doomed to endless wo; and to grant that sufficient provision has been made for the salvation of all, is equivalent to an admission that all men will be saved-for the sufficiency of the means employed, can only be determined by the accomplishment of the end designed. The gospel, the Divine plan of salvation, views man as he is, A SINNER -and the removal of whatever perversity there be in the human will, and of all difficulties which exist, of whatever kind, is provided for in the economy of heaven. Infinite wisdom devised the plan in conformity with the dictates of infinite love, and infinite power will effect the purpose of unbounded grace.

Yours respectfully,

ABEL C. THOMAS.

TO MR. EZRA STILES ELY.

Philadelphia, July 9, 1835.

Dear Sir-Your inattention to my arguments on several passages of sacred Scripture, introduced in the early part of our amicable discussion, will exonerate me from the charge of impropriety in presenting them again. You indeed attempted to invalidate your correspondent's exposition of some of those passages-but when he rejoined and (as he then thought and still thinks) refuted your objections, unwarrantable silence was all the answer he received. I cannot countenance any such disregard of the proofs of the doctrine in which the Universalist rejoices with unutterable joy.

Colossians i. 19, 20: "For it pleased the Father that in him [Christ] should all fulness dwell; and, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile ALL THINGS to himself, by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven."

In your attempt to set this testimony aside, as a proof of Universalism, you first admitted that "he must be happy who becomes reconciled to God, by a change in his

state and mental operations, so that he is a pardoned sinner and loves God," and then laboured to show that the reconciliation mentioned in the text is not of this description. You say that "the word reconcile primarily signifies to change any thing from one state to another; and hence, secondarily, when a man's mind is changed from enmity to love, in relation to any one, he is said to be reconciled to that individual." You contend that the word is used in its primary sense in the passage before us. To this I reply, 1st. That the reconciliation referred to is a change from enmity to love-for in the verse following, the disciples are thus addressed: "And you that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now HATH HE RECONCILED." The reconciliation previously spoken of must be of the same general character-inasmuch as the verb is the same in the original Greek. 2d. Dr. GEORGE CAMPBELL, in a note on Matt. v. 9, writes as follows: "This word [convoroto] is not found in any other part of Scripture, but (which is nearly the same,) the verb of the same origin, occurs Col. i. 20, where the connexion shows that it cannot signify to be gentle, to be peaceable, but actively to reconcile, to make peace. Etymology and classical use also concur in affixing the sense of reconciler, peacemaker, to sporcos." You undoubtedly unite in this view of the word translated having made peace, in verse 20; and as the connexion of every passage must be consulted and the general scope of the place regarded, it is manifest that your argument on the word reconcile is wholly fallacious. And I consider it established beyond plausible denial, that the reconciliation in question is of the description which, you acknowledge, must secure the happiness of all persons who participate therein.

ειρηνοποιεω,

The import of the phrase all things is the only point that remains to be considered. Were we discoursing of a less momentous subject, I should be disposed to query whether you seriously allege, as an objection to the universality of the phrase, that "the stones of the streets, the birds of the air, the cattle of the hills, the air we

breathe, and the winds and waves," are things. And it might also be questionable whether you were serious in saying, "If there is a single thing, a man, an apple, a pebble, to be excluded from the class of all things to be reconciled, so as to be happy, your argument from absolute universality in this passage is lost." You do not suppose that the apostles were to preach the gospel to the birds of the air or the cattle of the hills-yet preach the gospel to EVERY CREATURE, was the Divine command. That rational creatures only are referred to, is implied. And as rational things only can ever be in a state of enmity to God, such beings only are included in the class of all things to be reconciled.

In the preceding context, the phrase in question occurs five times : for by him were all things created all things were created by him, and for him; and he is before all things; and by him all things consist; and he is the head of the body that in all things he might have the pre-eminence." I consider it but a quibble, when you say, that "there are some things in existence which were not made by him; such as the essence of the Deity, infinite space, and the actions of free agents." There is good sense, however, in your remark, that "the all things created are limited to all creatures." To which

I add, that as to reconcile all things signifies but the reconciliation of such things as were, are, or may be "alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them," Eph. iv. 18, so you and I have come to this conclusion: "It pleased the Father that in Christ should all fulness dwell, and by him to reconcile to himself all alienated rational beings."

The expression" things in earth, and things in heaven," is simply a periphrasis of navra, all things. It is used by way of emphasis, or of intensity, as Professor STUART would say. As I cannot conceive of alienation from God in any of the celestial inhabitants, so I judge that the expression is merely a figurative superaddition, designed to show that the pleasure of the Lord embraces the reconciliation of all alienated beings, wherever they may exist.

When we read that "the Father loveth the Son, and hath given navra, all things into his hands," John iii. 35; that Jesus" gave himself a ransom Teρ Tavτwv for all," 1 Tim. ii. 6; that he hath been " appointed heir of πάντων all things," Heb. i. 2; that "he is Lord (or owner) závTWV of all," Acts x. 36; that "it pleased the Father by him to reconcile ra màvra all things to himself," Col. i. 20; and that " Ta navra all things shall be subdued unto him," 1 Cor. XV. 28,-we naturally give to the word or phrase in question the unrestricted sense it bears in the declaration, God "will have návras avoporous, all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth," 1 Tim. ii. 4.

Philippians ii. 9, 11:"Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name; that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Professor STUART says, that "things in heaven, earth, and under the earth, is a common periphrasis of the Hebrew and New Testament writers for the universe." Letters to Channing, p. 100. He refers to the text before us, and also to Rev. v. 13. Dr. GEORGE CAMPBELL, in reference to the same passages, says, that karaxdovioi is “a word of the same import with the phrase υποκατω της γης, under the earth, in the Apocalypse; and with the επουράνιοι and επιγειοι celestial beings and terrestrial, include THE WHOLE RATIONAL CREATION. That they are expressly enumerated as including the whole, will be manifest to every one who attentively peruses the two passages referred to." Diss. VI. p. ii. Sec. 6. To which I subjoin, that this conclusion will be equally manifest to any one who will give to the expressions, every knee and every tongue, their obvious signification.

From the fact thus established, in conjunction with the declaration, "No man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost," 1 Cor. xii. 3, I infer the final holiness and happiness of all mankind. You object to this conclusion, 1st. Because a parrot might say, 'Jesus is

66

the Lord,' without the least intelligence"-but as that confession only can be to the glory of God the Father which is made in conviction of the judgment and sincerity of heart, the objection is fallacious, and may therefore be dismissed. 2d. You assert that some of our race " will confess Christ in such a way that God the Father will be glorified in their damnation." This is merely an assertion, and as such does not justly deserve consideration -nevertheless let us look at it in the light of the text. (1.) Paul furnishes no intimation that some shall bow and confess in one way and the rest in another. He makes no distinction as to manner or result; and therefore you might as properly assert, that the Father will be glorified in the damnation of all, as that some will confess Christ in such a way as to glorify God in their doom of despair. (2.) In order that the confession, Jesus Christ is Lord, may be to the glory of the Father, it must be made in faith-inasmuch as the God of truth cannot be glorified in the confession of that which is not believed. It is written," Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God," 1 John v. i. (3.) Professor STUART, on the text before us, says-" What can be meant by things in heaven, that is, beings in heaven, bowing the knee to Jesus, if spiritual worship be not meant?" Referring to Rev. v. 13, he writes as follows: "If this be not spiritual worship, and if Christ be not the object of it here, I am unable to produce a case where worship can be called spiritual and divine." Permit me to add, that this universal bowing down, and universal confession, indicate the consummation of the Divine purpose, that Christ shall subdue all things to himself, reconcile them to the Father, and subsequently be himself subject, that God may be all in all.

I will conclude this epistle with a few examples in illustration of the statement, that in connexion with many of the testimonies pertaining to the final holiness and happiness of all mankind, there is either a direct mention or obvious implication of the special, present, blessedness of believers.