網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

ness are contingent, and, not absolutely certain, but depend upon contingent circumstances connec ted with the volition of the human will, is manifest from the sacred Scriptures. Take, for instance, the declaration of the Almighty, himself, where, in speaking of the consequence of the Jews transgressing his law, he says,” Ye shall know my BREACH of promise." Num. xiv. 34. If the promises of eternal life were unconditional, why did the Apostle Paul caution the Hebrew converts to "take heed lest a promise, being left them of entering into his (God's) rest, any of them, should seem to come short of it." Heb. iv. 1. These scriptures prove indisputably, that the promises made to individuals, concerning future happiness, are all conditional. If this were not so, there is no possible use for a day of judgment; but there is a day of judgment appointed, in which the secrets of all hearts, will be made manifest, and the hidden things of darkness, brought to light, and every man receive a reward or punishment according to the deeds done in the body. Until you can prove that all the promises of God are unconditional in their fulfilment, it is vain, to adduce them in proof of the final salvation of all men; but this you never can do, while the bible is taken as a standard of appeal in

these matters.

2. The oath of God. The oath of the Almighty is of the same force and meaning with that of his word; the former may be better calculated to make an impression on the human heart, than the latter, while they are both equally obligatory on the faithfulness of God, as it regards their accomplishment. The oath which God swore to Abraham, had respect to the Messiah, and the

prosperity of his kingdom and government, which were to emanate from the offspring of that Patriarch, as it regards the flesh. This oath was literally and actually fulfilled in the coming of Christ, the spread of the gospel, and the innumerable multitudes, who were regenerated in heart, and reformed in life by the grace of God. The oath of God, recorded in the cx. the Psalm, and quoted by St. Paul in Heb. vii. 21, concern ing the priesthood of Christ, is similar in mean! ing, with that concerning Abraham, inasmuch, as they both relate to the same subject with some little difference, the former respects the Messiah, and his kingdom, the latter, the priesthood of Christ, and the success of his ministerial labours. I can see no proof in all this, of the total extinction of human misery. You ask me "have I the oath of God in favour of endless misery?" To this I answer unhesitatingly—I have. If you will open your bible and turn to Psal. xcv. 11. you wil find that the Jews tempted God, and grieved his Spirit for the space of forty years in the wilderness; the consequence of which was, he swore in his wrath, they should not enter into his rest. You will probably say, this was a worldly rest, the land of Canaan, and not the happiness of the saints, in a future state. To this objection, I answer, we have an infallible commentator on the passage. St. Paul, applies it to the future state. In Heb. iii. 3. the apostle in addressing believers, warns them of the awful effects of unbelief, and quotes Psal. cx. 11. and applies the passage concerning the land of Canaan, as a type of the heavenly blessedness. Then, if the sense of the Apostle is not this, that God has sworn in his wrath that unbelievers shall never enter inte

eternal life, I confess, I do not understand what he means. If then, we have the oath of God, to assure us, that unbelievers, shall not enter the heavenly felicity, it clearly follows, we have his oath, in favour of endless misery.

3. The will of God. The will of the eternal Being, as it stands unconnected with the moral actions of his creatures, in relation to his own works and designs, must, undoubtedly, be considered as absolute, and infinitely beyond the control of future contingencies. That it is the will of God that "all men should be saved"—“be sanctified," and "come to the knowledge of the truth," is manifest, both from the Scripture and his benevolent nature. But that his will, in these respects, is not accomplished, is also manifest, both from Scripture and woful experience. The will of God in relation to the morality of his people, and its consequences, is contingent, or depending on contingent circumstances, respecting its accomplishments; otherwise, the freedom of the will is destroyed, and with it, all distinction between sin and virtue, as there can be no sin in the world, if the human will is not free. That some things happen, which are contrary to the will of God, none can deny. To illustrate this, it may be remarked, that the assassinations and murders that frequently happen, cannot be in accordance with the will of God, because he has expressly said "thou shalt not kill." If, then, the temporal life of a man may be taken away, contrary to the will of God, why not the spiritual and eternal life?

4. The decree of God. "The decrees of God' is a phrase that does not occur in the Scriptures' The decree mentioned in the second Psalm,.

not called the decree of God; nor am I certain, it has any relation to mankind at all, but merely to the appointment of Christ, to the office of Mediator. He r.ust be very sharp sighted indeed, that can see any thing in this Psalm, to favour the doctrine of Universalism. I confess it is too obscure for me to detect it. Christ being heir of all things, as mentioned in Heb. I. furnishes no proof of the final restoration of the damned. Christ be said to be heir of all things.-1. may Because he created all things Col. I. 14-16. 2. Because the Father appointed him to be the heir of all things. Heb. I. 2. 3. Because he has laid down his life to purchase all things for his church, Heb. II. 9. The phrase "all things" has several significations, as may be seen in my last letter, consequently it is, in itself, no proof of Universalism. The unchangeable decree, or determination of God is, that the wicked shall be punished and the righteous rewarded; but no decree can be found in the Scriptures, to say all mankind shall infallibly obtain everlasting felicity.

As this is the concluding letter on the subject of endless misery, I now propose to discuss with you at some future opportunity, through the columns of the "Pioneer," all the errors of the Universalists. Most of these dangerous doctrines have been kept behind the scenery,so that the public are little acquainted, either with them or their dangerous tendency. The following doctrines aredenied by most Universalists:

1. The fall of man, or human depravity. 2. The doctrine of the Trinity. 3. The Divinity of Christ, the divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit. 4. The vicarious sacrifice of Christ. 5. The regeneration of the human

heart by the Spirit of God. 6. The existence of devils, and 7. The eternity of hell's torments

Having concluded the discussion on the subject of future misery, and having entered into some engagements that will occupy all my time for the present, I hope to discuss, in the course of a fewmonths, perhaps weeks, the six remaining points of difference, between your creed and mine, if, indeed, you do differ with me upon each of the particulars already mentioned. In the mean time, I wish to assure you,that I am your sincere friend and brother in the gospel of Jesus Christ, our common Saviour.

JOSEPH M'KEE

LETTER No. XVI.
Baltimore, May 27th, 1835.

To Rev. Joseph M'Kee.

DEAR SIR-In letter No. 14 you charge me with two literary frauds or falsehoods,for saying, that "Kuinoel relies on Eichhorn as authority, and quotes the Targums as the work of the 3d or 4th century." Andin proof of this charge, you say, "first, Kuinoel does not rely on Eich"horn as authority concerning the dates of the "Targums at all, dordoes he, second, qnote the "Targums as the workof the 3d or 4th century "But I wilt state what Kuinoel does say on this "subject, and then it will be seen, that he decided "ly establishes my side of the question. Kuino"el in his prolegomena,gives us a dissertation on "the Logos, and in page 109 he cites the Tar"gums to show what were the Jews' opinion "upon this subject at the time of Christ. He then "goes on to say, that admitting the Targums "were (which he by no means admits) not writ

« 上一頁繼續 »