29-34.] These passages are parallel with Matt. x. 32, 33, and fully explain the time when the denial was to take place, and where. It was at that time he would say to the foolish virgins, "I know you not," Matt. xxv. 12. I earnestly request you to avoid assuming that the coming of the Son of man, so frequently spoken of by our Lord, is a yet future event. In Matt. x. 23, from which chapter you have quoted two verses about denying or confessing the Master, Jesus said to his disciples, "When they persecute you in this city flee ye into another; for verily I say unto you, ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come." And then follow the instructions before referred to.

In commenting on my remarks on the parable of the tares, you do not attempt to show that I erred in relation to the time signified by the phrase end of the world; and you proceed at once to assume that the furnace spoken of is in the immortal state of existence. Prove this point and I will yield the argument.

When I said, that "whatever is destroyed ceases to exist, and of course ceases to suffer or enjoy," I had in view your supposition that the destruction of soul and body belonged to a future state. When the body ceases to exist as such, it ceases as such to suffer or enjoy; and if the spirit as such be destroyed, as a spirit it can neither suffer nor enjoy. When the Lord, "having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterwards destroyed them that believed not," they were simply destroyed as men in the flesh-they were taken away from the earth-but what has this to do with a future state of existence? If you can prove that they were destroyed in a future state, then I will acknowledge that they were annihilated-and in this event, it would be as foolish in you to assert their endless punishment, as in me to affirm their final holiness and happiness.

These remarks will equally apply to Psalm xcii. 7, which you quote. If you insist that the being destroyed for ever there spoken of, refers to the future state, you must be understood to teach the annihilation, and not the

endless punishment of the wicked. I might refer you to Ezek. xiii. 22, with no less impropriety than you can me to Malachi ii. 17.

As to Acts iii. 23, I remark, that Peter must not be understood to attach a meaning to the language of Moses that Moses never intended to convey. If you are disposed, you may consult Deut. xviii. 15-20. I ask you to quote a single passage from all that was communicated to Moses at Horeb, in which any thing like future punishment is so much as clearly intimated. To destroy a man from among the people, plainly signifies no more than to cut him off from the land of the living. (See Lev. xviii. 29.)

Heb. x. 37-39: That "perdition is here contrasted with the saving of the soul," is certainly true; and I freely allow that it " 'evidently means the not saving, or

the loss of it, concerning which the Saviour has asked, 'What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?" " The latter quotation is from Mark viii. 36. But do you seriously suppose that the word soul here used signifies more than natural life? In the verse preceding, precisely the same original word is twice used, and is translated life in both cases. So also in Matt. xvi. 25, though in verse 26, as in the text above it, it is rendered soul. The plain meaning is, "What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own life? or what shall a man give in exchange for his life?” SO PEARCE, CLARKE, and others.

You have cited Matt. vii. 13, 14, without comment. Why is this so? I knew that passage was in the Bible before I saw it in your letter. I will acknowledge that you are right and I am wrong, if you will prove, 1st. That the destruction there mentioned signifies endless punishment; and 2d. That the life there spoken of is the blessedness of immortality.

I regret that you have not deemed it expedient to notice the passages by me cited in my last letter, with the comments thereon, in proof of the final holiness and happiness of all mankind. You promise, however, to attend

to them in some future communication-but it appears to me that it would be well for us respectively to finish our work as we proceed. Whatever course you may think proper to pursue, I shall continue, as opportunity presents, to furnish the Divine testimony in proof of the eventual blessedness in Christ of the whole human family.

1 Cor. xv. 22: For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. By dying in Adam, I understand dying in the mortal constitution of the first man, who was of the earth, earthy-and by being made alive in Christ, I understand a resurrection from the dead in the image of the Lord from heaven.

That the death in Adam is a natural death, you will admit-and that the chapter in which the text occurs, treats of a resurrection into an immortal existence, will not be disputed.

The word all in the latter clause of the sentence, is coextensive in signification with the word all in the first clause. As many as die in Adam, will be made alive in Christ-for the declaration is, even so."

If it be objected that all do not die in Adam, inasmuch as Enoch and Elijah were translated, I reply, 1st. They must have undergone a change equivalent to death; and 2d. They who in no sense die in Adam, if any, will not require a resurrection.

If you say that believers only shall be made alive in Christ, I remark, 1st. The text says nothing about believers, but simply that " as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." 2d. If none but believers die in Adam, then none but believers shall be made alive in Christ.

If it be objected, that the text simply states, that all men shall be raised from the dead, I answer, that “all shall be made alive IN CHRIST." And "if any man be in Christ he is a new creature, old things are passed away, behold all things are become new," 2 Cor. v. 17.

Moreover, Paul says, it is sown in corruption, dishon our, and weakness; it is raised in incorruption, glory and

power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. All have borne the image of the earthy; and all shall bear the image of the heavenly.

If it be objected that Paul says, "But every man in his own order: Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming"-I remark that the apostle adds, "Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. And when ALL THINGS shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son ALSO himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that GOD MAY BE ALL IN ALL." Amen, Alleluia !

Remembering, as I do," that it is as far from your house to mine, as from mine to yours"-or in other words, that your opinions differ as widely from mine as mine do from yours-I cordially reciprocate your good wishes, and remain,

Respectfully yours,

ABEL C. THOMAS.

TO MR. ABEL C. THOMAS.

Philadelphia, April 3d, 1834. Dear Sir-I have refrained from replying to many things contained in your letters, not from disrespect, but from a desire to avoid undesirable length in any one of my communications. At present I will refer to some of your past quotations and remarks.

To prove that there shall be no punishment beyond the present life, you have quoted Prov. xi. 31: "Behold the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth: much more the wicked and the sinner." Now it will not follow from the fact that the righteous and the wicked meet with a suitable recompense ON THE EARTH, that they will not also meet with a similar course of dealing from their Ma

ker in the future state of existence. The fact of their being recompensed here, furnishes one of the strongest probabilities that they will also be recompensed hereafter; for why should God, who now makes the way of the transgressors hard, render it in future more pleasant? If his justice and goodness now require him to punish transgressors and reward the obedient, these attributes remaining the same will for ever secure similar results. An unchanging God, whose principles of moral government are fixed, and who recompenses men according to their conduct now, will certainly treat them according to their respective characters in all future times. Before this passage can be of any avail to the cause of Universalism, it must be shown that God fully, and perfectly punishes all the wicked, and all sinners, in the earth for all the sins they have committed or ever will commit, so that justice can inflict no more penalty upon them.

It is not true, that in THE EARTH, or in the present life, perfect distributive justice takes place. The righteous, as a general rule, find wisdom's ways to be pleasantness, and godliness to be profitable unto all things; but still there are numerous instances in which they are injured and oppressed, and spend nearly the whole of their lives in suffering. On the other hand, the wicked generally experience the way of transgressors to be hard, and vice to bring in itself much misery; and yet in many cases the wicked prosper, triumph, and die with their bones full of marrow, and with hearts at ease in stupidity. The text cited from Proverbs, therefore, cannot mean that in this world God makes a final end of recompensing either the righteous or the wicked. Did he make a full and final retribution, it could not be said that "MUCH MORE" will he recompense "the wicked and the sinner." Perfect retribution in each case, would preclude the possibility of such a comparison.-He will to a certain extent, and as a general law of his proceedings, recompense the righteous in the earth; but much more, to a greater extent, and more invariably, will he recompense the wicked in the earth. This corresponds exactly with the experience