eternal life was used simply to express the life of faith; for it would be useless and absurd to say of a soul after it was perfected in glory, it shall never perish, and none shall pluck it from the hand of Christ.

For the five foregoing reasons, I must dissent entirely, from your position, that aionios "is forty-four times used to express the endless duration of the life of the redeemed." It is an assumption sustained by no proof, but popular prejudice. You must therefore reckon again to make out your forty-four instances, where aionios is admitted by all to be endless. Universalists admit nothing of the kind.

You say that aronion is three times applied to God's purpose. But such is not the fact. The literal meaning of 2 Tim. 1. 9. is "according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus, before the aionion times." Now if aionion here means eternity, this purpose was formed before eternity; and as this cannot be, aionion is here used in a limited sense to denote what God purposed before the commencement of time. Besides, nothing is said of an aionion purpose. The other two instances are the same. Here then are three more cases to be deducted from your calculations. What an absurdity to say before eternity!

On the three instances in which you say aionios refers to the endless glory of the saints, I will make no remarks; for I can see no bearing they can have on this discussion. That aionios is sometimes used in an unlimited sense we admit. But conceding these, your fifty instances are cut down to a small number. In

appear, that

what light now does your remark .aionios is never used in a limited sense?

There remain of the seventy-one places where aionios occurs, but twenty-one to be considered. As fourteen of these have no reference to punishment, I will pass them by simply asking 1. If any thing more can be intended by the phrase, everlasting Gospel, than that the Gospel should be preached to the end of time, and that it should never be succeeded by another? 2. Can people in this world, be said to have endless consolation? And does not the absurdity of this idea, show, that everlasting consolation sim ply means, the great and permanent consolation of christians? Remember-they had this everlasting consolation, and that christians can fall from grace.

3. How can Christ's kingdom be called endless, when he says, he shall deliver it up to the Father? See 1 Cor. xv. 4. By what authority do you refer the phrase everlasting habitations to the future world? Have men the control of the kingdom of endless blessedness? Can they admit and refuse whom they please? 5. Onesimus was a fellow laborer with Philemon, and the son of Paul in the faith. For a time, he departed from Philemon, but returned by the advice of Paul. Hence it is said; "he departed for a season, that Philemon should receive him forever." But can any thing more be intended, than that they should continue without interruption fellow laborers? Surely in this instance aionios, at most, can only mean the life of man. Thus we have five cases to take from your fourteen.

We will now examine your seven texts, where aronios is applied to punishment. Your

remark that the best informed Universalists generally refer these to future punishment, is another proof of your imperfect knowledge of our faith.

1. On Matt. xviii. 8. I will only ask 1. What can Christ mean by entering life maimed? 2. What can he mean by being cast into fire with two hands and two eyes? 3. Should you say he speaks figuratively, and means by being maimed separated from his friends, I would ask, how entering heaven, without friends, could be called entering maimed? According to this every christian goes to heaven maimed. But here is a difficulty; for this would make sinners go to hell maimed, inasmuch as they would leave friends behind. 4. When Jesus says it were better to be drowned in the depth of the sea, than to offend one of these little ones (v. 6.) does he not refer to the same punishment as that in v. 8? These questions show that Jesus was merely speaking of the opposition to his cause, of the importance of believing in him, even if it displeased connexions, and of the judgment that would come on the offenders. They had bet.. ter enter his kingdom without friends, and against their will, than to be destroyed with them. Fire is a common figure to express the temporal punishments to come on the Jews. See Matt. 3. 10; xiii. 42; xxv. 41; vii. 9. Eis to pur to aionion or everlasting fire then, can he no proof of endless misery; for it is seen to refer to a particular judgment upon the Jews.

What Dr. Chauncy's notions have to do with this or any other text, as it respects our discussion I am unable to conceive. I hope therefore

in future, you will give us your reasons, not the unsupported opinions of other men.

and

2 & 3. Let us now consider Matt. xxv. 41,and on to end of the chap. This you say is not a parable, 1. Because there is no indication of it. That is easily said, but what does v. 33. mean? "He will set the sheep on the right and the goats on the left." Now if you are correct, we need discuss the subject no further; for it refers not but to sheep and goats. The sheep shall go into life eternal, and the goats into everlasting punishment. The sheep fed the hungry, clothed the naked, &c. while the goats were wanting in these kind offices. A kingdom was prepared for the sheep; but the goats were to be penned with the devil.

to men,

Again; you say many phrases in this scripture, such as come in his glory-holy angels-all natims,&c. can only be applied to a general judgment. See Matt. xvi. 28. where Christ was to come in the glory of his Father with his angels to reward every man according to his work, before those to whom he spoke, tasted death. See also Matt. 24. 30-34. where it is said, all the tribes of the earth should mourn; Christ should come in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory; send out his angels to gather his elect from one end of Heaven to the other; and all before the generation then living passed away. But you knew all this before; you were not ignorant of our views on this subject; for you have read my sermon on Matt. 25. 31—46. Why then bring up these old arguments, which we have refuted, without replying to what we have said? You lay great stress upon the phrase all nations; but is there more difficulty

in understanding that, than the phrases, reward every man-all the tribes of the earth shall mourn -gather his elect from one end of heaven to the other? You think there is a difficulty in the phrase, "inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world." But did not the disciples have a kingdom; and one too prepared for them? This dear sir, is in favor of our views. Besides, Jesus told his disciples that he would appoint to them a kingdom, as his Father had appointed one to him. Thus every circumstance connected with this scripture, shows, that aionios is limited. What you say about Chauncy, and the best of commentators is entirely foreign from the question. Further, it is not true, for Pearce and Cappe explain the subject as universalists do.

4. Mark iii. 29. next claims our attention. Here you find two forms of speech, negative and positive, which teach endless misery. Now I consider this uncandid; for as you read the Greek, you must have known that the original will bear no such construction. Aion and aionios both occur in this text, but only one (aionios) is translated. According to the original, it reads, "but he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, hath not forgiveness unto (aioni) the age, but is obnoxious to the aionion judgment. This destroys your negative argument. It is not an unlimited, but a limited negative. Now as we must believe, that Mark uses aion in the same sense as Matthew, we feel justified in saying, unto the aion, means unto the christian aion or dispensation. This accords with Matthew-neither in this age (the Jewish) neither in the age to come, (the christian.) Hence the damnation