft's office; for their anointing fhall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations." Lev. xvi. 35," And this fhall be an everlasting ftatute unto you, to make an atonement for the children of Ifrael, for all their fins once a year; and he did as the Lord commanded Mofes." The reader may learn the abolishment of the priesthood that is here called an everlasting priesthood, from Heb. vii. 11,12. “If, therefore, perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law) what further need was there that another priest should rife after the order of Melchifedec and not be called after