"believeth on me hath everlasting life," and "he that be"lieveth on me shall never thrist," did he not insinuate that unbelievers shall have their portion in the lake of fire, which is the second death, and in which there is not a drop of water to quench their thrist? All these questions are plainly answered by a voice directed from heaven to an inhabitant of this lake. "But Abraham said, son, remember that thou in thy life-time receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art "tormented."

66

66

When our Saviour promises mercy and comfort, satisfaction and sanctification, a royal inheritance, and a heavenly reward, to the poor in spirit, the mourners, the meek and merciful, the pure, the persecuted, and the peace makers, is not an opposite destiny insinuated against opposite characters? When Peter says by the spirit of God," he that fear"eth him, and worketh righteousness is accepted with him,” is it not an insinuation that the presumptuous and disobedient shall be rejected? When Paul says that the gospel “ is "the power of God unto salvation to every one that belie"veth," does he not insinuate that the gospel shall not save the unbeliever? When our Saviour says, " blessed is he, "whosoever shall not be offended in me," and "he that en"dureth to the end shall be saved," is it not an insinuation that those who are offended with Christ, and turn back from following him, shall not be blessed or saved? In the doctrinal, experimental, and practical reception of christianity, there are many dangers to encounter, and many prejudices and corruptions to overcome. Our Saviour says, ❝ to him "that overcometh will I grant to sit with me on my throne." What does this insinuate concerning those who are led captive by the world, the flesh, and the devil?a

2. Supposition. Although all the passages advanced under this head, are hypothetical expressions, all of them, except the last, contain almost as manifest an innuendo as those which have been adduced above. "Behold I stand at "the door and knock: IF any man hear my voice, and open "the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him and "he with me." "IF any man therefore purge himself from "these, he shall be a vessel unto honor." These passages imply that those who are not cleansed, and who do not open the door, shall be banished from Christ, and treated with

a Matt. vi. 2, 16. Luke xvi. 25. In. vi. 47, 35. Rev. xx. 14. Ps. xvii. 14. Matt. v. 3-12. Acts. x. 35. Rev. iii. 21. Matt. xi. 6, 10: 22. Rom. i. 16.

contempt: and this is elsewhere called an "everlasting contempt." Concerning false teachers, our Saviour says, "IF "it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." Does not this imply that all others are fatally deceived? Paul says, "let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed LEST he fall." If none could fall, by mistaking the ground upon which he stood, why this caution? The same caution against resting in a form of godliness without the power, and thus falling short of real religion, is taught in the following passage. "Looking diligently, LEST any man fail of the grace "of God; LEST any root of bitterness springing up trou❝ble you, and thereby many be defiled; LEST there be any "fornicator or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel "of meat, sold his birth right." The sequel proves what is here implied; that these characters, like Esau, are rejected of God. "For if they escaped not who rejected him that 66 spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, IF we turn "away from Him that speaketh from Heaven."a

My last text, which I observed, did not contain an inuendo, may be considered as amounting to positive proof, although it contains a supposition. "The Son of man goeth, as it is written of him; but woe unto that man by whom "the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man "IF he had not been born." b

On this passage my opponent, with great confidence, repeatedly challenges me to meet him. The following are his words, viz. "I am willing to take the person and character "of the traitor Judas, as the entire subject of the debate, to "decide the question under discussion; and if my opponent "can prove that Judas is to be eternally miserable, I admit "that he proves his doctrine; but if I prove from the testimony of the inspired writers, that there is as much reason "to believe he will be saved, as there is to believe that any "of the other disciples will be saved, then he has lost the argument. If my opponent will not meet me on this, or on "any other argument, you, my hearers, will say it is because " he dare not." "I am not ashamed to appear before this audience as the advocate for the final salvation of even "Judas, and if I am not able to prove that we have the same "reason for believing in his final and eternal happiness, as "we have to believe in the salvation of Peter or of Paul, I

68

a Rev.iii. 20. 2 Tim. ii. 21. Matt. xxiv. 24. 1 Cor. x. 12. 9. 27. Heb. xii. 15-17, 25. Jer. iv. 4. 17. 27. 21. 12. Am. 5. 6.

b Matt. xxvi. 24.

"must give up to my opponent, and acknowledge he has "gained his argument. I must have the same hope for the "salvation of Judas as I have for my own, or my faith in uni"versal salvation is without foundation. Could I not prove "from the testimony of the scriptures that Judas is finally to "be saved, I tell you, my hearers, I could not so boldly ad"vocate the doctrine of universal redemption; upon the sal"vation of Judas, therefore, I rest the truth of my doctrine. Judas, we acknowledge, was guilty, he was a traitor; but "show me the law which requires that he should be endless"ly miserable, that is, punished to an absolute eternity for "what he did."a

One

In the above challenges, my opponent seems confident that Judas is as safe as any other Apostle, but at other times, he appears to think him much safer than one of them. would almost think that he was afraid of Peter's being lost, because he was so much more hard-hearted and impenitent than his beloved Judas. The following are his words, viz. "There is nothing in the whole history of Judas, that should 66 cause us to suppose he will never be saved. If salvation "be predicated on repentance, we have the same evidence, "yea, if possible, better evidence of the repentance of Judas, "than we have of the repentance of Peter. The one betrays "his master, the other denies him: but what does Judas "when he finds his master is in the hands of his enemies? "Does he, like Peter, cowardly deny him, with imprecations "and curses? No, he comes forward to the enemies of his "Lord, and declares that he had sinned in that he had betrayed innocent blood.' He acknowledges and repents of "his guilt, and bears honorable testimony to the innocence "of Jesus. But the priests, having obtained their end, in "the apprehension of our Lord, care not for this confession, "but they say, 'What is that to us? See thou to that. Does "Judas rest contented, saying, well, I have got the money, "and what I have done cannot now be undone ? No, he des pises his ill-gotten gain; "he cast down the pieces of sil"ver' at the feet of the priests, and went out, and was suf "focated with grief.' I know that our common version of "the scriptures, says, he went and hanged himself;' but "it is the part of my opponent to prove that this is the mean; "ing of the original, which he cannot do. How is the idea "of his baving hanged himself reconcileable with the account "given in the book of Acts, of the death of Judas? Falla Minutes, p. p. 77, 90.

66

"ing headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his "bowels gushed out.' Acts i. 13. The learned Mr. Wakefield, who was no Universalist, translates the passage, "Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple, and withdrew and after his departure, was choaked with anguish and that excessive grief will produce this effect, "all who know any thing of the effects of the passions on "the body, must acknowledge. I would now ask, have we "as much evidence of the sincerity of the repentance of those "who come forward in our days, and declare themselves to "be such great sinners in the sight of God and man? Do "they make restitution in those instances in which they have injured their brother? I do sincerely wish that we had the "same evidence of the sincere repentance of christians, in "our day, as we have of the sincerity of Judas, when he re"pented him, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver "to the chief priests and elders.' Matt. xxvii. 35. Let my 46 opponent, now, if he feels himself able, meet me on this ground."a

66

66

,

In the above effusion, my Universalist opponent tries his talents for criticism. The following effort in the same way, is in his own words, viz. "The original text is ambiguous: "it is literally good were it for him, if that man were not "born.' It will admit of the following constructions, 'Good "were it for him (the Son of man) if that man (the traitor) "were not born.' Or, 'good were it for him (the traitor) if "that man (the Son of Man) were not born.' Or, (what is "more probably the true sense)' good were it for him (the "traitor) if that man (the traitor) were not born.' Or, lastly, "(which is nearly the same in sense) 'good were it for him, "(the traitor) if he were not born that man.' But good "were it for that man (the traitor) if he had never been born," "(that is, never existed) is a construction that the words "will not possibly bear. To prove this statement true, I "have only to refer to a passage where similar expressions "occur in the original. It is recorded in the book of Acts, "chapter seven, that Stephen made an address to his accu"sers, in which he gives a history of all the great things "which God had done for his people in former times, from "the time when he appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Char66 ran;' when he comes to speak of Moses, he

a Minutes, p. p. 92, 93.

says, 'at

66

6

"which time Moses was born, ev nagw eyevvnin Mwʊons,' "where the same verb, syɛvvnen, translated was born' occurs "in the text in reference to Judas, & ουκ εγέννηση ὁ ανρθωπος, "excepting that in the one, the idiom of our language requires "that it should be rendered in the indicative, and in the "other, being preceded by the conjunction & If, in the sub"junctive mood. Now what is the difference between these "two passages? The only difference is, that the latter has "the modifying particles a, translated if, and the negative "OUX not, which, however, do not alter the meaning of the "verb, which is precisely the same in both. Now if the "verb syavven in the former, express the natural birth of "Moses, by what mode of reasoning can we cause oʊx ɛɛnŋ "in the latter to signify absolute non-existence? That these "statements are literally true I appeal to our judges, and to "all learned men. lf İ am wrong let me be contradicted."Thus, you see, ends the discussion in relation to the dis<6 pute on the meaning of the passage in reference to Judas. "Even my opponent dare not dispute the correctness of my "statement. [Here Mr. Kennedy, the second of Mr. M'Calla, one of the bench, arose and commenced some remarks but "was silenced by Mr. M'Calla.] You see my hearers, that "his friend would have looked into the passage, but my opponent shrinks from the decision; and yon now see how we stand on the subject to which I have called his atten❝tion, and on which I am perfectly willing to rest this dis"cussion."a

66

In the same strain my Universalist opponent speaks as follows, viz. “The phrase in relation to Judas, is 'xaλov nv 66 αυτω ει ουκ εγεννηθη ὁ ανθρωπος εκείνος, good were it for that man "if he had not been born.' My opponent says that the true meaning is 'good were it for Judas if he had never had (6 any existence.' Now I ask, if Judas had never had a be66 ing, could any thing have been good for him? Could any thing be good for you, my hearers, if you had never been "brought into existence? The idea of any thing being good "for Judas, implies in itself that he must have had a being."

He reasons at another time in the following words, viz. "I am willing to rest the salvation on the plain testimony of "God. This testimony, it is true, declares that "by transgression Judas fell, that he might go to his own place. “Acts i. 25. But my opponent must prove that this place

(6

a Minutes, p. p. 89, 90.

b Minutes, p. 78.