"The time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God. And if it first begin at us (the christians) what shall be the end?" &c. He tells their end-'they should be destroyed as brute beasts, they should perish iu their corruption.' 4. The following chapter sustains this view of the subject. There it is said, it had been revealed, 'that in the last days scoffers should come, asking, where is the promise of Christ's coming? To understand the full in port of this, we must consider, that Christ had told the disciples he should come, and reward them for their faithfulness, and punish his en

mes.

To this the scoffers refer. 5. Under the figure of destroying the heavens and the earth the apostle represents the judgment coming upon the Jews. This is a common figure for changes in church and state. See Isa. xiii. 9, 10; Ezc. xxiii. 7, 8; Dan. viii. 10. That this is the apostle's meaning is evident, from his allusion to the destruction of the old world by the flood, which he thus expresses: "by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water, whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished." From this, it is plain, that by destroying the heavens and the earth, he means the great change which took place, at the close of the old dispensation. This is confirmed by the figure 'fire' being used, for this is a common figure, to represent the dertruction of the Jews. 6. The time of this was at the coming of Christ, wl.ich was to be as a thief in the night. This is precisely the way it is represented in Matt. xxiv. which all refer to the

destruction of Jerusalem. 7. They were exhorted as in Matt. xxiv. to faithfulness with reference to this coming, because then the faithful would be rewarded, and the ungodly would fall in judgment.

From this brief review of the chapters, it is evident, that Peter was illustrating to the Christians, from the angels, the old world, Sodom, Noah, and Lot, how their enemies would be destroyed in the coming judgment and they delivered out of their trials. If so, the phrase 'mists of darkness forever' only expressed the punishment then inflicted upon the Jews, who rejected our Lord and his sacred instructions.

3. Jude 13. This was explained in Letter No. 7.

4. Rev. xiv. 11; xix. 3; xx. 10. That these texts all refer to the same time and punishment, is evident from the allusion in all three to Sodom and Gomorrah, from which are borrowed the figures "lake of fire and brimstone, and their smoke ascendeth up, &c." From their intimate connexion and agreement it is evident that the phrase "day and night” is alike applicable to all; which shows beyond dispute that they refer to a temporal punishment, a punishment where time is measured by days and nights. Hence before you again charge me with error,look well to the subject; and see that you are able to sustain your charge. Rosenmuller, Grotius, and Hammond explain these texts in accordance with Universalism.

Having already explained the texts where day and night is connected with the duration of the exercises before the throne of God, I will add nothing further. If, however, you wish for

more light on this, read Clarke, and he will set you right. As it is customary to say of people engaged in worship, they are before the throne of God, I can see no force in your argument on this.

Thus, dear sir, we see, that aion is limited in 70 cases out of 104, and that it is about as often limited as endless, when governed by eis. Universalism, therefore, can never be opposed by this word. If it is to be put down, it must be by other arguments.

My question, if "aion means endless, in the singular, how it could be used in the plural?" is evaded by introducing words 'unloose and untie, cease and surcease,' and by saying I might as well ask, why aion is spelled with four letters, or why A was put before B in the English alphabet. Now when we consider, that aion is used in the singular and plural, in a single and reduplicate form, for times past and future, and in connxion with things temporal and eternal, when we consider that it is composed of aei which signifies continually, and of on which signifies being, or existence, it seems impossible to resist the conclusion, that its etymological sense is continued existence; and if it be not, I see no way in which it could properly be used in these various senses. Until this argument is answered, you can raise no objection from aion against universalism.

As it respects your four rules, I say now, as I have before said, I admit their correctness and am willing to meet you on the ground they pre scribe. All therefore, which you have said about my being unable to refute them, and my

dilemma, is fighting a man of straw. It was not your rules, but your absurd inferences which I rejected, because they took for granted the point in question. But admitting I had made the assertion you say, how would it follow, that if it was good for nothing, your rules stood in full force, but if it was good for some thing, Universalism was refuted. Really, this is a logic which I do not understand. Please explain.

From this examination, we discover that the doctrine of endless misery rests upon ambiguous words for support. Aion is regarded as its strongest proof, and this only signifies continued existence; and out of 104 times, only 84, at the most, are endless. It is only six times connected with punishment, and all these have been explained by orthodox commentators in a limited sense! Would the Allwise Creator, when his children are exposed to infinite dangers, give them no, other warning of it than this?Why did he not speak in language which would show them the positive certainty of this endless woe? Why did he not thunder their tremendous doom continually in their ears? Aion only six times connected with misery!! O how unlike bible preaching is the popular preaching of this age! And how feeble the proofs of endless woe! The Lord is good to all, his tender mercies are over all the works of his hands.

I am, &c.

OTIS A. SKINNER.

LETTER No. X.

BELL AIR, Feb. 8, 1835.

To Rev. Otis A. Skinner:

Dear Sir-The sacred scriptures teach us that punishment shall be inflicted on the ungodly in exact proportion to the number and magnitude of their crimes. Agreeably to this sentiment we may justly conclude that the punishment of Gentiles, Jews and apostate Christians shall be variously diversified in proportion to the light and other means of improvement which they enjoyed. And not only so, but the Gentiles or Heathens themselves will be variously punished as to the degrees of punishment, as there is no doubt, as great a difference between the sin of one Heathen, and another, as there is between a Heathen and a Jew, and as great difference beween the sin of one Jew, and another Jew, as there is between a Jew and a Christian; or, in other words, there may be as great a difference between a good Heathen and a bad one, as there is between a bad Heathen and a good Jew, and as much difference between a good Jew and a bad one, as there is between a bad Jew and a common sinner under the gospel. Now, if this be admitted, which I think will not be denied, it will authorise us to believe that the degrees of punishment are not degrees of time, but of severity. All these punishments may be endless, as to their duration, but variously diversified, as to the degree of the pain inflicted. The