limited, is another proof that you are conscious of the weakness of your cause; for if I were really in error, there would be no need of perverting my views. The grounds on which I prove endless bliss, are stated in letter No. 6. I trust therefore, you will not waste your time any longer, in repeating this hackneyed charge. My reason for saying aion is limited in these texts is, many who first drank of the water of life fell from grace, their love waxed cold. Consequently, the life which they had was limited. Of this there is no doubt. This fact has several times been mentioned, but you have not yet given it an answer.

4. John x. 28. Although you have said the absurdity of my position on this, carries with it its own refutation, it is precisely the opinion expressed by Clarke. Fence he says, they who continue to hear Christ's voice and follow him, shall never perish; thus showing, that if they ceased to have Christ "living and governing in their souls" they would cease to have eternal life, and of course, perish, thus making the promise conditional. As Christ was more powerful than all the united energies of men and demons, none could pluck his followers from him, but they could, as many did, fall away. And when this was done they ceased to be his sheep, and consequently forfeited his protecting care.

5. John xiii. 8. This contains Peter's decla ration, that Christ should never wash his feet. Aion is here used as in Matt. xxi. 19 and Mark xi. 14. See our remarks on those, for a reply to yours on this. Peter could have meant only during his lifetime.

6. John xiv. 16. On this Clarke says: As

the death and atonement of Christ will be necessary to man till the conclusion of the world; so the office of the Holy Spirit must be continued among men till the end of time: therefore, says Christ, he shall continue with you forever. What you have said on this text, about “absurdity," "annihilation" and "giving up Universalism," is entirely foreign, as the reader will see from the above quotation.

7. Cor. viii. 13. This is Paul's declaration concerning eating meat. Clarke explains it thus: Rather than give offence, "I would not only abstain from all meats offered to idols, but I would eat no flesh, should I exist through the whole course of time." I need add nothing here.

8. Heb. v. 6; vi. 20; vii. 17, 21, 24, 28. These relate to Christ's priesthood. My position on this seems to have filled you with fright., I infer this from your wild exclamations, and your still more wild positions. But I would say to you as the angel did to the shepherds, "Fear not"-truth will do you no harm.

Your four positions, might deserve a reply, were it not that Paul has expressly said, (1 Cor. xv.) that Christ shall finally deliver up the kingdom to God, by which Clarke understands his mediatorial kingdom; and which, he says, comprehends all the displays of his grace in sav ing sinners, and all his spiritual influence in governing the Church. In the same chapter, Paul says, Christ shall become subject to God, and that God shall be all in all, by which Clarke understands that Christ will then cease to act in the capacity of a Messiah and Mediator. Of course he will cease to be a Priest. Therefore

though Paul says Christ ever lives to make intercession, that his priesthood is unchangeable, and that Christ is a priest forever, he must not be understood, so as to clash with his testimony in 1 Cor. xv. He may live forever, but he will not make intercession after he gives up the kingdom; his priesthood was not transferrable, but he could give it up when he resigned his office as mediator, he might be made a priest forever after the power of an endless life, and still his priesthood be limited, for Clarke says this means he was immortal, and would not die, or cease through weakness, to be a priest. As to its effects, they can prove nothing with respect to the duration of the priesthood. Christ's priesthood, is not, as you have declared, said to be endless, but to be eis ton aiona. He was made a priest, not after the Aaronic priesthood, nor after the law of a carnal commandment, but after or according to the power of an endless life. But because this life was endless, it does by no means follow, that the life of Christ, as a priest, is also endless. Such, we have seen, is not the case; therefore Universalists believe that the Saviour's priesthood is limited, while the life and blessings which result from it are endless. And in this way they prove endless happiness from akatalutou. So your remark on this is a perversion of our views. Hence we may say with Paul that Christ will deliver up his kingdom to God, and God will be all in all.

The remaining instances, of eis ton aiona are so evidently limited that I need not illustrate them. My views on John viii. 35, you have perverted. I must therefore refer the reader to

letter No. 5 for a defence of this. Heb. vi. 5, Clarke refers to the Gospel dispensation. 2 John 2; 1 John ii. 17; 1 Pet. i. 23, 25, require no explanation.

The plural and reduplicate forms of aion are admitted to be generally endless in the New Testament. Luke i. 33, is an exception, and also the three texts which speak of punishment. The former cannot be endless, because Christ is to deliver up his kingdom to God; and the latter we will now prove cannot be, according to the connexion and the opinion of critics. Before doing this, however, it may be well for us to sum up what we have proved respecting eis and aion. 1. We have proved that out of the 72 times in which you say aion is endless, 32 of them are limited, leaving, after deducting the 6 from the 72, which relate to punishment, only 34 cases where it is endless in the whole New Testament; and thus showing that it is limited 70 times and unlimited 34 in the New Testament. I must add there are other cases where I think it limited. 2. We have proved that instead of aion being endless in every instance when governed by eis, it is limited in After we shall have considered the 6 which relate to punishment, we think it will be admitted to be limited in 29 cases; thus making aion about as often limited, when governed by eis, as unlimited.

23 cases.

It now remains to consider the 6 texts where aion is connected with misery. On these you differ from Stuart in his work against. Universalism. He sets down only five texts, leaving out Mark iii. 29.

1. Mark iii. 29. This is the sin against the Holy Ghost, which we have explained in letters No. 3 and 6 to which the reader is referred.We will only add: 1. That Matthew in recording this, does not use eis, but en. 2. Clarke, Wakefield and Pearce, translate aion, age, and refer it to this world. 3. St. Matthew says, neither in this age, neither in the age to come -that is, say the above commentators, the Jewish and the Christian. 4. Mark says, hath not forgiveness unto the age (eis tons aiona) that is, unto the Christian age, but is in danger of the punishment which will be inflicted when Christ comes to destroy the Jews.

age

2. 2 Pet. ii. 17. "To whom is reserved the mists of darkness forever." To understand these words, let us consider, 1. That they were addressed to christians under great persecution. 2. That the apostle draws, from God's dealings with the angels that sinned, with the old world and Noah, with Sodom and Lot, an argument to encourage the christians under their sufferings. His language is, 'the Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, (or trial) and to reserve the unjust unto the (or rather, according to the Greek a) day of judgment to be punished.' He had done thus in these cases. The day of judgment to them, was the day of their destruction. As God had done with those to whom the apostle alludes, so would he do with those he was addressing, and their enemies. Hence he says, 'the damnation of those wicked men slumbered not, and

their judgment lingered not.' This agrees with his language in his first Epistle iv. 17,