used in this world, it should have been said, In the future state is the accepted time, and in hell will be the day of salvation.

2 Cor. 4: 18, "The things which are seen, are temporal; but the things which are not seen, are eternal." If all the unseen things of the future state be eternal, the punishment of the damned is eternal. And eternal, aiova, must in this instance mean endless; otherwise all opposition with regard to duration, between things seen, and things unseen, is lost; and things unseen are as truly temporal, as things seen. At most, on Dr. C's principle of construing scripture; the apostle's proposition comes to this merely: The things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are unseen are to continue for an age. But this is true of many

present seen things.

The promises of the gospel in general afford an argument in favor of endless punishment. Rev. 2: 11, "He that overcometh, shall not be hurt of the second death." I presume all will grant, that this promise implies, that all who do not overcome, shall be hurt of the second death. Therefore, by parity of reason, when it is promised in the same chapter, "To him that overcometh, I will give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God;" it implies, that those who do not overcome, shall never eat of that tree. "To him that overcometh, will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone," etc. implies, that he who does not overcome, shall never eat of the hidden manna, shall never receive the white stone, etc. "Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out," implies, that he who does not overcome, shall not be a pillar in the temple of God. "To him that overcometh, will I grant to sit with me in my throne," implies, that he who does not overcome, shall never sit in Christ's throne. These I give as a specimen only of the promises, and of the argument which they afford.

Finally, if all shall be saved, why have not Christ, and those who wrote by the inspiration of his spirit, been explicit in the matter? Why have they used so many expressions, which in the literal sense assert the contrary doctrine? and which apparently obscure the truth, and blind the eyes of the readers of the New Testament? Especially, if, as Dr. C. holds, universal salvation be so glorious to God, the main subject of the gospel, and so necessary to vindicate the divine character? Surely this of all doctrines ought to have been indisputably revealed, and not one hint given to the contrary

Besides these arguments drawn directly from texts of scripture; I shall mention one drawn from the general nature of the gospel,

or from the particular doctrines of the gospel, acknowledged by both parties in this controversy.

Those who die impenitent, deserve an endless punishment. The proof of this hath been attempted, Chap. VI. It is briefly this: If endless punishment be not the penalty threatened in the law, and justly deserved by the sinner, no account can possibly be given of the penalty of the law. It cannot be the temporary punishment actually suffered by the damned; because then the damned would be finally saved without forgiveness. It cannot be a temporary punishment of less duration, than that which is suffered by the damned; because on that supposition the damned are punished more than they deserve. It cannot be a temporary punishment of longer duration, than that which the scriptures abundantly declare the damned shall suffer; because no such punishment is threatened in the law, or in any part of scripture. It must therefore be an endless punishment. This endless punishment threatened in the law, is not annihilation, but endless misery; because if it were annihilation, none of the damned, on supposition, that they are all finally saved, will be punished with the curse of the law, or which is the same, with the punishment which they justly deserve. But both the scripture and Dr. C. abundantly hold, that the damned will be punished as much as they deserve, as hath been shown Chap. III. But for the full proof, that the punishment of hell is not annihilation, I must refer the reader to Chap. V. If the endless punishment threatened in the law, and deserved by the wicked, be not annihilation, it must be endless misery. But whatever punishment the wicked justly deserve, they will in fact suffer; they will have to pay the uttermost farthing; they will suffer judgment without mercy. Therefore, they will suffer not only an endless punishment, but an endless misery,

or torment.

The same argument is a little differently stated thus: Dr. C. allows, that if the punishment of the damned be intended to satisfy justice, it is impossible all men should be saved.* He also holds abundantly, that it is impossible, that any sinner should be justified or saved "on the foot of law." He equally holds this with regard to the moral law, "the law written in men's hearts," "the natural law," and the law as promulged in the gospel by Jesus Christ and his apostles," as with regard to the "Mosaic law." He also holds, that "the law of God is a perfect rule of righteousness." Now if it be impossible that any sinner be justified by the moral law, then every sinner is, and must be condemned by it, and from that condemnation he can never * Page 11.

† See 12 Sermons p. 4, etc.

be acquitted by the law. If it be impossible that any sinner be saved by that law, then on the footing of that law, every sinner must be excluded from salvation.

But this law is "a perfect rule of righteousness." Therefore perfect righteousness, or strict distributive justice, will never admit of the salvation of any sinner; but every sinner justly deserves to be endlessly excluded from salvation. Again, a punishment which satisfies justice, is one which is perfectly just and deserved by the sinner. Therefore, if the sinner be punished according to his desert, he can never be saved. But both the scriptures and Dr. C. hold, that the damned will be punished according to their deserts; therefore they will never be saved.

CONCLUSION.

I have now finished a work which has been attended with considerable labor to me, and with some to the reader who has perused the whole. I am sensible that controversial writers often misunderstand each other, and therefore often spend their own time and labor, and the time of their readers for nought. I have been aware of the danger of this, and have endeavored to my utmost to avoid it; how successfully must be submitted. I have often wished for an opportunity of conversation with some sensible and thorough believer in Dr. C's scheme, that I might obtain explanation of some things, to me unaccountable. But I have not been favored with such an opportunity. I have endeavored to meet the Doctor's chief arguments and not to carp at particu lars which are of no importance to the scheme, and have not designedly shunned any argument which appeared to me to be important, and not implied in other arguments particularly noticed. I hope that whoever shall undertake the confutation of what is now offered to the public, will treat it with the same candor. In a work of this length, and on a subject of such intricacy, it would be strange indeed if there were not some slips which would give advantage to an antagonist; yet those slips may not affect the main question. If any man shall write to point out such errata, it will hardly be worth while for me to trouble either myself or the world with a reply. But if any gentleman will candidly point out the fallacy of the main arguments, on which I have rested what I fully believe to be truth; however I may be affected by it, I

doubt not but that the public will have the candor ingenuously to acknowledge it. If on the contrary his reply shall consist chiefly of declamation and warm addresses to the passions and imaginations of mankind, pathetical and frightful representations of the torments of the damned, interlarded with sarcastic fleers and other essays at wit; I doubt not the same candid public will properly notice it, and draw an inference not very favorable to the cause which is to be supported by such auxiliaries. Such artifices are unworthy of theologians, philosophers and any inquirers after truth. I hope whoever undertakes a reply, will tell us what punishment sin justly deserves; what is the penalty of the moral law; or that curse of the law from which Christ hath redeemed us.* I hope he will further inform us whether all men shall be saved in the way of forgiveness. If they be, he will reconcile that mode of the salvation of all men with those declarations of scripture which assert, that the wicked shall be punished according to their works, shall have judgment without mercy, and shall pay the uttermost farthing. If it shall be his opinion, that the damned will be punished according to their demerits, and then be saved without forgiveness, it is to be hoped he will reconcile this idea with the whole New Testament, which everywhere represents, that all who are saved, are saved in the way of forgiveness. If he shall hold, that αἰώνιος, eternal, εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, forever, and εἰς τοὺς αἰῶ vas tav alávov, forever and ever, generally in the scripture mean a limited duration, let him point out the instances of that use of them, that they may be compared with those instances in which they are used in the endless sense. But I need not enumerate the various particulars, which ought to be minutely and distinctly considered, in a candid and judicious discussion of this important question.

I have no apprehension, that the doctrine of endless punishment will suffer at all by a thorough discussion. In the course of the disquisition many may be perverted to fatal error; yet the final result will be the more clear elucidation of the truth. However "many may run to and fro, yet knowledge shall be increased."

Finally, if any man, after a careful perusal of what has been, or may be offered, on both sides of this important question, shall be in doubt on which side the truth lies; it would certainly be most prudent and safe for him to act as he would, if he fully believed endless punishment; it will be most prudent and safe for him to yield a cordial compliance with the gospel, in repentance,

Dr. C. explains Gal. 3: 10, to mean the curse of the moral law, or the law under which all men are; 12 Sermons, p. 13.

262

THE SALVATION OF ALL MEN EXAMINED.

faith and obedience. Then he will be safe on either supposition, But if he trust to the flattering doctrine, that all are finally to be saved, and in this presumption shall neglect the gospel, its invitations and requirements; and it shall finally prove, that that doctrine is a mere imagination of men; alas! he is lost; irrecoverably lost; while those who receive the gospel with "the obedience of faith," shall through the blood of atonement, "have right to the tree of life, and shall enter in through the gates into the City."