In Colossians i. 21, (the context of which proves the doctrine of universal reconciliation to God, as I have attempted to show,) it is thus written: " And you [the saints and faithful brethren at Colosse] that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now HATH HE RECONCILED"-that is, those disciples had already experienced such a change in their state and mental operations as brought them into the enjoyment of celestial peace. In 2 Cor. v. 18, 19, the fact that "God was in Christ reconciling THE WORLD unto himself," is thus introduced: "And all things are of God, who HATH RECONCILED US [the disciples] to himself by Jesus Christ." The same general truth is taught in James i. 18: "Of his own will begat he us [the primitive disciples] by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of FIRST FRUITS of his [rational] creatures." I say rational, because the character of the harvest, the lump, is indicated by the first fruits. Romans xi. 16. In Rom. viii. 18-23, (to my remarks on which you have not yielded the slightest attention,) this subject is also illustrated: "For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us, [the believers.] For the earnest expectation of the creature [the creation] waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature [the creation] was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope. Because the creature [the creation] itself ALSO shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole [rational] creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the FIRST FRUITS of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body."

In this remarkable passage of Holy Writ, the disciples, the believers, are set forth, on the one hand, as having the first fruits of the Spirit, and as being in the present enjoyment of the blessing which must ever be consequen

of believing and obeying the truth. On the other hand, the promise is communicated, that the whole rational creation, which is in the bondage of corruption, shall be delivered therefrom, and introduced into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

It is my fervent desire, that you, sir, together with all who unite with you in opinion as to the final destiny of man, may be so turned from the power of darkness unto light, as by faith to enter into the immediate enjoyment of the blessedness which is reserved in heaven for the ransomed of the Lord.

Yours respectfully,

ABEL C. THOMAS.

TO MR. EZRA STILES ELY.

Philadelphia, July 13, 1835.

Dear Sir-In this letter I propose considering the doctrine of the resurrection of mankind into an immortal existence, as taught in the Bible. Perhaps I should rather say, I propose a re-consideration of that subject-inasmuch as it was discoursed of, at some length, in the progress of our controversy. It is desirable, however, that the substance of what has been said on that especially important branch of the discussion, should again be brought into view.

In 1 Cor. xv. 22, it is thus written: "For as in Adam ALL die, even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive." You admit that the word ALL, in each member of this sentence, is expressive of universality—for though Enoch and Elijah were translated, they must have underwent a change which was equivalent to death.

By Adam, in the passage before us, I understand the mortal constitution of the first man, who was of the earth, earthy. All the children of humanity bear his image, as a mortal being; and in that image they must return to the dust whence they were taken. By Christ

I understand the quickening spirit, the Lord from heaven, the heavenly. By being made alive in Christ is signified the resurrection into a state of incorruption, power, glory; in a spiritual body; in the image of the heavenly, who is declared to have been "the image of the invisible God."

As it is not optional with man whether he will or will not die in Adam, so I judge it to be not a matter of choice with him, whether he will or will not be made alive in Christ. The promise is absolute, and in the fulfilment thereof, man is necessarily passive. "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ SHALL all be made alive."

Thus far there is perfect unity in our views of the resurrection-but you assert that some will be made alive in Christ to an eternity of misery-while inspiration avers, that "if any man be in Christ he is a new creature,” 2 Cor. v. 17. From this testimony, in connexion with the text, I deduce the doctrine of ultimate universal blessedness in Christ. To this conclusion you object, because Jesus said, "Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away. If any man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them and cast them into the fire, and they are burned," John xv. 2—6; and thence you infer that many of those who shall be made alive in Christ will subsequently be cast off, having ever been unfruitful in good works. I rejoin, that I will admit your conclusion if you will prove the all important postulate, that some will not abide in Christ in the resurrection state. The fact that some men are not in Christ in the present life, is not to the purpose-for, however, they may live or die, they will all be made alive in Christ, in incorruption, power, glory; in a spiritual body; in the image of the heavenly. As I said in my letter of August 27, 1834, so I say now, that "to be in Christ in this mutable state, surrounded by temptation, exposed to the power of deceptive influences, and liable each moment to be led into sin, is a very different matter from being in Christ in an unchanging state, removed from the influence of tempting and cor

rupting circumstances. He who is in Christ, even in this life, is a new creature-for he "has put off the old man, which is corrupt, according to the deceitful lusts," and has "put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness"-but he may revert to his former estate, and be cast off as an unfruitful branch. Now, if you can prove that any one who will be made alive in Christ, in incorruption, and in a spiritual body, and who is therefore a new creature, will not abide in Christ, or will ever again put on the old man which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, then you will have proved that such an one will be cast off-but not otherwise.

1 Corinthians xv. 28: "And when ra návra, all things, bяотayn, shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son ALSO himself brоraynosTaι be subject [or subdued] unto him that put all things under him, [or rather, that subdued all things unto him] that GOD MAY BE ALL IN ALL." You will perceive that the word ALSo debars the popular cavil that some will be subdued in one way, and the rest in another; and I know of no rational exposition of the language, that God may be all in all, if a part of our race are to be eternally excluded from the enjoyment of his love.

Jesus said to the Sadducees, as recorded in Matthew xxii. 29, 30: "Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God: for in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." In the parallel place in Luke xx. 34-36, it is thus written: "The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage; but they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage: neither can they die any more; for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection." In your letter of Au gust 21, 1834, you say, that "but for this clause, [namely they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that worl and the resurrection from the dead,'] this text would render

me a Universalist." This frank statement induced me to hope that I should succeed in convincing you of the truth of the doctrine I advocate; and I accordingly endeavoured to make you acquainted with the true import of the clause in question. Although you did not notice my exposition thereof, I presume you were not satisfied therewith. Allow me to repeat the substance of the argu

ment.

The Sadducees did not accredit the doctrine of immortality, and the case they presented was merely designed to perplex our Lord. Their inquiry assumed that conjugal affinities must exist in the future life, (if a future life there be,) as in the present; and that there men would possess many, if not all, the passions which are here developed. Hence they desired to know whose wife of the seven brethren the woman should be in the resurrection. The supposition that our Lord evaded the inquiry, is not admissible; and since it will freely be conceded that his reply was pertinent, I conclude that it referred directly to the resurrection state. He contrasts this present state of being, in which matrimonial alliances are contracted, with the incorruptible and spiritual life, in which no such ties are formed.

If you allege that some of our race shall not be accounted worthy to be raised from the dead, you must discard the doctrine of endless punishment, unless you can conceive of endless punishment without a resurrection. But since you grant that all mankind shall be the children of the resurrection, you must admit that they will all be the children of God. Your assertion that some of the human family "will be undutiful and rebellious children for ever," is exploded by the declaration, that "the [rational] creation shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God," Rom. viii. 21.

In his address to the Sadducees, our Lord simply intended to correct their error as to the condition of men in the future state. They supposed, as previously mentioned, that the passions which men possess in this world, they