A DISCUSSION

‘BETWEEN

De Lovie Pierce, Methodist

: ae aap |
\ : C. F. R. Shehane, Universalist
ON, ENDLESS PUNISHMENT

aC. F. R. SHEHANE DENYING
San

DR. PIERCE AFFIRMING

Held at Americus, Ga., in 1850.

OANON, GA:
UNIVERSALIST HEBALD PRINT:
1903. :Universalist Book ef
Refer 2nce.

COUMCDUAS
CRUD

THIS is -one of our most useful Books
in removing erronedus interpretations of the
Scriptures from the mind. oS
: Sent post paid for $1.00.

For Sate Av Tos HERALD OFFICE,

A TREATISE ON

THIS book was “written ce Hosea Bal-

lou, one of our profoundest thinkers. ~ This

book has done more, directly and indirectly,
in arousing intelligent thought on the At-
os than any other book ever written
by man. : S
The book is just from the press, and
has an able introduction by John Coleman
Adams, D.D. Price, post paid $1,10.
For Sanz Av HERALD OFFICE.A DISCUSSION

BETWEEN

  
   
   
   
    
  

a On

Dr. Lovic Pierce, Methodist

AND

C. F. B. Shehane, Universalist

 

 

ON ENDLESS PUNISHMENT

C. F. B. SHEHANE DENYING

—AND——

DR. PIERCE AFFIRMING

Held at Americus, Ga., in 1850.

CANON, GA?
UNIVERSALIST HERALD PRINT:
1903.—— nnn

  
     
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
 
  
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  

More than a half century has passed since the Theological com-
bat occurred between C. F. B. Shehane, Universalist, and Dig:
Lovie Pierce, Methodist. Both have long since passed from the
earth life, into the great beyond. It may be said of them as may
be of all others—their works do follow them. They are dead; yet
they speak. When the writer of this was a little boy, he remembers
to have heard his father and older brothers speak of Shehane as a
‘“‘Campbelite preacher.”’ He published a religious paper somewhere
in South Carolina, called the ‘‘Morning Watch.’ While publishing
this paper, he found his way to Bowersville, then a country post of-
fice on the mail line from Athens, Ga., to Anderson, S. C., my fath-
er, Job Bowers, being the post master. Here he made one convert
to the Campbelite faith—we have forgotten his name—baptising
him in my father’s gin pond, near where the Herald offlee now
stands. We remember to have heard our father say that Shehane
was the best read man in the Bible he ever saw. Perhaps this part
of Shehane’s history is sixty or sixty-five years in the past. Some-
time soon after this, Shehane became a Universalist, and as to his
ability to preach and defend that faith, we leave it to the reader to
come to his own conclusion. |

We see no reason why any honest sincere man should not read
this discussion, let him believe what he may in regard to the future
destiny of the race. Itis true, some Adventists believe neither
theory advanced in this discussion: but think the final end of the
wicked will be annihilation—blown out like a candle. Of course
such do not believe in a happy destiny for all; neither do they be-
lieve in an endless hell of pain for any.

While this is true of Adventists, yet, the greater part of the
people hold, either to endless punishment for a part, or endless hap-
piness for all. If the doctrine of endless torture be true for part
of the race, it is awfully true, and ought to be known by ali. “We
have no way of knowing the truth about this great question only as
weare taught by God’s word—the Bible. [fit teaches it, we should
he willing to accept it. If it does not, no man has a moral right to
be filling the world with gloom by teaching it. If Dr. Pierce, or any
other D. D. is teaching this doctrine, they ought to be sure it is the
truth. It casts an awful shadow on the character of the Infinite
God if true: and is a tremendious slander if false.

3Dr. Lovic Pierce was the father of Bishop Pierce, and was a
great power in Georgia Methodism. ‘The Pierces are closely related
to the history of this great church in Georgia.

In reproducing this discussion after the lapse of more than fifty
years, we have at least two main reasons for so doing, viz: Ist. That
those who may chance to read these pages may have an oppor-
tunity to see the subject of the destiny of man’ examined in the
hght of Scripture by two learned men of very diverse views on the
subject. 2nd. Dr. Pierce was popular with the masses, and was
backed by money in his day. It is true, he did not bring out this
discussion in print, but it certainly was not because he did not have
the money.

We have been told that Shehane was poor, as regards worldly
goods, therefore he could not do much in bringing this debate be-
fore the public in the printed page. It is true, he did havea small
number of them published, but they suddenly disappeared as soon
as they left Universalist hands we have been told. Why their sud-
den disappearance the reader must judge for himself.

But very few are living to-day, who heard this debate. The
Rey. J. C. Burruss, D. D.. of Notasulga, Ala., informs us that he
was present all the way through the combat. James Harrison, who
is now dead, told us several years ago, that’ he was present. Mr.
Harrison was Ordinary of Franklin county for many years.

We now send forth these pages hoping that some good may be
the result.

Our prayer to God is, that the truths herein contained, may be
blessed of Him, who is the author of all truth, in the opening of the
blind eyes, and unstopping of the deaf ears. Amen.

JNO. M. BOWERS.
Canon, Ga., July Ist, 1908.THE
UNIVERSALIST HERALD.

THE HERALD is a weekly four page paper, devoted to
the cause of truth, as understood by Universalists.

THE HERALD is a ‘‘free-lance,’’? and will not back down
from the brow-beatings of the majority, when it thinks they
are wrong.

The mission of THE HERALD IS NOT to expose men:
BUT TO EXPOSE ERROR. The weapons of our warfare are
not carnal, but reasonable, and are mighty in tearing down
strongholds of error that are entrenched amid the rubbish of
ignorance and age. THE HERALD, as far as it is able, will
prove itself a true friend to all, by endeavoring to lead} its
readers into a more consistent and reasonable interpretation of
God’s word than is usually preached by Limitarians.

The great thinking masses are beginning to inquire for a
more humane religion than the creeds teach. THE HERALD
will fight and oppose all the old heathen myths that have
been so long entrenched under the curtains of the Christian
church,

THE HERALD is a clean and hewsy sheet—having noth-
ing in its columns that is not healthy for the souls of men:
without it is some advertisement of a patent medicine, and
we do not have many of them.

Sample copies of THE HERALD can be had by asking
them sent.

The paper will be sent three months for 25 cents in ad-
vance; or six months for 50 cents; or $1.00 per annum.

Address all orders for the paper to Rev. Jno. M. Bowers,
Janon, Ga., and the matter will receive prompt attention,
Send money by check, postal money order, express money or-
der, or by registered letter, A paper dollar enclosed 1 ee
plain sealed envelope is generally safe.rir. Shehane’s Opening Speech.

Gentlemen Moderators, and Respected Auditors:

From the correspondence between Dr. Pierce and myself, which
he has just read in the hearing of us all, you perceive that he calls
my attention to Isaiah 8: 20, asthe Rule to govern this debate.
‘To the law and to the testimony: If they speak not according to
this word, it is because there is no light in them.’’ To this I have
no objection. It shall be my polar star, whilst I attempt to navi-
gate the stormy ocean upon which I now launch my little bark.
The Dr. also wishes the Bible expounded upon the principles of
common sense. To this rule I also readily consent, but I wish it
distinctly understood, by one and all, that the common sense of a
well trained mind is one thing, and that of an uneducated, or mal-
educated man, another, and avery different thing. Let me explain
myself. For instance, many persons not well skilled in the science
of theology, suppose that 1 John 5: 7, clearly teaches the doctrine
of the Trinity. But along comes Dr. A. Clarke, with his vast stock
of information, and tells them that t] e passage upon which they sq
confidently rely, is of noauthority. For says he, ‘‘I have examined
118 Greek manuscripts, and find that it is wanting in 112, and the
copy which contains it, is of recent date, and of no authority.”’
Thus you see how the common sense of Clarke, enlightened by long
and deep study,uproots that of those who merely float upon the sur:2

face of matters and things. Aska Jew why he rejects Christianity,
and clings with such death-like tenacity to Judaism. He will tell
you that he does it upon the principles of common sense. Ask a
Mahometan why he believes 1n a hell composed of ice and fierce
north winds, as well as in one of fire and brimstone, and his answer
will be, because he is guided by common sense. And upon the same
principle a Chinese will tell you that Ads hell is a mountain of sharp
knives, and that he believes in three hundred millions of Gods!
The Greoks had thirty shousand only, but it takes a Chinese to have
a number sufficiently great to answer all his purposes. But to
bring the matter nearer home. Ask a Calvinist why he holds on to
Calvinism,—his answer is, because the natural, plain, unsophisti-
cated meaning of the Bible leads him into that faith. And just as
likely as any way, he will quote Acts 18: 48,in proof of his doctrine
—‘‘As many as were ordained to eternal life, believed.’’ Stop says
an intelligent Arminian to his Orthodox brother, who follows in the
wake of John Calvin. The order of the Greek in the verse you
quote is quite different from our common version. Forthe Greek
says, ‘‘As many as believed were set over to eternal, or everlastin g
life.’ Again: When the Calvinist quotes Rom. 9: 18, to prove that
Esau was rejected or reprobated of God, before he was stained with
a single crime, and that, per consequence, ‘nothing awaits him in
the future world but pain without end, and misery without relief.
The Arminian, yes,and the Universalist too, will quote Hebi]: 24;
“By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come.”’
And while the Calvinist contends earnestly that his common sense
compels him to believe that his Maker designed from the beginning
to curse Esau forever, the Methodist, such for instance as my aged
and worthy opponent, will as earnestly maintain that God designed
to bless the whole race of mankind. Then stands up the Universa-
list with the testimony in his head, and God’s love in his heart,and
quotes with equal earnestness, texts to prove that what God designs
he willaccomplish. Such for example, as the following:—"My
counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure.’ Isa. 46: 10.
‘‘He doeth according to his will in the armies of heaven, and among
the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand.’’ Dan.
4: 35.

Upon the strength of such passages as these, I do most earnestly
eontend, and that too on the principle of the best kind of sense,1. e.3

Bible serisé in the light of tight reasoh, that if the Almighty has de-
signed the salvation of the whole Adamic race, it will as certainly
be accomplished as He lives, unléss the unfailing God of the Unie
verse makes a failure! To fail, however, is impossible. And hen¢e
my rule of common sense must stand, ahd all others opposed to it
must go as chaff before the wind.

Knough has been said to cohvince the candid, that what is gen-
erally called cOmmbh sense, differs very much in the different men
and nations. I therefore return to Isa. 8: 20.—And I will just ob-
serve, in passing, that it is a maxim of civil law ot rule of évidence,
that in all litigated cases the best testimohy is always to be sought
and obtained if possible. And that evidence of a superior quality
is hever to be set aside by that of an inferior grade.

These things being premised, I now proceed to my first propo-
sition, which is, that Jesus died to destroy the devil. I turn for proof
to Heb. 2: 14, 15, which says, ‘‘Forasmuch then as the children are
partakers of flesh and blood, he (i. e. Christ) also himself likewis¢
took part of thé samé, that through death he might pEstroy him
that had the power of death, that is, THE DEVIL; and deliver them,who
through fear of death, were, all their lifetime, subject to bondage.”
Here is clear testimony—strong proof of my position. It now de-
volves on ny opponent to show to the satisfaction of this great con
course of people, how the devil, after his destruction, will still be
in existence as large as life, and as terrible as the raging fires of an
orthodox hell. A house is destroyed by fire. Does any one think
it Will ever be a houseagain? Of course not.

To this my opponent may reply, that men are destroyed§
Granted; but the word destroy in Heb. 2: 14, is not applied to the
souls or spirits of men. Besides we are taught that all men who
die, whether by flood or fire, are to be raised from the dead. But
in what part of the divine testimony has it yet been discovered that
the devil is torise from the dead? i request my Gpponent to
bring it up, if he knows of any such.

As another proof, J introduce Gen. 8:15. “‘I will put enmity
between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it
shall bruise thy head, [the Catholic versitn says crush thy head, |
and thou shalt bruise his heal.’’ As our orthodox opponents con-
tend that the devil is here brought to view, I take them npon their
own grounds, and ask them, and especially my antagonist in this4

disctission, to show how the devil will litt his brazen head forever
in blasphemy against heaven, after it shall have been crushed. In
other words, let it be shown, if can be, that he whose time is. short,
Rev. 12:12, is to reigneternally. And that his kingdom of black
ness and darkness, of sin and misery, shall last as long as the king-
dom of light and glory. Let this be done, and I will strike my col-
ors; I will call for quarters, and seek refuge in the camps of ortho-
doxy. But until then I expect to battle hard for the triumph of
Jesus, and for the destruction of the devil and his works.

This brings me to my 2nd proposition, which is that Christ was
manifested to destroy the works of the devil. My proof is iJohn 8: 8.
(“or this purpose was the Son of God manifested, that he night de-
atroy the works of the devil.’’ The celebrated Wesley, 1H his ser-
mons, has some very appropriate remarks on this verse, which I here
take occasion to read.. Now listen— . |

“4, Then error, pain, and all bodily infirmities cease jall thesé
are destroyed by death. And death itself, ‘the last etiemy’ of man,
shall be destroyed at the resurrection. The mometit that we hear
the voice of archangel and the trump of God, ‘then shall be ful-
filled the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up ih victory.”’
‘This corruptible [body] shall put on incorruption; this mortal
[body] shall put on immortality ;’’ and the Son of God manifested
in clouds of heaven, shall destroy the works of the devil.

‘5. Here then we see inthe clearest, strongest. light, what is
real religion: a restoration of mati,by him that. bruises the serpent’s
head, to all that the old serpent deprived him of; a restoration, not
only to the favor, but likewise to the image of God implying not
_ parely deliverance from sin, but the being filled with the fullness
of God. It is plain, if we attend to the preceding considerations,
that nothing short of this is Christian religion. Everything else,
whether negative or external, is utterly wide of the mark. But
what a paradox is.this! How little is: it understood in the Chris-
tian world; yea, inthis enlightened age, whereitt it is taken. for
granted, the world is wiser than it. ever was from the beginning!
Among all our discoveries, who. has discovered this? How. few;
among the learned or unlearned!. And yet, if we believe the Bible,
who can doubt it? It runs through the Bible from beginning to end;
in one copnected chain; and the argument.of every part of it with
every other, is properly the analogy of faith. Beware of taking any-5

thitig tise; 6 atiything less than this for religion! Not anything
else: Do not imagine an outward form, a round of duties, both in
public and in private, is religion! Do not suppose that honosty,
justice and whatever is called morality, (though excellent in its
Place, ) is religion! And least of all, dream that our orthodoxy,
right opinions, (vulgarly called faith,) is religion. Of all religious
dreams, this is the vainest: which takes hay and stubble for gold
tried in the fire.”’

Here we see that the founder of Methodism speaks not only of
the destruction of all the devil’s works, but of a restoration of man
to the favor and image, yea, to the being filled with the fulness of
God. It is # rule in English Grammar, that a noun without the ar-
ticle to limit it, is generally taken in its widest sense. ‘A restoras
tion of mart,’ must therefore mean the restoration of all mankihd to
Holiness. I will not say that Wesley was 4 Universalist, for 1 know
he teaches ifi some of his sermons endless woe. But this much I will
say, the quotation now made suits Univetsalism very well.
Whether it stiits Methodism is another question, which the Dr. may
pettle at his leisure.

Here is another I present for his special consideration—-How is
it that the devil atid His works are to be destroyed, and yet exist for-
ever after their destruction?

I now take up the third proposition, which is, that Hades, the
Rich Man’s hell is to be destroyed. Upon this subject I must be
very brief, for my time will not allow me to make long dissertations,
I will therefore state it as a fact,not to be sticcessfully resisted, that
this word occurs 75 times in the Greek Scriptures—that is variously
translated, viz: by such words as dedth, pit, grave and hell. Thirty
times it is rendered grave in the common version. If hades means
# place of endless misery, as my opponent thinks, how will he acs
count for the following facts? 1. That the patriarch Jacob speaks
of going down into hades, and finding his beloved son Joseph. Gen.
87: 85. 2. That the patient Job prayed to be hid in hades until
God’s wrath was past, 14:13. But hark ye! if hades is the burning
focus of wrath and that is never to pass, as my opponent contends,
then Job prayed to be eternally damned! The straiigest prayer up-«
on record, if Methodist theology be true. 8. Ezekiel says the un-
circumsized have gone down to hell, with their weapons of war, and
have laid their swords under their heads, 82:27. What! gotieto a6

lake of fire with their bows and atrows; swords and banvets, and the
plumés that dance upon the warrior's head in the day of battle?

The Bible represents vast multitudes as going, or having al-
ready gone to hell. Take as examples the following passages—
Peal. 9: 17, Isa. 5: 18, 14; and 14: 9, But the great question 18,
will they ever be redeemed fromit? I answer yes, and now for the
proof. Hosea 18: 14, is to the point‘‘I will ransom them from
the;power of the grave, (hades, the very word rendered hell in the
rich man’s case,) I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be
thy plagues; O grave, (hell) 1 will be thy destruction.’’ Does not
this fully sustain my third proposition? Should any doubt,I would
tiirn their attention to 1 Cor. 15: 55, where Paul, the only time he
ever used hades, says, ‘‘O grave, hades, hell, as it is cin the margin;
where is thy victory?’’ Now, if even one should be in hades in the
morning of the resurrection, when this triumphant exclamation
shall be sounded throughout the universe, that fact would be an an-
ewer to the mighty question, ‘where is thy victory?’ But there will
be none: for God is impartial, and if he redeems one from hades he
will redeemall.

My fourth proposition is, that Gehenna, rendered hell twelve
times in the New Testament, or the valley of Hinnom, sometimes
called Tophet, or the vallley of slaughter, is to become holy under
the administration of the new Covenant. It is generally admitted,
I believe, that this valley was South of Jerusalem, and Joshua 1o: 8;
confirms this opinion. Jeremiah and Zachariah are my witnesses
in support of this position. We will hear Jeremiah first. He says;
“he whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and all the
fields, unto the brooks of Kidron, unto the corner of the horse-gate
towards the east, shall be holy unto the Lord sit shall not be plucked
up nor thrown down any more forever.” 81: 40.

Zachariah declares that‘‘All the land shall be turned as a plain,
from Geba to Rimmon, South of Jerusalem ;and it shall be lifted up
and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin’s gate, unto the place of
the first gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king’s wine-
presses. And men shall dwell in, and there shall be no more utter
destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.’’ 14: 10, 11.

The ptophets of the Old Testament, and Jesus of the New, rep-
resents Gehenna as a place of destruction. But here we have a clear
prediction that when it becomes holy, there shalt be no more utter des7

struction? How can the doctrine of eternal destruotion of soul and
body, stand before these living words in the holy oracles? It re-
mains for my aged opponent to demonstrate this problem. Pem
haps he will assume the ground that the figurative import of Gehen-
na, is future, endless punishment. When he does so, I shall be pre-
pared to show from both Testaments, that Gehenna figuratively
portrays the temporal calamities of the infidel Jews.

I have proven, as I proposed in this, my first speech, the de-
struction of the devil and his works, and of the Rich Man’s hell; I
also proved the regeneration of the valley; of Hinnam, or as it is
in the Greek of the New Testament, Gehenna.

Lastly, no one can pray or hope for the truth of endless misery.

I now give place to Dr. Pierce, hoping that you will grant him
a patient hearing, and if he can succeed in raising the devil after
his destruction, and protracting his works to all eternity, he will] ac-
complish something which no Christian minister has ever yet done,Dr. Pierce’s Reply.

Respected Auditors:—

I present myself before you under different circumstances from
what I expected ;—and I repeat now, that it was my intention to
give my opponent all that a reasonable man might claim; but I
did not suppose that he would embody in the outset every point un-
der discussion, save one. He may be a Webster or a Calhoun in in-
tellect, and I am therefore willing to give him his own preference.

We are proud to see our children learn five or six studies; but
we all know that they cannot well attend to but one ata time, with
any degree of justice. My adversary ought to have produced first
the proof of the devil’s destruction; but to my surprise, he was, in
a few minutes, away over in Hell!! Still, Ido not complain, tho
it is not the best way to discuss this important matter. But is
there no cunning here? Is there no dissembling? It is not the
candid spirit I was induced to expect from him.

It is known to this community that my adversary has come here
to prove his favorite doctrine of Uvniversalism; but his method as
you see, is not in harmony with the plain, common sense meaning
of the Scriptures. I shall follow suit, and follow him in the same
way. I shall furnish him facts, stern, wndeniable facts, as invulner-
ble as the throne of the Almighty! To these I invite his atten-
tion, aside from all quibbling or prevarication. Up to this time
however, as you well know, he has made cunning his refuge rather
than the strong muscles of Biblical argument.

He has told us that no one could pray for the endless torment
of our fellow mortals, and hence he draws the sweeping conclusion
that such will never be the doom of any of God’s creatures! This
is by no means relevant to the point under discussion. But let us
probe the matter a little farther, and test its validity. Icould not9

pray for my fellow creatures to go to the penitentiary; yet we know
that many, by their sinfulness, oft-times bring themselves to that
dreary prison house. You see here then, at a single glance, that
my opponent’s pretended argument falls at once to the ground.

The other view which I understood him to advance, was that no
one could say he hopes for an endless hell. In reply to this, I will
only remark, that if such a place is necessary for the maintenance
of God’s perfect government, I am glad that there is an eternal hell.

In the commencement of this discussion I stated plainly, that
we must be goverened by the common sense meaning of the Scrip-
tures. This is what I understood Mr. Shehane to accede to. He
has taken much pains to show what common sense is, and gave it
only one meaning. Andhastoldus that to some common sense
teaches Calvinism, to others, Methodism, and yet to others, Univer-
salism! My definition of common sense differs widely from this.
It isthat active monitor within which prompts to right. It is that
peculiar arbiter in man, which is but seldom listened to. It never
seeks ‘‘to lead but to bewilder, and dazzle but to blind.’’ Now Mr.
Shehane may attempt to light up the universe of space like a comet
with its firey tale, but sure am I, that such speculations will flash
for atime, only to be extinguished in the blackness of darkness,
forever |

If any are present who wish to be Universalists, they must be
struck with the wonderful amount of Scripture that has been ad-
duced by my oppoment. But I would have you know, that it is one
thing to quote Scripture, and another thing to prove a doctrine to be
true. It isone thing to advance arguments, and something quite
different to be satisfied with them ourself.

People are lukewarm on the subject of religion; from the peas-
ant to the president, this is the case. Many will quote Scripture,
while at the same time they will flock to hear anything, rather than
the Gospel. If I wanted to establish Methodism at all hazards, I
could bend and bias my mind in sucha way, as to advance argu-
ments which I do not believe. My mindis convinced of the exist-
ence of an eternal hell, nor can I feel or believe otherwise! All are
anxious to learn their destiny beyond the grave! Scripture as well
as reason, convinces me that Iam right. Now why, I enquire,should
a man have an intuitive conviction of these dreadful things, if they
be not true?10

But this is not all. Remove the fear of endless punishment
from the minds of men, and they will live as they list. What is
there to restrain them, to cause them to feel their responsibility to
the great God of heaven? Yea, banish the doctrine of endless ret-
ribution from the minds of men, and we shall soon have a pande-
monium on earth. The signs of the times, the indications of the
age, and the known perversity and waywardness of human nature
proves this. Yes, the impious enquiry would at once echo through-
out the boundless realm of space, ‘‘Who is the lord that we sould
serve him, and what profit shall we have, if we pray unto him???

It has been said, and that truly, that ‘‘straws show which way
the wind blows.’? A short time since I fell in company with an
individual, who told me that he had once been a Methodist, then a
Baptist, and that if he could be convinced that there was no real,
eternal hell, he would not feel responsible for his actions. Univer-
anlism removes the fear of endless punishment, and it is therefore
dangerous in the extreme, and should be rejected.

I object to the proceedings of Mr. Shehane, because he has
failed to give me any whereabouts, as a mariner would callit. He
isnot tangible! Under these circumstances should I unintention-
ally misrepresent Universalism in any of its bearings, my adversary
ought not to complain. Universalists say there is no real bonafide
devil. They say the devil is the evil nature of man! I believe ina
different kind of a devil. There is a real, personal, diabolical BO-
NA FIDE DEVIL!! Norhas Mr. Shehane yet proved his destruc-
tion. Now, if my opponent will define his position, I shall be bet-
ter satisfied. Let him state what he does mean.

So far as my good friend felt authorized to quote from the writ-
ings of John Wesley I must say that I was much surprised! Was
there no trick of dishonesty here? Mr. Wesley, as we well know,de-
fended the doctrine of the eternity of torment, and the endless ex-
istence of the devil; and yet this author is brought up to strength-
en the views of the Universalists! John Wesley revived religion in
fingland, and preached and defended the doetrine of sanctification !
He never supported Universalism! The Lord help my brother, if he
supposes a man cannot use words that are used by Universalists,
without being of that faith!

But Mr. Shehane has quoted from Wesley to show that all will
be saved. Why did he thus go out of hisway! We have1

hot coms heté to’ learn what Wesley taught, but what the
Bible teaches! But if all are to be saved on Wesley’s plan,
we are Universalists whether we will orno! Does my antag-
bnist intend to take the ground that all are to be saved by
the power of God? If he does, I will attend to him. If he does not
define his position, I shall proceedto preach against the insinuat-
ing doctrine of Universalism fully. He knew that we should take up
one point ata time, and yet he has so far deviated from this, that
he has covered nearly the whole ground in his opening speech. He
may atrange his mind in as many directions as he pleases, but his
alleged proof texts have no more to do with Universalism than my
arm has to do with the horns of the moon.

I might read of the valley of Hinnom and assert one thing,
while the prophet might mean something very different! Mr. She-
hane has called my attention to Gen. 8:15, and to the misery threat-
ened Apollyon. He also passed rapidly on to Heb: 2: 14, as his
strongest proof. If yott will go with me to the Gospel by St. Luke,
you will there see that God gave his people power to cast out devils!
But does it follow that Satan will be destroyed? No. These pow-
‘ers were credentials to the Apostles. In this was their excellency.
Christ sent his disciples to preach—they obeyed, and devils were
subject tothem. This only is what is meant by bruising the ser-
pent’s head. The power of the Gospel, as we well know, destroys
the ravages of sin. Jesus evidently so taught.

Now so long as my adversary makes shells, I will; and when he
comes to arguments, I shall. Mr. Shehane says, if I understand
him, that Jesus will accomplish that which he came to do. f ad-
mit that he will in the end accomplish his mission; but Universa-
lism does by no means follow. Christ will accomplish all that the
‘condition of the Gospel will allow.

There is much evil in this world—it will long remain with its
blighting scourge. Univetsalism teaches that God will destroy evil
finally. Why does he not do it now? God has as much power now
as he ever will have. God is as good nowas he éver will be! He
never changes. Our Creator designed, by the gift of his Son, to se-
ure salvation to all believers! The plan of salvation 1s founded
upon this condition. Jesus, in speaking to the Pharisees, cem-
pared the Gospel to a vineyard let out to husbandmen. To them
servants were sent. Some were beaten severely, and others killed.12

Last of all, the owner of the vineyard, said, they Will reverses iy
son; but the husbandmen said, “This is the heir, come let us kill
him, and the inheritatice shall be ours. What therefore shall tHe
Lord of the vineyard do? He will come and destfoy the husband-
men, and will give the vineyard to others.”? Mark 12: 8,9. God
commanded people to believe in and reverence Jesus, but they
would not; they crucified him and heaped tpoit him cruel mockings.
They trampled under their feet the blood of the everlasting coves
nant. } ne

But my friend has told tis that Jesus came to destroy the devil
and his works. This we allow, but his inferences do by ho means
follow. The Sons of Temperaiice are batided together for the dé-
struction of drunkenness, but yet we know it is not destroyed. The
degrading vice prevails to ah alarming extent in our land. No
man but a Universalist can therefore ever believe that Heb. 2: 14,
proclaims the final destruction of Satan. Christ redeenis all be-
lievers from sin, and none others; and in this sense Christ will frus-
tate or destroy the works of the devil.

The force of these terms is somewhat too strong. We must un-
derstand Scripture in accordance with the general tenor of the same.
Mr. Shehane is evidently determined to prove the destruction of
Satan. It does not follow however, that the poor old fellow will be
destroyed, that his life will be taken. If any other text on this
subject cab be pointed out, let my opponent bring it forward; and
let him prove by fair argument that the Bible teaches the doctriné
of Universalism, and he will accomplish something which I greatly
doubt his ability todo. Let him take one argumentat a time, and
proceed to the task. Thisis the correct way to arrive at truth.

In my youth I was raised a Calvinist, but I have long since
found out that many thitigs believed cannot be sustained by the Bi-
ble. We are not always prepared to judge correctly on theological
points; but I believe however that Iam now free from all danger

ous errors. But ‘‘To the law and to the testimony.” .

Christ will destroy the sins of the believer by his spirit—by his
love. But if you will examine the Bible, you will find that Gehen-
na will not be purified from sin atid misery—that its inmates will
continue filthy still. These things will ever continue.

_ But Twill close. Universalism may gain your credence, may
triumph for a time, but in the judgment it will hot stand—it will
be burnt up, though many of its sincere votaries may be saved, yet
“‘so as by fire!”’

I thank the audience for their kind attention.ir. Shehatie’s Second Speéecii.

Gentlemen Moderators:
I shall take up a portion of my time this morning, in reviewing
the arguments (if such they may be cdilled) of Dr. Pierce. He is
father displeased, it seems, with my plait of conducting this contro
versy. This is ndt at all to be wondered at. He don’t like to hear
of the destruction of the Devil arid His works.. Not He. Much bet-
ter would he be pleased if I would admit the existence of an eternal
hell, and that the Devil will live there, after his destruction, to all
eternity! For many reasotis, I cannot adniit such tictionalities.
The Dr. says I ought to have dose tle very thing which I did, viz.
prove the Devil's Destruction. -

, My opponent gives me more credit for low cuhtiihg than I real-
ly deserve. Phrenologically speakiig,mly head is not put up in that
way. Lam entirely willing to let this community judge of my
proofs. It is true, I came here to sustain Universalism ii opposi
sition to Dr. P., arid all on his side of the dark question of eternal
iisery. |
You have already had my ideas, to somie exteit, oft what ig
called common seiise. I have, as yet, heard nothing to induce mé
to change my Opinion.

You perceive that the Dr. falls out with mie for quoting tod
much Scripture. I had much rather he would britig this charge
than to say, as I can of him, ‘He quotes too little.”’. Butif I have
nauseated his stomach already by Scripture quotatiotis, Ithink he
will get dreadfully sick before Iam dotie. He tells us that it is ond
thing to advance arguments, and another to be satisfied that they
are correct. Does he say this from his own experience, of does he
guess at the feelings and motives of others? He would probably do
well to heed the adage—‘ ‘Charity thinketh no evil.”’

The Doctor says he is convinced of an eternal hell—he is also14

glad of it, tiot for hintsolf or family, but for his wicked Heighbota:
What a neighborly old man he is! But although he is convinced in
his own mind, he has given us no proof to convince ours. For hia
conviction is no proof at all. The Oatholic tells us that he is con:
vinced in his own mind ofapurgatory. The Mahometan would tell
us, if he stood before us today, that he is convinced in his own
mind, of three rivers in Paradise, a river of milk, one of wine, and
anothor of horey,ard that there is an infinite number of silver cups
on the banks of those rivers, and when he goes there he has nothing
todo but take hold, and drink to his satisfaction. And Hé might
Add, in the words of Dr. Piette, that he ‘‘cdtild not feel or believe
othérwise.’? Still, that is no proof to tis. We must have sonisthihg
Ktronger thal the prejudices of the nirstiy.

The Doctot thinks that Universilisni, by rentoving the feat of
Shdlesé punishivent is extremely dangétdils to good morals. He
might say, with as much propriety, that the laws of ott? cotliitry,ih-
damuch as they do not itiflict endless paih,are oxttemely ditigerots,
I throw the chatge back on hia own ddétriiis, atid I cah prove it too,
both theoretically and practically. His dbdctritié is, that all the
sins of the vilest in the land, were packed on Christ 1800 years ago,
und punished adequately in his person, long before the sinner was
Korn. Corvitice a man of this, and teach him, as Methodism dobs,
that there is more pleasure in difi than there is in virture, and in
hine cases Gut of ten, were it not for the fear of Human Isws, he
will plungs headlong into all sérts df wickedness, The History of
Methodism will fully bear me out inthis allegation. The sinher
feels like he is ruinitig into debt, arid he intends to take the benefit
of the spiritual batikrupt law, atid come out clear of sin and ptina
ishment too. But this is a fatal mistake. God has so arranged his
laws that piih tiéads of the heels of sin. Is there any danger in
believing, that though hand join in hand, the wicked shall not be
unpunished? That the sinner is recémpersed in the earth! If
this is dangérous, then the Bible is the author of it.

The Doctor says, ‘There is a real, personal diabolical Devil.’’
{ call upon him for his proof. AndI give itas my opihion at the
Outset, that when he attempts to give us the history and pedigree of
the devil, he will be like the Frenchman in the third head. A
French preacher ohce said, ‘‘My friends, I divide this subject into
three heads. Ol the first,I will speak of such things as I know, andi lee RR a Th a

   

15

you know nothing; on the second,I will speak of such things as you
know, and I know nothing; and whenI get to the third, I will
speak of such things as none of us know anything about.’’ So it
will be, I guess, with the Doctor; but as I do notnow wish to an-
ticipate him, I will listen patiently to what he may have to say.

It would seem that my opponent is dull of apprehension.
Hence he speaks of my defining my position, and stating plainly
what Imean. My positions are taken and defined,and I have spok-
en as plainly asIcan. If he cannot understand me, the fault is
not mine. I am pretty well convinced that the congregation under-
stands me.

The Doctor is not pleased with the quotation from Wesley. I
ean't help that. His words please us Universalists very well. We
like to hear of the destruction of the devil and his works, and Wes-
ley, in the quotation made, has certainly taught that. I shall show
my opponent the grounds of our faith by the time I shall have fin-
ished this speech.

My opponent thinks Luke’s gospel explains what is meant in
Heb. 2: 14, by the destruction of Devil. But it so happens that
Luke talks about casting out demons, and this casting out was long
before the death of Christ. It would be very strange that Jesus
should die to accomplish an object which his apostles had already
done, if Dr. Pierce is right. The original word, as all scholars
know, for devils in Luke’s gospel, and in fact, wherever devils in the
plural is found, is not the same as the one rendered devil in Heb.
2: 14, Dr. Pierce is therefore manifestly wrong.

Since I have glanced at a fact in the original, I will make anoth-
er statement which all the doctors upon the earth cannot successful-
ly controvert. It is this: The word rendered destroy, in Heb. 2: 14,

is in other passages, which I could easily mention, translated in our
common yersion,—vanish away, done away, abolish, cease, make void,
etc. Now it devolves on my opponent to show how his bona fide
devil will be in existence to torment some of God's offspring forev-
er, after his Satanic Majesty has ceased, or vanished away, or been
abolished? This is what I suppose Dr. Pierce calls making shells:
well, as bombs are dangerous, I would caution him, unless he wish-
es to be torn all to pieces, to keep his distance. But he wishes to
know why God does not now destroy evil, if he ever intends it?
With as much propriety he might ask, why does not God now bring16

about the resurrection of the dead, if he ever intends to do so. My
answer to all such silly questions, is, that the Governor of the world
takes his own time to accomplish his own purposes.

The Doctor thinks the Sons of Temperance, being bent on the
destruction of drunkenness, and not having done so, is a good argu-
ment that Jesus will fail to destroy the devil! Thisto me, appears
exceedingly weak. The Doctor and myself are both Sons. We
have the will to put down drunkenness, but we lack the power.
Not so with Christ in refference to Satan’s destruction. No, blessed
be God, our Jesus not only has the will, but the power also. For
all power in heaven and in earth is given to him. It is Dr., Paley,
I think, who very forcibly argues, that where there is a will, accom-
panied with sufficient power to effect any purpose, it is the best
reason in the world for hoping and believing that that purpose, if a
good one, will surely be accomplished. What is better than the
final abrogation of all evil, and the salvation of the whole world?
Again, we say, what? Can Dr. Pierce tell us? :

By contending that Christ redeems none from sin, only those
who believe in this life, does not Dr. Pierce send all infants, idiots,
and pagans to his eternal hell, in which he joyfully believes?

Sometimes, it seems, I give my opponent too much Scripture,
and sometimes not quite enough. He is very hard to please. I have
quoted two texts to prove the destruction of the devil. Now the
Doctor wants more, if I have any! , we:

Isay, let him dispose of them, if he can, before I attempt to
quote any more on that point. Indeed, if he willtake them fairly
out of my hands, I will give up that 1am wrong. He floats upon
the surface, he does not dive to the bottom and bring up pearls
of great value. . ,

The Doctor when young, was a Calvinist, now he isan old Ar-
minian. This shows that one change has come over the spirit of
his dreams. And I am pretty certain that he will have to be changed
again, before he can appreciate the noon-tide splendors of the gos-
pel. Now he is so bewildered, that he thinks an eternal hell is bet-
ter for some than salvation for all.. He is like the elder brother in
the parable; he is mad, and don’t want heaven for the whole
family. Does he not need to be born again? I think he does. To
be born from Calvinism into Arminianism, or Methodism, is quite
a different thing from being born into the Universal love of God.Bb abeaa a cad a eT ee ae

  

17

My opponent asserts that Gehenna will ever be polluted with
sin and misery. This pointedly contradicts two of God’s prophets,
whose testimony I advanced in my opening speech. He has inci-
dently referred to the judgment. At the proper time I will show
that the Bible represents judgment as taking place in the earth.

Having reviewed, as fully as my time will permit, the argu-
ments already presented by Dr. Pierce, I now approach my fifth and
grand proposition, which is, ‘‘That all nations, families, or kin-
dreds of the earth shall be blessed with immortal life, in Christ Jesus, the
Son of God.”’

In arraying the testimony to support this position, I will in the
first place notice what I call the negative branch of the evidence.
For example: David says that God ‘‘will not always chide, neither
will he keep his anger foraver.’? Psalms 108:9. The Lord says, ‘‘I
will not contend forever, neither will I be always wroth: for the
spirit should fail before me, and the souls which I have made.”’
Isa. 57: 16. Again: ‘I am merciful saith the Lord, and I will not
keep anger forever.’’ Jeremiah 8:12. Once more: ‘‘The Lord will
not cast off forever; but though he cause grief, yet will he have
compassion according to the multitude of his mercies.’’ Lam. 3:
81, 82. ‘He retaineth not his anger forever, because he delighteth in
mercy.’’ Micah. 7: 18.

Perhaps it may be said, these are Old Testament Scriptures,
can you find any thing in the New that will harmonize with them?
I answer, yes, and now for the proof—‘‘We have had fathers of our
flesh, who corrected us; and we gave them reverence: shall we not
much rather be in subjection unto the father of spirits, and live?
For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure:
but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
Now, no chastening for the present seemeth ta he joyous, but griev-
ious: nevertheless, AFTERWARD it ylieldeth the peaceable fruit of
righteousness, unto them which are exercised thereby.’’ Heb. 12;
9~11, 7
Here we see the design of punishment. It is for the good of the
punished. It is for a few days; not for all eternity; because the
Apostle says, ‘afterwards ;’ but endless punishment could haye no
afterwards, therefore Dr. Pierce is wrong, and the Bible is right.
But here is another proof. Jesus forewarned his disciples to be-
ware of the Pharisees’ doctrine. Matt. 16. All gdmit that the18

Pharisees, the murderers of Christ, believed in endless damnation.
Jesus, by saying beware of their doctrine, has put the seal of his
condemnation upon it. So we discover that Dr. Pierce’s. doctrine,
was condemned in the person of his brother Pharisees, by the Lord
Jesus Christ himself. ;

While on the negative branch of my subject, I submit it as an
incontrovertable truth, that God, Christ, Daniel, and Paul, all lim-
it the greatest punishment known in the Bible by the word till or
until. After Isaiah had seen many of his countrymen descend to
hades, he said, ‘Lord, how long?’ God answered by saying, ‘‘untzl
the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without
man, and the land be utterly desolate,’’ etc., 5th and 6th chapters.

Jesus said, ‘‘Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles,
until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.’’ Luke 21: 24. This
punishment is described as being the greatest that ever was, or ever
shallbe! Matt. 24:21. It was worse than the punishment of the
sin of Sodom. Lamentations 4: 6.

Daniel says—‘‘for the overspreading of abominations he shall]
make it desolate, even until the consummation.’’—9: 27.

Paul says, ‘‘Blindness in partis happened to Israel, until the
fulness of the Gentiles be come in and so all Israel shall be saved.”
Romans 11:25. As this chapter will come up again in its proper
place, I forbear now to offer any remarks.

So much for the negative branch of evidence. Now for the af-
firmative. In presenting this, I shall first lay before you the testi-
mony of holy men, then the testimony of holy angels, and lastly
the testimony of God’s Son, as found in his song, prayers and ser-
mons.

1. The Testimony of holy men, for Peter says, “holy men of
old speak as they were moved on by the Holy Ghost.’’ I begin with
Moses. He says, ‘All the families of the earth’—‘All the nations of
the earth, shall be blessed in Abraham’s seed,’’ which is, according
to the New Testament, the Son of God, Jesus Christ. Gen. 12: 3;
13; 183 26: 4328-14: Gal. 8:16. Haw is. it possible for these
texts to be true, if millions of men and women are to be cursed out
of Christ eternally? Icall upon my aged opponent to show me and
this assembly, how all are to be blessed in Christ if Myriads are to
be plunged into hell to groan in excruciating-agonies to all eterni-
ty! Let him do it, and we will give up the ship of UniversalismPi rte

   

19

But wntil that is done, we shall hold on to the truth as tatight by
Moses. He also says, ‘All nations shall come and worship before
God.’ Rev. 15: 8, 4.

, We will next hear King David, who, after portraying in lively
Colors the sufferings of the Messiah who gave himself 4 ransom for
all, asserts most positively, that ‘All the ends of the world shall res
member and turn unto the Lord! and all the kindredsof the na«
tions shall worship beforé thee. For the Kitgdomis the Lord’s
and he isthe Govetnor among the nations.’”? Pslaims 22: OW Calo
See also Psalnis 86: 9. If this glorious result of the mission, suffers
ings, death aiid resurrection of Christ, depended upon weak and
fallible mien, there might, and in all probability there would be,
® failure; but the teason assigned by the toyal prophet is, that God
ip the Governor among the tations—that he is great, and does won«
dfous things.

To blot out the sitis of the world, and to save with an everlast=
ing salvation the whole race of mankind, is surely wonderful, and
worthy of the Almighty, atid infinitely good God. On the contrary,
to imimortalize sin, if such a thing cowld be done, and to perpetuate
misery forever in hell, would certainly be as bad as all the devils in
the universé could do. Nothing shot of Universal damnation
could be worse.

I next adduce the testimony of Isaiah. “I have swotn by my=
self the word has gone out of my mouth ix righteousness, and shall
hot return, That unto me evety knee shall bow, every tongue shall
sweart Surely shall say, in the Lord have I righteousness and
strength.’’45: 28. St. Paul interprets, or alludes to this language
in this way—‘‘At the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of
things in heaven, and things in eatth, and things under the earth.
And that evety tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to
the glory of God, the Father.’’ Phil. 2:10. When this universal
bowing down, aiid this universal confession of the truth shall take
place, will the language of all intelligent creatures be that of de-
spair or triumph andsalvation? Saint John shall answer—‘‘Every
creature which is in heaven, and on earth, and wider the earth, and
such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heatd I saying,
blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth
upon the throne, and unto the Lamb forever and ever.”’ Rey. 5: 18.

Jeremiah comes next. ‘‘Behold the days come, saith the Lord,20

that I will make a hew covenant with the house of Israel, and with
the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with
their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them
out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although
I was a husband unto them, saith the Lord: But this shall be the
covenant that I will make with the house of Israel: After those
days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and
write it in their hearts; and will be theit God, and they shall be my
people. And they shall teach no mote every man his btother, say-
ing, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of
them to the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their

iniquify, and [ will remember their sin no more.’’ 81: 31-34
From this quotation we see that all the Jews, from the least of

them unto the prealon of them, shall know God, which is as ex-
plained by Christ, to have eternal life—that their iniquity is to be
forgiven, and their sin remembered no more! ‘This is in complete
harmony with Isaiah 45:25. ‘‘In the Lord shall all the seed of Is-
riel be justified and shall glory.’’ This, then, is the sense in which
God is to be their God, and they his people. Paul puts the ques-
tion, ‘‘Is he the God of the Jewsonly? Is he not also of the Gens
tiles??? He answers it by saying, ‘Yes, of the Gentiles also.’ Rom.
8: 29.

Our argument based upon these promises is this—inasmuch as
God is the Savior of all the Jews from the least to the greatest, and
inasmuch as he is also the God of the Gentiles,the conclusion is that
the whole world will finally be save. Thisis our belief. This is
our hope, and aglorious one itis. But when St. Paul says, ‘All
Israel shall be saved;’’ Our opponents say that Israel, in that chap-
ter, méans the true Releeend This objection brings me to examine
as aye as my limits will allow, the 1ith of Romans. And as it is
a good rule of interpretation to substitute the meaning of the word
for the word itself, I will read a few verses in that way, beginning
at the 25th, and ag I come to the word Israel, or Jacob, or to the
pronouns they, their and them, which stands eo Israel, 1, will, im
lieu of them, put believers; and if it makes good sense, my oppo-
nent is right and I am wrong. Now for it. ‘I would not brethren
that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in
your own conceits, that blindness in part hath happened to the be-
lievers, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all thei x amen; Lar -
BL Bid ie a ces Ng ie ERS SS a

  

21

believers shall be saved: As it ts Writte, there shall ¢onis sit of
Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from the bez
lievees; for this is my covenant unto the believers; when I shall take
away the believers’ sins. As cohcernihg the Gospel, the believers are
enemies for your sake; but as touching the election, the believers
are beloved forthe Father’s sake, * * * * ® op ne ye in
timés past have not believed God, yet have nbw obtained mercy
through the unbelief of the believers! Bvet so have those believer's
also ndw not believed, that through your niercy they also may
obtain mercy: For God hath conclitded the beltevers, all ih tinbe-
lief, that they all m&y be damned,” says Orthodoxy—that He
might havé mercy upon all, says the great Apostle to the Gentiles;
As we ste this way of reading the versés does nbt make gobd sehse,
let any one who is so disposed, substitute unbelieving Jews for thé
words where believers have been supplied, and theh all is easy, ev-
erything fair in support of my faith, arid in Opposition tod that of
my opponent. .

As this matter may come up again duriiig the presetit cotitro-
versy, | pass from Jeremiah to John the Baptist, the Harbinger of
Jesus Christ. The Baptist says, ‘‘Behold the Lamb of God, which
taketh away the sin of the world’’—Johh 1:20. ThisI take to be
an allusion to the scapegoat that yearly took away the iniquities of
Israel into the wilderness. It strikes my mind very forcibly, that
when Jesus has succeeded in removing the sins of the world, the
world will be sinless, and consequently holy, saved and happy:
This futher appears from subsequent testimony.

The Baptist also says, ‘‘The Father loveth the Son, and hath
given all things into his hahds.’? John 8:85. What is Jesus to do
with this great gift, will he save all or lose a part?) This question
shall be answered when I come to examine the angelic testimony:

We will now take Peter’s evidence, Acts 8: 21. ‘‘Whom the
heavens must receive until the times of the restitution of all things
which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since
the world began.’’ Is it possible that man’s ingenuity can make
restitution of all things, mean the damnation, the endless woe of
myriads? [honestly think not. Peter also says that Jesus is Lord
of All. Acts 10: 86. And likewise that all the kindreds of the
earth shall be blest in Christ. Show me a man, womah, or child
that is akin to no one, and then I will admit, but not until then—a9 |
that that petsoi has ho intefest i Christ atid 1s Hever to be blessed
in him.

St, John’s evidence comes next. ‘‘We haveseen and do testify;
that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world. Whoso-
ever shall cohfess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him
and he ih God. 1dohh 4: 14, 15. From the testimony of Isainh and
Paul, already exhibited, it is plaih that there is to be a tithe utidet
the govethinerit of the Almighty; when all shall cbtifess that Jesus
is Lord; then sveviding to Joh, God will dwell ih then ahd they
in God, Hetce we aie asstived, that “When all thitigs shall be subs
ued unto him, then shall the Sti himself be subject tinto him
that put all things titider him, that God siay be all iti all.’ I Cor.
15:28. No toom then, in any for the Devil} blessed be God forevs
ermore. eo

That Chiist is the Saviot of the world, is tiled evident ftom the
testimony of the Samaritans, who were cotiverted by his owii preach-
ing. John4!42, Bythe way, let us suppose, for the sake of the
base, that the heaters of Calvin, after listeniig attentively to one of
his sermotis, in which he labors to show that myriads, eveh includ
ing infants,were reprobated atid foreotdaihed to be forever damned;
had cried dut itt the joy of theit sarts} ‘We know that Jesus is in-
fleed the Savior of the world.’’ What would Calvih have thought!
Would he tiot have had them burned for Heresy?

Or to bring the matter a little iiearer home, suppose that whet
my aged opponeiit had vented his spleeh ih a lotig spebch against
Universalism, some of his Methodist brethren had shotited out;
“Glory to God, Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world, Dr: Pierce’s
notions to the contrary notwithstanding.’’ Would not the Dot-
tor have taken them totask, and unless they hati recatited had
them expelled from his church for believing too much? It is more
than probable With me that he would; for he is glad that their
is an eternal hell, and he is much opposed to liberal setitiments. —

Having incidentally noticed some items ih the testimony of
St. Paul, I how proceed to examamine it in a more formal manner.
I begin with Romans 5:18. ‘‘Therefore, as by the offetice of one
judgment came upoh all men to condemhation; even so, by the
righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto justifica-
tion of life. Foras by one man’s disobedience many were madé
inners, 80 by the obediance of one shall many be made righteous.”23

The testimony here, that the free gift, which the 2ist verse of

this chapter says is eterna] life, came upon all men unto justifica-
tion of life, is so explicit, that a long comment ig thought to be un-

necessary. I therefore turn to chapter 8: which declares that the
creature, or as the word is rendered in the next verse, ‘‘The creation
shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption, into the glorious
liberty of the children of God.” Mr. Wesley founded his belief of
brute salvation on this verse. J think however, for my own part,
that it has reference to the hoping, or human creation. At the
same time, I must admit that there is something much more _pleas-
ing in the thought that the whole animal creation shall be redeemed
from corruption, and made perfectly happy in heayen, according to
their various capacities, than that any intelligent being should be a
wretched outcast from God’s dominions forever. The 11th chapter
183th verse says, ‘‘For of him, and through him, and to him, [yes,to
God, not to satan, ] are all things, to whom be glory forever, Amen.
As Paul had been speaking particularly of the Jews and of the Gen-
tiles—of their sins and unbelief, and of their fulness; in a word, of
their salvation, this verse teaches that they all sprang from God,
that they are conducted through time by his Fatherly care,and that
however far they may wander from him, they shall finally return to
him. This is one of the passages upon which Tholuck, the great
German Theologian relies for his faith in Universalism. But this
only in passing.

1 Cor. 15: 22. ‘‘As in Adam all die, even so, in Christ, shall
all be made alive.” Many have been the attempts to slide round
this plain testimony. ‘Every man in his own order,’’ has been
quoted a thousand times, to all of which I reply, grant that there
are to be different orders, as it regards the times of rising from the
dead, they are all alive it Christ when raised; and if in Christ, as
the apostle teaches, there will be none out of him to be unhappy
forever. This will more fully appear when I present the testimony
of Christ on the resurrection state.

Ephesians 1: 9, 10, is 80 much to the point that I cannot pass
overit. ‘‘Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, ac-
cording to his good pleasure, which he hath purpssed in himself:
That in the dispensation of the fullness of times he might gather
together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and
which are on earth: even in him.’’ This also induces me to: exhib-24

it the will of God as found in 1 Tim. 2:8, 4. ‘God our Savior, who
will have all men to be saved,and to come unto the knowledge of the
truth.’? In these two quotations we have not only the will of God
but the mystery of his will, which is, as explained in Eph. 38: 4-6.
That the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, and of the same body, and
partakers of his promises in Christ by the gospel. With regard | to
the nature of that promise, I quote 2 Cor. 1: 20, ‘‘All the promises
of God in him are yea, and in him amen, unto the glory of God.”
This does not look as if the unchangeable Eternal intended to make
a breach of his promise, as has been alleged by some little upstarts
in the great science of man’s redemption.

Col. 1: 19,20. ‘‘For it pleased the Father that in him should
all fullness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of
his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by himI say
whether they be things in earth, or things in heayen.’? Much more
might be quoted from the writings of Paul, but time would fail me
—I therefore turn your attention to

The testimony of angels. By consulting the 10th and 11th chap-
ters of Revolations, we find it declared by an angel, that when the
seventh angel begins to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God
shall be finished, as has been announced to the prophets. The ac-
complishment of this mystery is that the kingdoms of this world be-
come the kingdoms of God and of his Christ. This is quite a differ-
ent result from that at which Dr. Pierce is driving! He thinks the
kingdoms of this world are now partially under devil-government,
but after a while Satan will get full possession of them, and dash
them against the firey rocks of damnation forever.

Angelic testimony, however, is against the Devil and his advo-
cates. See what follows: The angelof the Lord apppeared, and
said of Mary’s Son, ‘‘Thou shalt call hisname Jesus, for he shall
save his people from their sins.’’ Matt. 1: 20,21. Nowa question
of the utmost importance arises; it isthis—How. many belong to
Christ by creation and by gift? Many passages might be intro-
duced bearing directly on this point. A few must suffice. And I
shall admit without any argument, that those who do not possess
the spirit of Christ, are not his incharacter. But God says, ‘All
souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the son ig mine.”
Jesus says ‘‘All things that the Father hath are mine.’’? John 16:
15. ‘‘All mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in29

them.” John 17; 10. He who once said, gather up the fragments
that nothing be lost has also declared, that ‘All that the Father
giveth me shall come to me, and him that cometh to me | will in no
wise cast out, So I came down from heaven, not to do my own
will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father’s
will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should
lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.”’ John
6: 87-89. Here it is fairly implied, that all then raised shall be
saved, This will be more fully'sustained, when I array, in its prop-
er order the testimony of Jesus. 7

From Luke 2: 10, we learn that the angel of the Lord said to
the Judean Shepherds, ‘‘Behold, I bring yau good tidings of great
joy, which shall be to all people!’’ Mark, it, He does not say which
shall be to the elect, or to those wha believe in a trinity of Gods.
O no; but he said which shall be to all people! Now I should like to
see how Dr. Pierce will attempt to prove that all people means only
a part of Adam’s family; and how the roarings of an eternal hell
can be any good news to any intelligent being in God’s Universe.
Let him show this, or admit that the angel told absolutely and pos-
itively a great truth, when he declared that the news of a Savior’s
birth should be good tidings to all people.

Lastly, for the present, I proceed to bring foward the testimony
of the faithful and a true witness, Jesus Chsist. I began with his
song, Rey. 15:4. ‘‘Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify
thy name? forthou only art holy: for all nations shall come and
worship before thee: for thy judgments aremade manifest.’’ Here
we see that God’s judgments, so far from driving people into endless
torment, are designed in the plan of redemption, to bring all nations
to worship and adore the one living, true, and Almighty Being.
We also see that this song harmonizes with the 72 Psalm, in which
it is said that ‘‘All kings shall fall down before him; all nations
shall serve him.’’? From his song, I turn to some of his prayers.

When on the cross, the Savior of the world, in behalf of his
murderers, said: ‘‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what
they do.’ Luke 23: 84. Only a few hours before, as we learn from
the 17th of John, he prayed that the world might believe, yea, that
the world might know that God had sent him. See verses 21, 28,
No know this isto have eternal life, therefere Jesus did, in fact,
pray that the world may have eternal life, That this was the grand26

object of his mission, is clear from what he asserts in John 6: 388.
‘The bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giv-
eth life unto the world.’’ This cannot be animal life, for the world
possessed that before Christ descended from heaven. It is therefore
eternal life.

In another sermon of his, Luke 20: 85-38, he declares that those
who shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resur-
rection from the dead, are equal unto the angels, and are the chil-
dren of God, being the children of the resurrection. Had he stop-
ped here, many might have doubted whether all would be accounted
worthy to be raised from the dead. But he went on to say in this
same discourse, that God is not the God of the dead, but of the liv-
ing, for all live unto him. This agrees precisely with the Apostolic
declaration which we have already noticed, viz: that ‘‘As in Adam
all die, even so, in Christ, shall all be made alive.’’ How well does
this agree with John 12: 24-838. But I must now give way to Dr.
Pierce, to see what he will do with my Bible proofs of Universalism.esi 5 RT a
Sab i igs ta epee ae RCT Ses es
a it Min a ag

Dr. Pierce’s Second Speech..

Respected Auditors:—

It will be remembered that our text is, ‘Tio the law and to the
testimony} if they speak not according to these, it is because there is
ho light inthem.’’ Or, as it is in the original, because there is no
morning inthem. It is one thing to appear thus to speak, and
quite a different thing to doso. To conform to the Bible is the duty
of all Christians in their investigations after truth. It is a respon-
sible work, and is enough to make a modest man tremble while he
attempts to pty into the great storehouse of knowledge for the pearl
of great price. When Moses was about to turn over the chutch of
God to his successors, he carefully recapitulated to them their duty.
The prophet charged them saying, ‘“Hearken unto the law of the
Lord. Ye shall not add to ot take from it.”’

Many have done these things, and have therefore rendered the
law of God of none effect. This I think my opponent has done. He
has at least endeavored to destroy the force of the law by frittering
it away to a mere cipher. It does not follow that God’s will must
be done in’the sense contended for by Mr. Shehane. By his logic
the force of the law is completely destroyed.

But what says Jesus? ‘‘One jot or one tittle shall in no wise
pass from the law till all be fulfilled!” Again: ‘‘Whosoever shall
do God’s will, shall be great in the kingdom of heaven.’’ Now the
tise I intend to make of these passages is this: that if Mr. Shehane
presumes to say that God does not really mean what he says, I shall
not attempt to follow him in his serpentine windings.

He has adduced many texts to prove that all will be saved: but
sf it should be true that these Scriptures were not used to prove
such a doctrine, then all that has been said on this point falls to the
ground, shockingly mangled and shattered, nor can he ever gather
up the fragments !--Sophistty may be used in a variety ef ways 1028

support of a particular doctrine, arid with sonie, this niay pass fo?
argument, but yet after all, the only true way to decide the matter,
is to appeal to ‘the law and to the testimony,’ to the emphatic words
of the Eternal God! But there have been in all ages many false
teachers. In confirmation of which,I now call attention to 2 Peter,
2: 1-2. ‘‘But there-were false prophets also among the people, even
as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring
in damnable hefesiés; even denying the Lord that bought them, and
bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow
their pernicious ways, by reason of whom, the way of truth shall be
evil spokei of.’’ From this we see that Peter anticipated heretics,
and denotinced their infidelity; and we iidy be so allowed. The
same Apostle has told us that ‘‘God is not willing that any should
perish; but that all should return and live.’’ This hé said; not to
make a ‘strong word,’ but that men might be redeemed from error;
These words are beautiful and expressive. They warnof death and
lure to life? Why should we have such language if sll are to be
saved? O° hn.

But there are two classes who are wont to misconstrue tHe Bible,
The learned and the ignorant. And I wish to inform you that many
little fellows of the first class will often seize upon the word of God
with ashow plausibility, while at the same time they ‘wrest it to
their own destruction,’ and to the ruin of others. Forgive me my
hearers when I say, that the unstable are the most ready to believe
in Universalism: Dissipated men, men who never pray ,;who hever
say grace at table, are almost sure to fall in with this doctrine.
This, of itself is enough to condemn it. It administers a false hope
to the wicked and encourages them in the way of sin.

As an illustration of this, I will here state, that sometime ago I
fell in company with a wicked man, who told me that if Universal:
ism did not save him, nothing would! Now that man would doubt-
less cling to that system which presetted to him such a brilliant
but delusive hope. This will at once convince the candid that Uni«
versalism ought to be rejected as being at least of doubtful value.

I will not weary your patierice much this evening. Neither will
Mr. Shehane’s idea about Gehenna pass with me or my superior for
argument. J founda good book the other day in Columbus, in
which I learned that Hinnom’s valley was used as a receptacle for
all filth. Now admitting that Mr. Shehane Has proved that GehennaPs ca Ca AC Nt eee nea

D9
16 to become lioly, whiat stipport dos tihiietsallsm dative thotee
from? It will do it no good. Let my oppdnent prove that there will
be no real eternal Gehenna! Unless he does this he, will accomplish
nothing:

I will now advert to that sublime and beautiful passage foilid in
Jeremiah 81:84. ‘Abd théy shall no mote teach every midi his
brothet, saying know the Lord :for they shall all know hiin, froin the
least of them to the greatest of theni, saith the Lord. For I will
forgive their iniquities, ahd thbit sina I will remember bo more.”?
Now, has not this langtiage a more evangelical meaning than that
hich has been given by my opponent? Stitely he is prone to run
iiito extremes. The prophet expected & tinie wheh Christianity in
triumpli would spread with greater grdiideti# in this World df sin ahd
sorrow.

Bit as Mr. Shehane desigtis a triumph in Eze. $2: 27, I will to.
tice it just here. The prophet alludes to the fall of Babylon, atid
nothing more. [In proof of this Dt. Pierce hete read the most of
Ezekiel 82.] It is a simple narrative only, and designed to portray
the things of time. Mr. Shehaé seeiiia to rely upon thid with uch
colifidence. He says their ihiquities shall be tipon thei# boties,
Poor pickings, one would think!

When mighty warriors have fallen, they have frequently Had
their swords placed under their heads. Thi’, we well kriow is & coni-
mon custom with military men. Hosea 13: 14 has been introduced
to prove the destrtiction of hell! Now it is by passages of this kind,
that the inspired writers speak of and prove a resurrection ! That
men will not sleep the slebp of oblivion, biit that they Will, by the
power of God, be arouséd from tHe dreary sluimbets of thé dilent
tomb | ! .

But I will attend as I proniised, ‘‘To the law atid td the testi-
mony.’? Mr. Shehane does not bélisve iti a real personal devil, and
has not, since he became a Universalist: My opponent believes
Satan td be the spirit of evil, and in his great zeal has not left him
so much as an inch to stand upon, though he is kind enough to take
all the damned to Heaven. But I again repeat, there isa real, per-
sonal, dlabolical, BONA FIDE, DEVIL, and on this point Mr.
Shehane’s queer logic surprised me as much if I should find myself
¥iding upon a rail in the moon!

Christ said to the Jews, ‘ye are of your father the Devil.’ NowBU
how éould they lidve a father if there be Ho petsotial devil? Aud it
there be no personal devil, a wicked man is compared to nothing ev-
ery time you compare him with the devil. I have beencompared to
the devil’s attorney; I can only say, if I am, I get very poor pay.
Then we tutn to the Bible we find proof enough of the exis-
tende of the devil, and that too of the most positive kind. Adam
and Bye were tenipted by the devil.. His flattering Inaguage was,
‘Ye ghall hot surely die.’—‘‘Ye shall become as Gods,. knowing
pood atid evil.”’ This same devil was a liar from the beginning, and
his Lie to Adam ahd Eve is the fitst we have oh record. If you will
turn to the epistle of Paul to the Gorihthiatis, you will perceive that
he expressed fear lest some Of thei shold be led away from the
Gospel by the devil. But why sich fear if there be ho personal
devil? Now let us connect these things together. Jesus was tempt-
ed forty days in the wilderness by that teal, bona fide devil. My
ord had ho evil passions—He knbw no sin, teither was guile found
in his mouth. Universaliste sy that everything evil in man is thé
devil.

Eve was made liable to sin, Christ was not. The devil tried
long, but cotild not influence him by his unholy machinations.
Eve felt the shock of motal death thrill through her youthful bos-
bm as s0oh as she sihnéd! And how sad have beeh the cohsequenc-
es! Paul ih his letter to the Thessalohiatis, evidently compared the
movements of the Pops of Romé to the devil. But why this com-
parison, if his existetice were a phantasm? All that Mr. Shehans
has said on this point, thus far, has only confitmed me in the cor-
tectness of iny vibwé: And I will mSet my friend when the stars
are dim atid powerless, and then plead for the truth of what I here
state. Yes, ‘then shall we know, éven also as we are known.’

If satan thought to blot out virthe from the fair creation of
God, he will be mistaken in his dark ahd impious scheme! Tho
sin has entered the world, yet theré is grace. But how I ask, could
the sword of justice have been turhed away, but by the grace of
God? Are we not told, that ‘‘as by one man sih entered into the
world, and death by sin, so that death passed upon all men unto
tondemnation?’’? According to justice, therefore, all were condemn¢
ed, and so would have remained but for sovereign Grace |

My friend has told us that ‘‘the free gift came upon all men
tinto justification.’’ But the life here spoken of evidently refers tedl

natural or animal life, and nothing more, for we are told in anoth-
er place, that ‘‘in God we live and move, and have our being.” to
the giver of all good are mankind indebted for the numberless
mercies that are showered upon them.

In this sense I understand 1 Cor. 15:22. ‘For asin Adam all
die, even so in Christ, shall all be made alive.’”’ Iwell know that
Universalists cling to this text in support of their doctrine, but it
evidently alludes to something very different. By sin death enter-
ed into the world. Hence we read, ‘‘in Christ shall all be made
alive,’’ 1. e., be raised up to natural life. Daniel says. ‘‘Many that
sleeh in the dust shall awake, some to everlasting life, and others
to everlasting shame and contempt,’’ 12: 1-8. With these solemn
facts sounding in the ears of my ardent opponent, how can he plead
for Universal Salvation! It is dangerous thus to teach.

I will now give Mr. Shehane something further for his consid-
eration. ‘‘Woe unto thee, Chorazin, woe unto thee, Bethsaida, for
if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre
and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ash-
es. But I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Si-
don at the day of Judgement than for youl’? Matt. 11: 21, 22.
Now, if Universalism be true it may be said that there will be no
difference in the judgment, for according to that scheme all will
stand justified.

But again: Does not Jesus say that some shall be beaten with
few stripes, and some with many; and this is just what we believe!
But this is not all; on the theory of Universalism, it is impossible
to reconcile the fate of Judas with the declarations of Christ. Of
the traitor it was said, that ‘‘it would have been good for him if he
had never been born.’’ Now if he was annihilated, it would not be
good that he had not been. I would rather be in jeopardy than be
annihilated. But if we are to believe Universalist, Judas went to
heaven soon after his rope broke! and became and heir of eternal
life in heaven!

Mr. Shehane was pleased to quote John 6: 80, in which Jesus
says he will lose none! But does not my friend know that Judas
was said to be lost! that he was called the son of perdition? Again
we read, ‘‘have I not chosen you twelve, and one of you isa devil!”’
The Psalmist had long foretold the fate of Judas. And when the
election was held by the Apostles, it was said ‘‘that he might go toad

$2

his own place,’ which was an eternal hell! Now I will admit that
Judas probably though that Christ would elude the malice of his
enemies, though betrayed, and that he the traitor would go off with
the money.

Now many of you know how Universalists attempt to destroy
the force of all this, and many may smile at the seeming Universa-
list triumph! But for all worlds I would not believe it! If Uni
versalism is true, Judas is to be saved, and yet we readthat he wa
lost.

I will advert now tosomeof my opponent’s assertions. He
says there are some inaccuracies in the common version of the Bi-
ble, hence he comes here armed with a Greek Testament? But his
followers are in a bad box, if they have to come to him every time
they wish to know what the Scriptures teach! They might as well
be under the Pape at once, I admit that a Greek scholar may find
new ideas which he may not see in the English version, but yet in
the main they harmonize, And whenever you find a man who can-
not get along without his Greek, you may. rest assured that there is
something wrong |

My adversary has baited his hooks and thrown them out, and
seems to expect me to bite them; but this I am not going to do, in-
asmuch as his worms are tolean! [Laughter,] He also attempted
to make capital out of an alleged expression of mine. I did not
say that Christ would perform that which he came to do, but that
his mission will be accomplished on the conditions implied therein.
If I did, it was a lipsus linguae,

The Savior offers salvation to all. Huis words are, ‘‘He that be-
hheveth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not
shall be damned!’’ These are the conditions, and if we comply
with them we may be saved, and not without. Again: He has
said, ‘‘If ye die in your sins, where Lam ye cannot come.’’ The
wrath of God abideth onthem! Christ is the condemnation of
sinners by the light of the Gospel. Men will not walk in light.
They love darkness rather than light, and oft-times bring an them-
selves swift destruction. In the natural world men may fall on
rattlesnakes, and may be bitten by them, because they ought to
have seen them.

But I must remind you of the fact, that Universalism is old
baptized Calvinism. It is ultra Calvinism with the dropsy. Ittells you that tle man who robs your smokehouse of bacon is just as
sure of heaven, in the end, as the greatest saint! Isthis the reli-
gion of the Bible?

My ardent friend has told us a great deal about the loveof God.
I contend that anger is an attribute of God, as well as love. That
it will exist as long as the other attributes of Deity! Destroy one
and you destroy the other. Let us attend to one thing at a time.
Mr. Shehane quotes too much Scripture, and speaks too rapidly.
Let him prove that one of the prophets was a Universatist, and that
will do; if one was, all-were. There is no use in rambling thru the
Bible. Let him reason more, and I willattend to him. He has
with a view to rouse our sympathies, told us that he has five chil-
dren!, and that he could not scoop out a pit, and fill it up with fire
and brimstone to burn any of them in, and wishes to know if you
could! I have not asked him to do anything of the kind! I have a,
wife and eight children, and would not harm a hair on their heads,
yet there may be awful punishments for them, for there is a real
eternal death!

Our friend has also told us that he is clear of ever haying. been
a Methodist preacher. Will he informus to-morrow what he has
been! For my part, I could not see why he brought up the articles
of the Methodist Discipline unless it were to endeavor to render that
evangelical denomination rediculous. He also speaks much of

original sin, as taught therein. Butthe doctrine of original sin,
upon which he so fluently comments, and objects, forms no part of
Universalism. The soul and body in the resurrection will be
united. I shall not get Brother Robinson’s body,but will get mine.
Each and every one will get its own,and will retain its identity. But
the resurrection as taught by Mr. Shehane, will be a strange affair.
We shall all be anew and strange race of beings. Now [ think,
that when an argument is strained so as to make my friend run to
the Methodist Discipline for shelter, it must be bad off!—and at
best can only be said to live at a ‘‘poor dying rate!”’

Our creed teaches us that we are justified by the merits of
Christ—by faith. Let the gentleman tell us how we are justified by
faith? He may quote as much as he pleases, but his capacious
plan derives no support from that eminent man ofGod. It may be
that Paul wished to check Antimonianism in his day but that he
ever taught Universalism has not yet been shown. If a man_ be-
lieves in Jesus, he is as much bound to walk worthy as though he
did not thus believe. To-morrow J} shall prove the doctrine of ay
eternal hell, or come yery near it, ,lr. Shehane’s Third Speech.

Gentlemen Moderators:

Dr. Pierce, in his last speech, has introduced more than twenty
items, some of much importance, and others of little, or no conse-
quence. It is my intention to leave nothing unturned that has any
bearing on the all absorbing question under consideration, which is
that all men shall finally be blessed in Christ, according to the Un-
versalist faith and hope, or, if Dr. Pierce is right that myriads are
to be eternally lost.

He has quoted from Peter’s 2nd epistle, to show that the Uni-
versalists are heretics, who wrest the Scriptures to their own con-
demnation, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. This pas-
sage cannot refer to Universalists, because the back-sliders of whom
Peter speaks ‘‘denied the Lord who bought them.’’ We do not de-
ny Jesus, but the complaint of our opposers is, that we confess him
too much—we confess him to be the Savior of the world the light
of the same, and the heir of everything. Those ancient heretics,
with soft words, made merchandise of their hearers. Who is it that
suits this description in our day? Who is it that whines about the
perishing heathen, sends round the hat and begs for money, or
makes merchandise of people easily gulled? J leave it ta my audi-
ence to say whether it is the orthodox priest, dressed in his black
cloth, with a gold chain about his neck, or the poor Universalist
preacher? By their decision on this point I will either stand or
fall.

I must make a few passing remarks on the word perish; for the
Poctor seems to take it for granted that it certainly does mean end-
less misery. But this isa grand mistake, as the following texts
abundantly prove. ‘‘The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it
to heart.’ Isaiah 57: 1. Does this mean that the righteous shall85
Bo ihto an btefnal hell, and ho minh cates for it, not even Dr.
Pierce! Surely not. Again: ‘The good man is perished out of the
earth.” Mi. 7? 2.

That is, according to my opponent’s definition of the word ‘per«
ish,’ the good man is gone to hell'fire forever! !—Once more: “They
also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.” 1 Cor. 15: 18.
Verily, if ‘perish’ means endless petdition, and if those who fall
asleep in Christ perish, then we wotld be better off perhaps not to
be in him!

The Doctor says there ate two classes who misconstrue the Bi=
ble—the ighorant and the learned. If it would not insult him, I
would like to know to which one of these classes he professes to be-
long. For my own patt, I will take and occupy, as best I may, a
middle grouhd, that is, I shall not profess to be very learned nor
Very ignorant, but something between the two. And God knows, if
{ miscobstrue his word, I do not design it. He says by Moses, that
in the morning of creation all that he had made was good, not only
good, but very good. Well, I believe it With all my heart. And
ice: I conclude, upon this datum, that there was no devil, no hell,
or sin in the universe, whless it be proper to say a good devil and a
good hell! He also says by John, ‘‘Behold, I make all things new.”
Then they will be as they were at the beginning, atid consequently
there will be nothing sinful in the vast empire of the Almighty.
How grand, how God+like, how consoling to the true Christian’s
heart, is this blessed consumation! And O, how the poor, pitiful,
insignificant, paganized notion of immortal sin dwindles imto a
bubble of contempt when contrasted with Universalism. 4

The Dr. asserts that prayerless people are apt to fall into Un
versalism, atid therefore it ought to be rejected. But see here.
There are many more in this age and country, who profess to believe
in the flames of ait endless hell, and who also neglect prayer, than
there are Universalists} and if the neglect of prayer militates
against any doctrine, it bears with greater weight against self-styl-
ed orthodoxy, than it does against universal salvation. But the
Universalists are not a prayerless people, though they do not, like
the ancient Pharisee, make a great parade about it. What is pray-
er? It is the sincere desire of the heart, whether untttered or ex
pressed in ‘an audible voice. All true Universalists devoutly desire
the salvation of the world, and héncé they pray for that glorious86

event. In the estimation of my opponent the old Pharisees were &@
very piotis people; for they prayed frequently at the corners of the
streets, that they might be seen of men. However, Jesus denounce
ed them as 2 set of hypocrites, and doomed them to the punishment
of Gehenna, a limited punishment, as I shall show directly. Prayer,
when offered in a proper spirit, and from right motives, is certainly
our duty; but within itself it is no proof of goodness, honesty, or
sincerity. There ate othet questions to be cohsidered, stich as these
—does the praying man administer according to his abilities, to the
necessities of the poor? Does he enlightens the erring, feed the
htingry, and clothe the naked? If he does not, I would not give a
fig for his prayers; sighs, sobs, and groans.

The Doctor calls on me to prove the non-existeiice of an eternal
heil, and he asserts tliat Gehetina denotes misery forever in the ime
mortal state: I am dot logically bound to prove a hegative. It is
his business to prove his assertions if he can. It is mine to show
that the punishment of Gehenna is limited—that it portrays the
temporal calainities of the jewish nation. In proof of this I read
from Matt. 28: 91, to the end.

“33. Yo serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escapé
the damnation of hell?

“34. Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets and wisé
men, and scribes; atid some of them ye shall kill and crucify, and
some of them shall ye scourge in your synagouges, and persecute
them from city to city: ,

“35. That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed
upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel, unto the blood of
Zacharias, son of of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple
and the altar. , :

7 “86, Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon
this generation.

i... O J erusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets,
and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have
gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens
under her wings, and ye would not. |

‘38. Behold, your house is left unto you desolate,

“839, For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till
ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.’’

Upon this, I will just remark, that the word rendered hell inSf

the 88rd Verse, is; in Gresk; Gehenita; and that inasmitch as the 89th
Verse says, ‘‘Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Bless:
ek is he that cometh in the name of the Lord,’’ the whole affair is
limited by the word till: for this is utidoubtedly a word of limita?
tion: My belief is that the Jews will say, blessed is he that cometh
in the name of the Lord, when ‘ There shall come out of Zion the
Deliverer, and shall turn away tingodlitiess from Jacob.’? And wher
all Israel shall be saved. Rom. 11: 26.

_ As a further proof of this positidn; 1 puote froit the 7th chapter
of Jeremiah, particularly from the 29th verse to the end— :

‘29. Cut off thy hair, O Jerusalem, and cast it away, and tak
up a lamentatict on high places: for the Lord hath rejected and
forsaken the generation of his wrath.

‘80, For the children of Judah have done evil in my sight;
saith the Lord: They have set their sbontihations if the house
which is called by name, to polute it. |

“81, And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is
in the valley of the Son of Hinnont, to burn their sons and theif
daughters in the fire; which I commanded them hot, neither came
it into my heart. seit wel

“39. Therefore behold, the days come, saiththe Lord, that it
shall no more be called Tophet, nor the valley of the son of Htn~
bom, but the valley of Slaughter; for they shall bury in Tophet till
there is no place. a si

“83. And the carcasses of this people shall be meat for the
fowls of the heaven, and for the beasts of the earth ;—and none shall
fray them away.

‘84. Then will I cause to cease from the cities of Judah, and
from the streets of Jerusalem, the voice of mirth, ahd the voice of
gladness, the voice of the bride-groom and the voice of the bride: fot
the land shall be desolate.’’ |

It is admitted on all hands, among the learned, that the valley
of the sons of Hinnom, inthe Old Testament; is the same as the
Gehenna of the New. I know that some contend that the figurative
import of this valley is future punishment in the immortal state;
but that is precisely what no mari can prove, I think I have already
shown, as well as I remember, from the 18th and 19th chapters of
Jeremiah that this valley figurately denotes the temporal calamities
of the Jewish nation. I+ must be plain to anyone who will atten-Bs

tively read those chapters. Of thid thet istho doubt! there cdi bé
atts Doctor thinks; that as Christ said to ihe infidel Jews, ‘‘Yeé
ate of your father, the devil” that he is certaitily a personal being,
fallen angel, etc., who tempted old Mother Eve, and our Lord J es
tis himself. This dfgument is by ho ieans conclusive. Indeed, it
is a perfect fallaty. Abcording to this plah of construing the Bible
We cin easily prove that the thundér is a persohal being, a fallen
angel, besatisé Chiist ciilled two uf his Apostles, “the sons of thuh-
der.’’? Mark 8: 17. : |

We cat lsd prove that Wratit js a petadhal beitig, a fallen an:
pel, becatise Patl says, ‘“We were by hatiite, or as Clarke has it, in
teality the childtet of wath, ever as others. ;’ Eph. 2¢ 8. Chil«
dren of wrath, righteoustiess, and of wisdom, aiid mati other simil:
tir phrases which might be introduced, did time ahd space permit;
surely do hot prove that wrath, righteoustiess and wisdom are per?
sorial beings. Nor does the 8th chapter of John, from which thé
Doctor quotes, prove the personal existence of the Devili And evel
if it did, that would do my opponeht ho good: for I have proved
that the devil is to be destroyed, let him be personal or what not:
I appreheiid that the 8th of John, wheh ebtrectly titiderstood, sim:
ply teaches that the wicked Jews were, accordidg to the flesh, the
seed of Abraham, (see verses 87, 56,) ahd that they followed out
their evil propensities. But to say that thé Devil is a literal being;
and that those jews were literally his sok8, involves consequences
shocking to hima nature, incotisistent withih themselves, absurd
is the Afab tales, disgusting to cominbh setise, and dishonorable
exceeditiply both to man and his Maker.

With regatd to temptation, I will just say, as I pass on, that
Jesus was tempted i all points as we are, yet without sin. Heb. 4:
15. How ate we tempted? By apreat devil having seven heads
and ten hors? No. “But every mat is tempted when he is drawh
away of his owh list, ahd enticed. Then, when lust hath concelv?
ed, it bringeth forth sin, ahd: sih, whet it is finished, brihgeth forth
death.” Jas. 1: 14,15. And Paul says Death, the last enemy,
Bhall be destroyed. So there will be at ehd of the matter. Notice
the words just cited, ‘sin, when it is fihished.”? My opponent, how?
ever, thinks that sin neVer will be finished. Ono: jf his theology
be true; sin is to be immortatized and perpetuated throvghotit eterag

nity. Let us rejoice and exult in the hope that sin will finally be
finished—will be done away forever. For Daniel says of Christ that
‘He shall make an end of sins, bring in everlasting righteousness.
9: 20. This is infinitely better, both for God and man, than that
sin shall reign in hell world without end.
oe The interpretatoin given by my aged opposer, of 1 Cor. 15: 22.
‘As in Adam all die, even so, in Christ, shall all be made alive,’’ is
so unnatural and absurd, that it can hardly be said to merit even a
passing notice. He thinks that the life there brought to view is
animal or natural life! Wonderful indeed. Is animal or natural
life incorruptible? No. But the connection clearly shows that it
is immortal, or incorruptible life. The following in proof of
what is here alledged. ‘‘It, or the body, is sown in corruption, it
is raised in incorruption. If is sown in dishonor, it is raised in
glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a
natural body, it is raised 9 spiritual body;’’ that is, according to
Dr. Pierce, the spiritual body isto be an animal or natural body.
If this is not reducing his position to an absurdity, I suppose the
English language incapable of proving anything, My congrega-
tion, judge for yourselves. Isit the high aspirations of your souls,
the full fruition of your hopes, simply to have animal life restored
to you in the resurrection state? J know it is not; I know also that
the Doctor’s position is false,

But he refers to the 12th chapter of Daniel to support his
views, and he takes it for granted that chapter refers to scenes in
the future state. In this he is mistaken, as I shall now show from
Christ himself. Let any one carefully compare this chapter with
what Jesus says in the 24th of Matt., and the following remarkable
eoincidencies will at once appear. 1. Daniel speaks of a time of
trouble, such as never was since there wasa nation, even to that
game time. So does Christ,Matt. 24:21. 2. At this time of trouble
the saints or the elect were to be delivered. And so also does
Christ teach, when he declares that the elect should escape the aw-
ful calamities which befel the unbelieving Jews. 8. Both Daniel
and Christ speak of the time of the end of that age. 4. Both speak
of scattering, or destroying the power of the once holy people. 6.
Both mention the abmination of dessolation. ~ 6. Daniel says,
when “‘He shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy

peuple, all these things shall she fizished.” Christ says, ‘‘This gen-dO

erations shall not pass till all these things be accomplished.”

[In confirmation of these coincidences, Mr. Shehane here read
from the 14th to the 24th verse, which, for the sake of brevity the
publisher omits, as he has some of Dr. Pierce’s long readings; but
as he gives the chapter referred to, he hopes to give general satis-
faction. | a

It is urged by Dr. Peirce that as everlasting life is contrasted
with everlasting shame and contempt, the shame and contempt
must be in the other world, and must necessarily be eternal. This
is plausible to many minds, especially such as are not proficient in
Biblical criticism. But if this passage certainly teaches the doom
of the wicked after a literal resurrection from the dead, why was it
doubted by such giant intellects as Doctors Jahn and <A. Clarke?
The New Testament represents believers as having passed from
death to everlasting life, and yet those believers are spoken of as
living upon the earth. See in proof of this, John 3: 86; 5: 84; 1
John, 5; 18. NowI should hke to know why the everlasting
shame and contempt could not be in this world, seeing that the
faithful are in possession of everlasting or eternal life. That an ev-
erlasting reproach and perpetual shame were to overtake the unbe-
heving and idolatrous Jews, is clearly taught in Jeremiah 28: 40.
Dr. Pierce, with the same propriety, might insist that the land of
Canaan and the Israelites must be carried into the future state,that
they may enjay this land for ‘‘an everlasting possession.’’ The
fact is, the words everlasting, eternal, and forever, are so frequent-
ly applied to temporal affairs, that it isdown right folly for any
one to contend that they must of necessity point out scenes to be
transacted in eternity. But as the subject may come up again dur-
ing this discussion, I will pass on to something else,

My attention has been called to the Judgment. and Matt. 11:
21, 22, has been quoted to prove a judgment after death inthe im-
mortal state of existence. I propose to examine this subject as
thoroughly as my limits will allow. The point of dispute seems to
be involved in the words, ‘‘It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and
Sidon, in the day of judgment, than for you.’”? The Doctor’s argu-
ment is, that aa Tyre and Sidon were both dead when this was spok-
en, and as the Savior said it shall be more tolerable, they must be
judged after death. That Tyre and Sidon were dead at that time is
by no means clear; for we read, ‘that a great multitude of people,41

out of all Judea, and Jerusalem, and from the sea coast of Tyre and
Sidon, came to hear Jesus, and to be healed of their diseases.’’ Luke
6: 17.—This fact then overthrows one part of his argument. There
is another fact in Matt. 10: 15, and 11: 24, at war with the notion
of judgment in the spirit world: that fact is, that Jesus Save.) Set
shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judg.
ment, than for thee.’’ Is the land to be judged in the future world?
I think not; but it has been judged in this world, and hence judg-
ment takes place in the earth. This matter I intend to make as
clear as a sunbeam beforeI am done with it. The judgment upon
ancient Tyre reduced it to ashes, upon the earth; and that on Sidon
resulted in pestilence, and blood in her streets. See Eze. 28: 18—
23. All this was surely temporal. It may however be objected
that this language is very emphatic, when it is declared to be at the
day of judgment. It is more so in appearance than in reality; for
the original does not say the day of judgment, nor does it say the
judgment. It is simply, as every scholar admits, hemera, a day,
and kriseoos, judgment; the article is not prefixed in either case, in
the passage under consideration. This is another fact that great-
ly weakens the source of the Doctor’s position.

These things promised,? I now assert that the Bible teaches
judgment in the earth. Many texts might be adduced in support
of this, but I will introduce only a few. ‘‘Verily, he isa God that
judgeth in the earth.’’? Psal.58: 11. ‘Iam the Lord which exer-
cise judgment in the earth,” Jeremiah 9: 24. ‘‘A king shall reign
and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.’’
Jer. 28:5. As further evidence that judgment takes place in time,
I here introduce the testimony of the prophet Daniel, ce. 7—

“OQ JT beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient
of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of
his head like the the pure wool; his throne was like the fiery flame,
and his wheels as burning fire.

“10. A fiery streain issued and came forth from before him;
thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times
ten’ thousand stood before him; the judgment was set, and the books
were opened.

“11. J beheld then because of the voice of the great words
which the horn spake; I beheld even till the beast was slain, and hig
body destroyed, and given ta the burning flame,42. As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dom-
inion taken away; yet their lives were prolonged for a season and
time.

‘43. JT saw in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son
of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of
days, and they brought him near before him.

“14, And there was given him dominion and glory, and a
kingdom, that all people, nations and languages, should serve him:
his dominion was an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass
away, and his kingdom, that which shall not be destroyed.”’

From this quotation we see that the judgment was set, the
books opened, etc.; we also discover that the lives of the beasts or
sea-monsters were prolonged for a season and a time! which shows
conclusively that judgment here brought to view is not after the end
of time, consequently not in eternity. There is another thing of
nuch importance to be taken into this account. It is this: The
Son of God is here represented as receiving a kingdom. This can-
not refer to the resurrection state, because Christ, instead of receiv-
ing a kingdom, at that period, gives his kingdom up to God. 1
Cor. 15:24. ‘‘Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered
the kingdom to God, even the Father.”’

To corroborate this view, I here bring foward the testimony of
Revelation, 19 chapter.

| We omit giving the long quotation here, and ask the reader to
turn to Rev. 19: and read the entire chapter. Enprror. |

From this description of the judgment we see that Jesus treads
the wine press which was in the land of Judea. Matt. 88: 21, and
on. We see also that the fowls of heaven were filled with the. flesh
of men and horses. Can my opponent show that there is to be any
horse flesh in the immortal state? If he cannot, he never will be
able to get people of good common sense to believe in his woeful no-
tions of the final judgment day. He is wont to insinuate that lam
full of sophistry, subterfuge and twistification. I am perfectly wil-
ling, however, to let the candid judge who is the better up to tiist-
ing or winding, he or I.

Isaiah says of the Messiah, that ‘He shall not fail nor be discour-
aged till he have set judgment Q@¥"in ihe earth!’ 12:3. This agree
exactly with what Jesus says himself.—John 7: 89:12: 81. And een
with what Peter says, 1 Eph. 4:5, 17. He declared 1800 years ago43

that the Lord was ready to judge the quick and the dead, that the
time had come when judgment must begin in the house of God. We
morever learn: from 2 Tim. 5: 1, that Jesus was to judge the quick
and dead at his appearing, and his kingdom. And we further learn
that this appearing and his kingdom took place in the lifetime of
some of those to whom he preached. Matt. 16: 27, 28. But as the
coming of Christ will be harped on when the Dr. gets on the 25th of
Matt., I will say no more on that point just now.

My attention has been directed to the case of Judas, and it is
argued that inasmuch as our Lord said it would have been good for
that man if he had never been born,the traitor is therefore lost in
an eternal hell. If this argument is good for anything,then the pa-
tient Job and weeping Jeremiah are also gone to an eternal hell.
For we have language as strong, in reference to them, as that used
by Jesus in reference to Judas. In proof of this see Jer. 20: 14-18:
Job 8rd. [Mr. Shehane here read an extract from Whittemore’s
Guide, which for brevity the publishers omit.] Judas was a Jew,
his name, if nothing else, proves that; he was one of the fallen, for
he fell by transgression; he was cast away, but as I have already
proved that the fallen are to be raised again, and those that are cast
away are to be received alive from the dead, I contend in the words
‘of the great Methodist commentator, Dr. A. Clarke, that there 1s no
positive evidence of the final damnation of Judas in the sacred text.’
See his comments at the end of Acts, first chapter. I will just ob-
serve in passing, that if Judas was eternally damned, because Jesus
called him a devil, then Simon Peter is lost also for Jesus called
him Satan. Strange that Dr. P. should be catching at straws and
straining at gnats. But we know the old adage, ‘a drowning man
will catch at straws.’

My opponent says, the reason why he did not bite at my baite
was because my worms, were too poor. Very well, I throw outa sil-
ver hook this morning, baited with the fat things mentioned in the
25th of Isaiah, and if the Dr. don’t look sharp, the first thing he
knows I shall have it into his gills, and shall bring him safe to land,
his flouncings and flounderings to the contrary notwithstanding, as
the lawyers sometimessays. The Dr. has quoted Mark 16:16, ‘he
that believeth not shall be damned,’ and seems to be much grati-
fied because he has found, as he supposes a strong passage against
Universalism, and in favor of his beloved Partialism. But this text44

does not prove punishment beyond the confines of time, for thi
word here translated ‘shall be damned,’ is applied to Christ himself,
three times at least in his own blessed Gospel, and also to the wo-
man takéh in adultry, and who was told to go and sin no more. See
Matt: 20: 18; 27: 8! Mark 14: 64: John 8: 10-12; in these passages
the Common version says, condemned, but in the Greek the word 18
katakino, the very word rehdeied ‘shall be damned,’ ih Mark 16: 16.
No scholar will dispute this. When Jesus asked tHe woman if any
man had condemned her, did he mean to say, hath no man put you
into an eternal hell! Certainly not. The word will hot bear that
construction. reer’

But the Dr. itivites my attention to John 8: 21, ‘Ye shall die in
your sins; whither I go, ye cannot come,’ If the phrase ‘whither I
gO ye Cdhnot conte,’ will prove that the unbelieving Jews are to be
eternally lost, ther the same argument will work the eternal undo-
ing of the believers too, For Christ said to his disciples, as he did
to thé Jews, ‘whither T go ye cannot come.’ John 18: 88. Alas,
what will become of self-styled orthodoxy? It is now bleeding at
every pore, for its strongholds are broken down, its walls are de=
molished.

Dr. Pierce says Universalisni is old Calvanism with the dropsy.
My ansWet to this is, that his hap-hazard system is uncértainty,
gone té seed, He is manfully afraid of predestination, although Pail
who nevér said Hell-fire, declares that ‘“we have obtained an inheri-
tance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who work-
eth all thing according to His own will.” That will is, that all men
shotild bé saved.—Eph. t: 10. There is no more danger in the doc-
trine of predestinatibn, when correctly understood, than there is in
any other part of Jehovah’s inimitable plans. He has predestined
our death, and our fesutréction also, and we can no more prevent
either than we can the rising and setting of the sun. Again, I say
there is no harm in predestination.

The strangest thing in the history and
versy, 1s the fact that Lovick Pierce, D.D., asserts that anger is one
of God’s attributes? If 0, it is a very short attribute, for David
says, “His anger ehduréth bit 4 moment.’—Ps. 80:5. But perhaps
a Dr. of Divinity can, by some theological legerdemain, stretch a

Moment into endless dtiration: Let him try it, and we shall see how
he succeeds.

progress of this contro-45
| The Dr. is dick and tired of my Scripture quotations. He calle
for reason. Well, I willendeavor to please him in that line. And
I will say with Pope, at the beginning—

‘Of thing's above and things below,
How can we reason, but from what we know.”’

I am wont to reason in this Wway—God could save all, and would
hot, or he would save all and could not; or, which is infillitely bet-
ter, He can and will save all. To say he would, btit could not, im-
plies a lack of power. To say that he could, but would sot, argues
a defect in his will. But his will and power have no deficiency hence
the conclusion that he can and will finally save the whole human
race. Amen.

Here I will suppose a case. Suppose that God, before he put
Adam into the garden of Hdeii, had called him into belhg oh some
other planet, atid consulting his will oii the terms and final result
of his existerice. Suppose His Grédtot had said to him, ‘Adam
Tam going to put you ot the edtth,and I will give you a lovely come
panion; your family will ultimately increase to many teh thousand
millions, but I have decréed that the majority of then shall be fore
ever damned: are you willitig to exist oi these terms?’ I know not
What Adami would have said, but I khow what I should say if
the same propbsitibn was made to me. I would sty, O Lord, raths
er than exist on stich terms, throw me back into my original nonen-
tity. Suppose God had said, oi the Atminian plan, you all may be
saved, or you may be lost, but your chatice of being lost is 8 to 10:
will you exist? Adam would have said, in my opinioh, ‘Let me
not live on that uncertain scheme of galvation.” But suppose
again that God had said,I Have cotistituted you,so that you and your
race will have much pain, distress, atid atixiety in 4 thousatid ways,
and finally you niust go down to the dust of death; bit in my own
time I will raise you from the dead, ahd clothe you atid your whole
family with the unfading bloom of immortality. Will you exist on
this plan? What would have pleased Adam then pleases me now,
and I am not willing to barter the jewels of heaven, the diadems of
glory, for the hot embers ahd cinders of hell and damnation. Now
let the Dr. take hold of my arguments and overthrow them if he can

He wishes to know how we are justified. His creed says by faith
only. But that is not so, for we read of justification by blood, by
works, by grace, etc., and we are told by Paul that Christ died ‘for46)

our justification.’ And we ate also told, as already noticéd, that
the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. Here is
a justification worth something but the Methodists profess justifica-
tion and sanctification to-day, and according to their views they
may be screaming in an endless hell to-morrow. Such justification
dnd sanctification are hardly worth having, and yet they are thought
by some to be much better than Universalism.

The Dr. says he will prove an endless hell after a while, or come
very near it? But Il wish all to remember that a miss 1s as good as
amile: And he is just as certain to miss a8 he lets off his bomb
shell,Dr. Pierce’s Third Speech.
Respected Auditors:—

My zealous friend complains that I have changed my ground,
It is known to you all that I shut him up to the congregation on the
plain, common-sense meaning of the Bible. Upon this platform I
commenced to build up my arguments in the beginning, and upon
it I now stand, nor do I intend to be drawn away from it by the sub
terfuges of sophistry. Iam more than ever convinced, that the
true fort of Umiversalism is in wresting the unequivocal word of
sod. In first determining what the Bible ought to teach, and then
by various twistifications, attempt to bend it as inclination
prompts. My opponent applies the awful denunciations of the Bi-
ble to the things of time, for the use of Universalism, to prevent its
bleeding to death.

He has also attempted to sustain his drooping system by intro-
ducing a syllogism, which runs thus: God can save all men but
will not; or, 2, God would save all men, but cannot; or 8, God can
and will save all men! I have not now time to notice particularly
this wonderful intellectual prodigy, but will say, howewer, in passing,
that it is exceedingly lame for a man of Mr. Shehane’s sense to m-
troduce. But I suppose it was that or nothing, as it is according to
what a man hath, and not ‘‘according to what he hath not.”

Universalism is predestination in its ultra dress. It throws its
dark and elastic folds over the vilest of the vile, and assures them
of a happy immortality at all hazards, upon the grounds that they
have been thus predestinated from eternity. To avoid the evident
affinity between: Universalism and infidelity, Mr. Shehane has taken
it upon himself to tell us of the books Universalists have written
and published in defence of Christianity, and boldly intimates that
he has looked in several Libraries, and could find none such writ-
ten by Methodists. Whether he has seen them or not, I must in-
form this audience that we, as a denomination, haxe put forth more48

| than fifty volumes in defense of Christianity.

[ recollect that some years ago, as I have been informed, a
Congregational minister fell in company with a Universalist Dr. of
Divinity, and a warm and animated conversation ensued; whereup-
on the Congregational minister observed to the Universalist, that
he always considered Universalism a sickly doctrine, as it had to
call to its aid so many Doctors of Divinity to keep it alive,and that
from his strong efforts in its behalf at that time, he was more than
ever convinced of it. And you may set it down asa fact my hear-
ers, that whenever you see or hear a man provoking controversy in
reference to his opinions, you may rest satisfied that he does not
really believe thom to be sustained by the Bible. A well man is
not disposed to be continually calling the attention of a physician
to the soundness of his physical structure |—No ‘they that be whole
need not a physician, but they that are sick.’

Mr. Shehane would not tell us anything about sanctification,
though I have more than once called upon him. Unless I am much
mistaken, he denies it with all his denomination. Butto show you
some of the prominent features of Universalism, I will give you the
testimony of Rey. A. B. Grosh, in an article written by him and
furnished for publication in this book. [Dr, Pierce here read from
the Religious Encyclopedia.] From this you will perceive that
Universalism embraces in its folds almost every shade of doctrine,
You have Winchesterians, who admit future limited punishment,
while you at the same time have the followers of Mr. Ballou, who as
stoutly deny any future retribution. But this is not all: Arianism,
Sabellianism and Humanitarianism are all hailed and fraternized by
this protean scheme. It is therefore true, as I stated in 1848, that
Universalism contains all shades of scepticism. Unitarianism de-
nivs the divinity of Christ, and if my good friends in Americus in-
tend to give their support to Universalism, they will also have to
receive the above branches ot it, which are—

 

“Of so frightful nein,
That to be hated needs but to, be seen.”

Mr. Balfour, a standard author with  Universalists, contends
| that the souls of men sleep, and knows nothing until the resurrec-
tion! But time would fail me to delineate the varied phases of
Universalism. Can the good people of Americus embrace such
views? Can they imagine God is good enough to hunt up and saveA9

the vilest sinner?

But this is not all: Universalists do not recognize the holy
spirit in their second article. The doctrine does away our Lord’s
words to Nicodemus. I recollect distinctly that one of the clever-
est men belonging to this sect told me that such language was only
a figure. Naw the corruption of our nature is clearly taught in the
Bible—we all feel that it is tootrue. And my ardent friend ought
to clear up these important things, ere he attempts to drive his Uni-
versalist car over the land.

This he has not done, but seems quite anxious that I should ex-
plain the origin and pedigrees of the devil, ashe is pleased to call
it. A man who appears to be as well ‘out and dried’ as he i8, may
puzzle some, but I am content to know that secret things belong to
God. I never pretended to understand these things. They are re-
corded; I believe, hut do not understand the modus operandi of the
matter. Wedo read, however, of fallen angels, of angels who
‘‘kept not their first estate,’’ of their apostacy. Now I contend
that this is plain enough, whether we know any more or not; nor
can all the artistic reasoning in the world show to the contrary. I
showed you here yesterday, that there is a real, bona fide Devil,
continually pulling the wires of volition.

When Mr. Shehane made the sweeping declaration that if any
one could find the penalty of endless punishment annexed to God’s
law, he would at once enlist under our banner, I must confess that
many of his words were as bamboos to my nervous feelings! His
quotations and conclusions are foreign, disjointed and forced. He
says the judgment is going on now, and probably will for a long
time. I could give you a great many striking proofs to show he is
wrong and Iam right, his verdict to the contrary notwithstanding.
Whatever Gad has given man must be improved to the utmost ex-
tent, or weshall be undone without remedy. In proof of this, I
call your attention to the follawing Seriptures: ‘‘When the Son of -
Man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then
shall he sit upon the throne of his glory. And before him shall be
gathered all nations, and he shall seperate them one from another,
asa shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats. And he shall set
the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall
the king say unto them on his right hand. Come ye blessed of. my
Father, inherit the kingdum prepared for you from the foundation50

of the world. For Iwas an hungred, and ye gave me meat; I was
thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger and ye took me in}
Naked and ye clothed me: I was sick and ye visited me: I was in
prison and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him
saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, and fed thee, or
thirst, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and
took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick,
or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and
say unto them, Verily I say unto you,Inasmuch as you have done it
unto one of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall
he say unto them on the left hand, Depart from me ye cursed, into
everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an
hungred, and ye gave me no meat, I was thirsty, and ye gave me no
drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked and ye cloth-
ed me not; sick and in prison and ye visited me not. Then shall
he answer them saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it
not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall
go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into hfe
eternal,’’ Matt. 25; 82-46.

Goats are wild creatures, they nip the briars of the mountain’s
brow, and represent the ungodly. The sheep are the Christians, the
pure in heart, Verily I say unto you,’ etc. Here is brought to
view the dread and awful judgment day, at which time rewards and
punishments will be dealt out endless in duration. How fearful the
language, everlasting punishment!

Observe friends, I hold to my original anchor—to the plain
common-sense meaning of the Scriptures; and I further affirm, that
what my opponent has advanced has no more to do with Universal-
ism than a negro’s pass.

Sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and many leave
the world covered with the films of sin! Now, how can Mr. Shehane
contend that an enemy is as rewardable in heaven as a friend? Is
there no difference between them?

We don’t desire to wrap up the word of God in Greek, Latin or
Chinese. It is good enough, in its plain, unvarnished sense, for
the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.’

When the fleeting dream of life shall be over, and when all the
congregated myriads of the universe shall be aroused from the cay-
erns of the dead, and brought to judgment, then shall the irreyoca=51
ble senitetice be passed. ‘To the Wicked, ‘‘evetlasting punishment,’

to the good, ‘‘eternal life.’

I cannot tell how much of the Bible he will give up to sustain
his cause, which he attempts to keep up by his skeptical genius,but
at any rate he seems to ma ke no scruples in abandoning some of it,

When we look at the Greek we find that everlasting and eternal
come from the same root: and we here say, when Greek meet Greek
then comes the tug of wai.

We here affirm, that we cannot limit the misery of the wicked,
without sapping the very foundation of the bliss of the saints. Un-
less I am very much mistaken, the eternal meaning of everlasting
is the common sense meaning. It is true, we read of everlasting
hills, and you may say if the hills pass away the punishment will
also. To this I reply, that if I should speak of the everlasting Al-
leghanies, I should use the term to show the mountains will endure
as long as the earth exists. The word isgoodas long as the
thing continues, and I therefore contend, that when the word is ap-
plied to the future state of man, it is good and sound so long as the
spirit lives! And should Diety annihilate the spirit of a wicked
man, the word would imply a period as long as the life of the spirit
These are palpable truths, and are worthy the consideration of all.‘ir. Shehane’s Fourth Spéech.

Gentlemen Moderators:

Dr. Pisce, in his last speech, has introduced some half a dozer
itehis which I must briefly notice, for I now have only one hotir
moze to stand before you. After éxamihing his argyuments,I will an-
ticipate him as extensively asI can. Because he Would not agreé;
ih our prelimiihdries, to bring up no Hew miatter in his iast speech,
to which I shill havé uo opportunity to réply. But I hete apprizé
the congregation, that if he introduces anything of importaticé in
His coiicltisioti, that I will aniniadvert upon thé sartie when the dis
cussion goes to press.

The Dr. thinks that we Universalists, having taken our stand;
intend to keep the field anyhow; and, therefore, we bend the Strips
tures to carry our point. Don’t he see that this charge can beé turn-
ed agaihst him and his brethren, very successfully? Have they not
taken the stitid in favor of ehdless woe and suffeting? And, are
they not guilty, ih many instancés, of applying passages which con-
éern this world, to the future state? How often do they qnote Luke
13:—‘‘Exceépt yé repent, ye shall all likewise perish.’’ Arid yet, if
they would catididly consider that chapter, it does not refer to the
immortal state. By the way, how cati intmortality die or perish?
You might, with as much propriety, speak of the death of God. It
is a contradiction in terms. There is no affinity between death and
immortality. Why then apply texts which concerts time to the
things of eternity?

_ The Dr.’s aneedote, touching Doctors of Divinity, ¢éomes from
the wrong side of the house. Because we Universalist have but very
few doctors, ahd he has a great many. Indeed, he is one himself,58

Thése facts show thén that Universalism ia iit a Hedlthy condition,
and that old Mrs. Orthodoxy is sickly,full of pains;and has the con-
sumption. She will soon go the way of all the earth, while Univer-
salism will live and flourish in the vigor of immortal youth, Amen:

The Doctor has made a great flourish about Unitarians, Arians
Sabellians, etc. What has that to do with the question in hand. I
confess that I neither see nor feel the force of his declamation:
THerd have be6h Unitarians who wete not Universahists in senti-
ment, so far; were on the Dr.’s side, touching upon the non-salva
tion of the whole world. And there have been Trinitarian Univer-
salists; but these facts have nothing to do with the question at 1s-
sue between Dr. P. and myself.

My aged opponent squints at the doctrine of total depravity,
and the vicarious sufferings of Christ: This is not the proper time
to debate those subjects; but if it is his wish totake a tilt on such
items, I think he can be gratified after the present controversy 1s
over. For I want the world to know that I object, with all my soul
to two sentiments, one of which makes human nature as bad as an
orthodox Devil; and the other makes God worse than a bloody ty-
rant. The doctrine which arrays heaven, earth and hell against
God’s beloved son, is to me more abhorent than the midnight gloom
of cold and heartless Atheism.

The Dr. has had something to say about fallen angels.—I sus-
pect, if the truth was known, that modern preachers get more of
their notions concerning fallen angels, from Milton’s works, than
they do from authentic parts of the Bible. My opponent, being a
Dr. of Divinity, ought to have known that the passage to which he
refers was rejected, according to Eusebius by the Christian church-
es, for the first three centuries. But let us admit, for the sake of
argument, that sin did actually get into the sinless mansion of eter-
nal felicity six thousands years ago, and expel a third part of the
heavenly host and drive them into the deep Tarterean gulf, there
to swim the billows of undying flames forever. I say let us admit
this, then what follows. Evidently this—we have no proof that sin
will not re-enter those pearly mansions, and cast out the other two
thirds, and all the saints besides. For what has been in the way of
sin may be again.

Admitting that angels did leave their pe
dence have we that they were not human beings.

ost or station, what evi-
John the Baptist54

aiid also the ministers of the sever Asiatic chtirches aré called ati?
pels. The word angel does not necessarily mean an immortal, spir-
itual, etherial being. But suppose it did. Then the Dr. is eritire-
ly off the subject; for the point between us is, whether the whole
human family will be saved.

The Dr. has at last made a héavy set on Matt. 25: 81-46. Of
Course he found it cotivetiient td take the very thing fcr granted
which he ought t have proved, if it could be done. He takes it for
granted that this is a prediction of the great judgment in the world
after the resurrection from the dead. But let it be bofne i mind,
that there is not a word about the resurtection from the dead in
that chapter, nor in the preceding nor sticceeding chapter. Let it
also be known that the secdnd coming of Christ, in or with his
kingdom, to the judgment df the quick and dead, has already taker
place.

Startle hot at this proposition till you hear and weigh well the
proof. Now to the testimony, Paul said, sometime previous to thé
overthrow of the Hebrew ptlity by the Romans, that Christ should
judge the quick ard the déad at his appearing and his kingddm: 2
Timothy, 4:1. That his appearing and kingdom tock place in thé
generation in which ke lived, is clear from Luke 21: 21-82. See als
Bo Luke 17: 20-87.

Add to this the fact that Peter said, 1800 years ago, that the
Lord was ‘ready to judge the quick and the dead’—that the end of
all things was at hand—that the time had céme when judgment
must begin at the house of God, etc, 1 Peter 4: 5, 7, 17. Now to
say that the judge was ready 18 centuries ago to do something which
is not yet begun, would be placing him in the singular predicament
of getting ready entirely too soon.

But let us hear Christ himself on this momentous question:
His language is,‘‘Behold, I come quickly, and my reward is with me
to give every man according as his works shall be,’ Rev. 22212.
See also verses 6,7, 10, and 20. Yes, Jesus has declared most
emphatically that ‘‘The Son of Man shall’come in the glory of his
Father, with his angels; and then shall he reward every man ac-
cording to his works.’”? Now mark the next verse, MF ‘Verily, I
say unto you, There be some standing here which shall not taste of
death till they see the Son of Man coming in hiskingdom.’’ Matt,
16: 27, 28. See Mark 8: 87;9:1. Luke 9: 26, 27. Rev. 1: 7.50

The Dr. may possibly object to my proof from the book of Rev-
elations, because he may suppose, for aught I know, that the Book
was written after the Romans subverted the Jewish polity. But
this is precisely what no mancan prove. On the contrary, we have
strong proof in the book itself, (11th chapter,) that Jerusalem was
standing when John wrote it.

Having briefly noticed the evidence of Christ, touching his com-
ing to judgment, I will in the next place turn your attention to
Paul and James. After stating in the 9th of Hebrews, that Jesus
should appear the second time without sin, [or without a sin offer-
ing], unto salvation, the Apostle goes on to say, In the 10th, ‘Ye see
the day approaching,’—‘The Lord shall judge his people.’ ‘Cast
not away therefore, your confidence, which hath great recompense
of reward. * * * * For yet a little while, and he that shall come,
will come, and wil! not tarry.” Now, how is it possible for my op-
ponent, or any mortal upon the face of God’s earth, to show me
that a little while means two thousand years, and that tarrying
that time, or longer, is no tarrying at all? But the words of St.
James, seemed to settle this question, as though they had been
written expressly for that purpose. Listen my hearers, and receive
the truth with meekness:

Be ye also patient, establish your hearts: for the coming of the
ord draweth nigh.

‘‘Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemn-
ed: behold the judge standeth before the door. James 5: 7, 8.

I give it as the best conviction of my mind, that all the Doc-
tors of Divinity in this world will never be able to show that the
phrase—‘The coming of she Lord draweth nigh,’’? means that this
eoming was not to take place in twenty centuries after James wrote.

It will also be objected that there never has been, nor never can
be a time, when ‘‘all nations’’ could be assembled at or near Jerus-
alem. As an offsett to this,'read Zech. 14: 1, 2, and the 8rd of Joel.

After these preliminary remarks I now assume the position that
the tares of Matt. 18 chapter, correspond exactly with the goats of
the 25, or with the foolish virgins of the same—that the furnace in
the one, answers to the everlasting fire, as some of the Bible writers
have it, the unquenchable fire, was in Jerusalem, every inch of the
ground must be fought for. For my antagonist thinks it is lke
giving up his God and Saviour to give up his eternal hell, which he56

has preached so long, and in which he so exultingly believes and re-
joices, For we all remember that he told us the other day that he

was glad there was an eternal hell.
That the furnace of fire was in Jerusalem, is what I now propose

to prove.

‘And he shall pass over to his stronghold, for fear, and his
princes shall be afraid of the ensign, saith the Lord, whose fire is in
Zion, and his furnace in Jerusalem.”’ Isaiah 81: 9.

“Son of man, the house of Israel is to become dross: all they
are brass, and tin, and iron, and lead, in the midst of the furnace;
they are even the dross of silver.

‘“‘Fherefore, thus saith the Lord God, Because ye are all become
dross, behold, therefore I will gather you into the midst of Jerusa-

I

jem.
‘As they gather silver, and brass, and iron, and lead, and tin,

into the midst of the furnace, to blow the fire upon it to melt it; so
will I gather you in mine anger and ip my fury, and I will leave
you there and melt you.

Yes, 1 will gather you and blow upoa you in the fire of my
wrath, and ye shall be melted in the midst thereof.

‘CAs silver is melted in the midst of the furnace, so shall ye be
melted in the midst thereof; and ye shall know that I, the Lord,
have poured out my fury upon you.”’ Hze 22: 18-22.

The proof is therefore irresistable, and conclusive. But was
that the fire was not to be quenched? Yes—Hze, 80: 47, 48. Jer.
7:20:17: 27. To this yiew it will perhaps be objected that the di-
vision of the sheep and goats, or the wheat and tares, or of the just
or the unjust, was to take place at the end of the world—and_ inas-
much as the end is yet to come, the separation is yet future. This
objection has no force in it, for the fact that 1t 1s based upon a mis-
take. The objector thinks the end ef the world means the confla-
gration of the world on which we live. It means no such thing, as
eyery Biblical scholar knows very well. It literally means the con-
clusion of the age, 1. e., of the Jewish age. The last two chapters
of the Old Testament, which Dr, A. Clark applies to the destruction
of Jerusalem, confirm my position. See also Matt. 22: 1-7.

But the Dr. thinks that we have everlasting and eternal in the
same verse, that whatever is predicted of one must be of the other.
This is not a good rule of lpterpretation, For instance: Habakkuk57

Bays, “‘the everlasting mountains were scattered,’’ but in the same
verse he speaks of God’s everlasting ways,’ 86. Now does it follow
as a hecessary consequence, that God’s ways must be scattered be-
cause his everlasting mountains were? J think not.

The same argument which keeps a Jew from embracing Chris-
tianity, keeps the Dr. from Universalism. The Jew finds that the
Aaronic priesthood is called an everlasting priesthood, and clings
to it with all his might. So the Dr. finds everlasting, ina few in-
stances, applied to punishment, and he hangs on to it with the icy
grip of death. Would it not be wiser and better to say with the
learned Dr. James McKnight, ‘‘that those who limit the words eve
erlasting, forever and eternal, when apphed to punishment, put no
forced construction upon them!’’ Or with the pious Dr. Dodridge,
when he declared, that ‘‘We cannot pretend to know beforehand,
the punishment of the wicked must and will be absolutely eternal.’’

There is another thing to be considered. The word for punish-
ment in Matthew 25: 46, is in Greek, kolasis, which is derived from
a verb that means to prune trees, so that they may bear better
fruit. This word is found only once more in all the New Testament
and then, strange as it may appear, the imperfect Christians are
represented as being under its influence. 1 John 4: 18. Surely
they were not in the flames of Dr. Pierce’s eternal hell.

These facts must forever keep me from applying the passages in
Matthew to a future judgment in the immortal state of existence. I
will only add, while in this part of the debate, that we have a judg-
ment on sheep and goats in the 84th of Ezekial. Any one who will
read that attentively can hardly fail to see that it takes place in
time.

Having, as I suppose, noticed every important point brought
up by the Dr., I will now anticipate him. Ido this because he may
intraduce new matter in his last speech, to which I shall have no
chance to respond.

He may have much to say about the sin against the Holy Ghost
—about judgment after death—about the great day of wrath, and
also concerning the Sodomites suffering the vengeance of eternal fire,

A few remarks upon each of these items are all that my time
will allow. 1. As it regards the sin against the holy Ghost, if it
eyer was committed it was by the Jews. But as I have already prov-
ed the salvation of Israel, this argument from Dr. Pierce can be nooo

bar to Universalism.
29. Were I to allege that the article tots has been left out of

Heb. 9: 27, andthat the definite article the has been prefixed to
Judgment my opponent might possibly say that I was hard pushed
and not satisfied with our common version. I will therefore for the
present, waive all this, and will take my stand upon a fact found in
Heb. 10:1; for that verse is evidently connected to the subject pre-
sented in the 9th chapter. The fact to which I refer is this—‘‘Those
sacrifices which they offered, year by year.”’ I now ask the gram-
marians who hear me, what is the noun for which the pronoun they
stands in this verse? Is it not the man to whom it was appointed
once to die? Very well; I ask, if any person now on earth offered
sacrifices before the advent of Christ? Surely not. Then the pas-
sage has no particular reference to the men of this age.
The fact is, this, the 9th chapter of Hebrews contrasts the two priest-
hoods, i. e., the Levitical with the priesthood of Christ, and is not
treating on punishment after death at all.

Whenever a person brings foward Rev. 6: 17, to prove a day of
judgment in eternity, I wish to remind him that this was to take
place when the 6th seal was opened. And as there were to transpire
earthly scenes when the 7th seal was opened, Rev. 8: 1-5, this great
day of wrath was not in the immortal state. To confirm this, I
quote Rev. 7: 1, from which we learn that after the things which
John saw in the 6th chapter, he saw four angels standing on the
four corners of the earth, etc., which proves incontestibly that judg-
ment takes place in the earth, as 1 have abundantly proven in my
last speech. Should anyone examine this subject further, he may
learn something more about the people’s calling onthe hills and
mountains to cover them; hy consulting Hosea 10: 7; Isaiah 2:
14-21; Luke 28: 29 80.

One of the most plausible passages in support of endless burn-
ings, to be found in the Bible is Jude 7th verse—‘‘Even as Sodom
and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, in like manner, giving
themselves ever to fornication and going after strange flesh, are set
forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.’’ It
is contended by the opponents of Universalism that participle suffer-
ing indicates that the punishment is now going on, and will contin-
ue forever. This of itself is quite plausible, But it so happens that

there are two other present participles in the same verse. Yes, the59

Sodontites were giving themselves over to fornication, and going af-
ter strange flesh. Now I would like to know if any person would
have the hardihood to contend that those wicked people were giving
themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh long af-
ter they wete dead!

Without protracting these remarks, I will state two facts which
throw the most consoling light upon this subject. 1. The Jews
were worse than the Sodontites, and their punishment greater, and
yet that punishment was to come te an end, or be finished, Lam. 4:
6, and on.

2. Ezekiel, in the 16th chapter of his prophecy, fortells the
testoration of the Sodomites, so that Jude—even if there were no
doubts in the minds of the learned with regard to the canonical au-
thority of the book—does not prove endless damnation of any hu-
man being.

I Will conclude by stating my objections to Methodism, because
the Dr. thinks it is far superior to Universalism. For my own part,
I think that pattialism, whether under the banner of John of Ge-
neva, or under the uncertain flag of James of Amsterdam, is a poor
thing when compared to the soul cheering hope of Universal salva-
tion. But to my objects.

1. I object to it because it was first set on foot in Ameri
ca by a man, who, according to his own showing, had no religion.

2. Because in its legitimate tendency it is exceedingly licen-

tious.
8. Because it is anti-republican, as well as ariti—universal, and

ig dangerous to our republican institutions.
4. Because it teaches infant regeneration in Baptism, and im-
plies very strorigly that all unbaptized infarits are lost. Dis. p. 109,

and on.

5. Because it makes salvation dependent on the will of man,
instead of the will of God. |

6. Because it makes God, the Father, kill God the Son, im the
room of sinners, and has a vast amount of the rubbish and super
stition of the dark ages, clinging to its skirts.

For these six reasons, I reject from the véry bottom of my soul,
distracted, growling, howling, groaning, sighing, grunting Metho-
dism, with all its train of abominations. Amen.Dr. Pierce’s Fourth Speech.
Respected Auditors:—

If there are any who think they cannot remain in until I get
through they are requested to leave now, as it is unpleasant to 4
apeaker to be interrupted in the midst of a discourse. I gave up 17
minutes this morning that were due me, and itis but right that I
have your continued attention. I feel however, that I can well . af
ford to give my adversary 17 per cent in the argunient, without any
detriment to the cause of truth.

I have very little anxiety about niy opponerit’s objections: he
may array as many as he pleases against Methodism, but in the
hame of reason, what have they to do with the trnth of Universal-
ism?

I desire to state facts, and upon these, will I rear the beautiful
temple of Divine truth. These are worth more than all quibblings
and objections that may be brought foward by Mr. Shehane. He
has, to strengthen his Universalian views, repeatedly quoted from
the commentary of Dr. Adam Clarke. In this however, lie has mis—
sed his mark, for I must inform him and this audience, that the
British Conference have long since disowned the writings of that
Jearned man. They do not regard his productions as orthodox! We
are able to exist as a denomination, on our ‘‘own hook’’ indepen-
dent of the comments of Dr. Clarke.

My opponent has quoted Gen. 12:8. lo his pretended argu-
ment founded upon this Scripture, I have not yet replied, nor is it
how hardly necessary, for I presume all Christians believe the truth
conveyed in that text. By ‘‘All nations,”’ ‘‘kindreds,’”’ etc., being
blessed, we understand that the gospel in its majestic triumph,
should finally shed the rays of its divine light to the remotest core61
hes of the earth! 6 is iti this setise, we miust tinderstaid the tes-
timony of the inspired penman. But does this go to show that all
must be saved whether or no? Surely not. My opponent informs
us that the language is absolute and unconditional: This I deny:
God has ever tiade promises of Salvation upon conditiotis; and un:
less men comply With these—Faith, Reperitance, Obedience, they
can never be saved.

God it is true, is good, merciftil ahd kind, and this is one reas-
on why he has placed the means of salvation within our teach:

My ardent friend has told us that the Greek word ‘‘damnek,’’
comes from the same that Jesus applied to the Womati, when hé
said, ‘‘Shath no man condemned thee???

It will be seen however by 4 reféretice to the cotinéttion, that
the parties failed to establish their charge, ahd therefore our Lord
did not condemn her: Now, no matter what the punishment
it surely could not mean salvation! Mr. Shehane had to slip ih a
little proviso, to evade thé seeming fact that Christ winked at the
iniquity of the woman, according to Universalist interpretation,
To what extreme will not srror go! We also had a wonderful effort
made to show that the wicked Jews will yet be saved: and for sd-
bad a case, as Mr. Shehane defends, I coiifess His attempt was 4
very good one. But the difficulty which must beset Universalism is
this: Christ told the Jews they should die in their sins, and that
whither he went they could not come. My frietid informs us that
similar language was used in reference to the disciples. This is trie
though they could not go to Jesus then, the Savior asstired them
that they should afterwards; but where do we fitid such a promisé
to the unbelieving Jews? The place cannot be counted out. I yet
contend that when the Savior said uhto the sttibborh Jews, ‘‘How
ean ye escape the damnation of hell,’”’ that he did not meah thé
condemnation of the Sanhedrim, or the punishments which that
power might inflict in the valley of Hinhom, but that he meant thé
awful damnation of hell hereafter!

My opponent, in the plentitute of his mercy, made an illusion
to the writings of Dr. Bascom, in reference to vicarious suffering. I
must inform the gentleman that he is agaiit wrong, and that Dr.
Bascom was not the author of the sentiment, but that it came from
the pen of one of his correspondents. The article appeared in the
Methodist Quarterly, of which Dr. Bascom is editor, and was allows62

ed to occtipy a place in his paper, not because he satctiotied it, but
because he was willing to let men think for themselves.

When I closed my speech this morning, I was speaking of the
last judgment spoken of in the 25th chapter of Matt. I will now
call your attention to John 5: 28, 29. ‘‘Marvel not at this; for the
hour is coining, in the which all that ate in their graves shall heat
his voice, and shall come forth; they that have dohe good, tinto the
resurrection of life! ahd they that have done evil, unto the resur-
tection of damtiation.”’

In the precedihg verse, Jesus probably alluded to those that had
been raised from their graves, at divers times, and under various
circumstances; but in the language just quoted, he evidently point:
ed forward to a titne when all the slumbering myriads of the ¢arth
should awake from their dusty beds! Some to life—some to dam:
nation. They were to atise just as they had died. If they died
good, they will arise good—if wretched, poluted and febellious, they
will thus atise in the resurrecctioh! What saith the Scripture?
‘‘Hvery man in his own order.’’

This is clear ptoof of a judgment in eternity, ahd that He ‘‘that
is filthy shall be filthy still.”’

Mz. Shehane intimated that he thought I would bring up Rey:
20:10. I suspect he has been sorely scalded on that point, before,
else he would not dteadit so much. This world will eventualy be:
come a theocracy as it originally was, and then will all be blessed}
and the devil will measurably, if hot totally cease tpon the earth.
This we think evident from Rev. 20: 1-8.

‘“‘And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key
of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid
hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the devil, and satan,
and botind him a thousand years, and cast him into a bottomless
pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should de
ceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be ful+
filled; and after that he must be loosed a little season.”’

The Revelator then goes on to describe the closing scene. In
verses 4 and 5, he says:

4, And I saw thtones, and they sat tpoh them, and judg-
ment was given unto them that were beheaded for the witness of
Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the
béast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon theif63

foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ
a thousand years.

‘}. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand
years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

‘‘6. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resur-
rection: on such the second death hath no power.”’

By this we learn that those who do not have part in the ‘‘first
resurrection,’’ are liable to be ‘‘hurt of the second death,’’ which is
elsewhere declared to be the ‘‘lake of fire !”’

Mr. Shehane has used the word forever, in the same sense given
it by me. lt is good toexpressthe duration of punishment, so
long as the subject of the same continues to exist. The phrase
‘‘forever and ever,’’ is used to give force to the expression. I re-
peat here, that all the words upon which Mr. Shehane has played
with his inventive genius, refer to the future state beyond death as
well as the grave!

What says the Revelator? ‘‘Death and hell delivered up the
dead that were in them, and whosoever was not found written in
the book of life, was cast into the lake of fire.’ Here then is the
punisment beyond death! It is proper that Hades should be ren-
dered hell. It is aseparate state or place for all, until the judg-
ment. When that trying crisis arrives, then hell (hades) will de-
liver up the dead to be judged according to the things written in
the book of life. This I think all mustadmit. Mr. Shehane at-
tempted to tell you where this lake of fire is, but as I was imperi-
ously called away, I did not hear him. He probably referred it to

Gehenna, near Jerusalem. But this cannot be, for the very lan-
guage implies a HELL, and a LOCAL one in the eternal world!

But let us now turn to the case of the ‘‘rich man,’’as mentioned
in Luke. It was either a history of what had been, or else a para-
ble. and portrayed with the utmost precision what might be! Now
upon either hypothesis, Universalism is completely stranded! The
man is said tu have lifted up his eyes in hell! He cried.to be re-
lieved from his misery, but was told that there was a great gulf
that could not be passed! It is said he prayed for water to cool his
tongue, adding at the same time that he was tormented in the
flames. Now all these things are related as though they were reali-
ties, nor have we any authority to say they were not. All the so-

lemnities of the funeral are detailed with as much solemnity as any64

thing could be. If my Lord does not wish me to understand him
in this way, why should he thus speak to mislead me, and millions
of others? Then we are told that all has been done that is neces-
sary by Jehovah. Ifthe brethren of the rich man believed not
Moses and the prophets, neither would they be pursuaded though
one arose from the dead. No! if men will not believe the prophets
of the most High, they will not believe if the evil spirts should ap-
pear from their drear abode, with all their fiery paraphrenalia. You
all know how my opponent endeavors to destroy the force of these
Scriptures, but I will leave it for you to judge which is right—God
or man?

Christ has told us that he prayed ‘‘not for the world’’and think
you that those for whom the Savior never prayed can be saved?

Again, says Jesus in Matt. 10: 28, ‘‘And fear not them which
kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul, but rather fear him
which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.”

Now, why I ask, should the son of God warn of this danger, if
in reality no one is exposed to such a place? This,to say the least,
would be contrary to the known honesty of the Savior.

With such passages as these, there is too much quibbling on
the part of Universalists. Why can they not take God at his word?

Is the hell here spoken of the grave? Impossible. (Mr. She-
hane: It is Gehenna.) Well I thank my opponent for enlighten-
ing my opaque vision. Let me here state, that I have never denied
the fact that there are mistranslations in the Bible, but granting
all this, there are awful punishments in the land of Ghosts.

if the Lord found it necessary to have a Gehenna in this
world, to burn filth in, he will find it equally necessary to have a
Gehenna in the spirit world to consume filth there!

But I will close with my objections to Universalism. I do not
object to it, as my opponoet does to Methodism, ‘‘because it was set
on foot and preached by a man for twelve years, who had no reli-
gion,’’ but because if Universalism be true, there is no need of re-
ligion. Ihave known people to leave orthodox churches and join
the Universalist and have also known the same individuals to leave
off family prayer and graces at table. And here while I think of
it, T wouldrocommend a book put forth by Mr. Matthew Hail
Sm:th, who was for a number years a preacher of Universalism, but
who has renounced his error. He tells us that as Universalis in-6d

creased, wickedness prevailed. Universalists, say that Smith was
insane, but I would like for any man to read his book and_pro-
nounce him insane.

I reject Universalism because of its liberality!

It will fraternize with Owenism, down to the refined system of
Universalism! Liberality may be allowed until anarchy and mis-
rule claim undisputed dominion.

Look at Fourierism, and that benighted system of Fanny
Wright! These systems all boast of their extreme liberality, but
as we see, they are fraught with most demoralizing influences.
With all due respect for my opponent, I must say, I object to his
system on the same ground. If any should therefore teach that
the wicked will be saved, even unto earth’s remotest bounds, we
must reject it as of dangerous tendency. Get people to believe
this, and licentiousness will abound. Such a system must there-
fore be rejected. Had it not been for liberality, the union of our
country would never have been put in jeopardy. Universalists in
their great liberality, teach that no one can finally miss heaven.
Believe not this doctrine—it eminated from a carnal and benighted
mind.

Infidels flock to hear Univarsalist preachers with joy. They
like such liberality that will promise heaven to all. Some years
ago I was traveling in a stage with a young man of the Universa-

list profession, who was going to attend medical lectures. He man-
ifested a great desire to thrust his opinions upon me. At length I
observed, if you are a Universalist, I suppose you had as well die
drunk as sober. To this he replied in the affirmative. A like con-
fession could doubtless be made by others. Will you say in view
of these things, that the influenee of euch a faith is good! Such ig
the tendency of Universalism upon the carnal heart, how it may be
with religious men of this faith, | say not.

It may be that some of you think you have been poorly re-
warded during this debate. 1 could not well avoid it—l was drawn
into it, not of my own seeking. It is not my custom to give chal-
lenges; but as we are commanded to contend for the faith once de-

livered to the saints, I felt that Icould stand up before you and
say many things in defense of the same. Universalists frequently
quote a deal of Scripture 1n defense of their doctrine; but let me
say to you that if God himself should say that drunkenness 18 80«66

briety it would not be so. If he should say sin will not be pun-
ished, it would not be so. Or if he should say that no one can, or
will be lost, it would not be true. No one can be saved, aside from
Jesus Christ. J thank the audience for their attention.

Remarks on Dr. Pierce’s Last Speech.

As intimated in my last effort, I think 1t nothing but right,
now that the Discussion is printed, to make some strictures on the
Dr.’s Fourth Speech, to which I had no opportunity to reply.

With regard to Dr. Clarke’s having been voted down by the
British Conference, I will only say that I was aware of that before;
but as he has never been voted down by the Americans, and _ his
works are widely circulated by the Methodists in these United
States, and as Dr. Pierce, like myself, is a Carolinian by birth, I
do not think he can shelter himself from the scorching truths of
Dr. Clarke, behind the acts of a foreign court.

The 5th of John is generally coupled with the 12th of Daniel,
by commentators and preachers of various denominations, and by
all our reference bibles: and as I have already shown that Christ
has explained the 12th of Daniel in a way that differs as much from
Dr. Pierce as time from eternity, I think it unnecessary to enlarge
upon that point in this pamphlet.

Any person who will be at the pains to compare the 88th and
89th chapters of Ezekiel with the 14th and 20th of the Book of Rev-
elation, will see at once that they contain a prediction of the over-
throw of Gog and Magog; and the fact that the judgment and pun-
ishment were upon the breadth of the earth, (Rev. 20: 9,) proves
conclusively that the judgment was not, as the Dr. asserts, in the
eternal world. The scene of the fire-lake is evidently laid in time,
as may be learned from the 19th chapter. But as I do not wish to
protract these remarks to a great length, I will confine my atten-
tion mostly to the three tollowing points which the Dr. has made in
his last speech: 3

1. The Rich Man. 2. Liberality. 8. M. H. Smith.

Having proved in my first speech that hades, the Rich Man’s
hell, is to be destroyed, and in my subsequent speeches that all Is-
rael, all Jews, or as Isaiah has it, all the seed of Israel, shall be
saved, or justified in the Lord, it only remains to show that the
tich Man was a Jew. This is easily done. For he called Abraham67

his Fathe?, and Abraham called him Son. This is one redson for
thinking him a Jew. Here is another. His five brethren had
Moses and the prophets, in other words, they had the laws given to
Moses. Mark it, these laws were not given to the Gentiles. Proof,
Psal. 147: 19, 20.

As the Dr. has conceded the fact that hades is to give up the
dead, and as the 16th of Luke, even if taken literally, is not a rep-
resentation of a post-resurtection state, from the circumstance that
the five brethren are represented as living upon earth at the time.
{ think my opponent has failed, signully failed, to stistain the aw-
ful doctrine of tinceasing woe, by that sctiptite. He has also
failed to prove it by Gehenna: fot L showed in my first speech that
Ciehenna is in the ecotioniy of God, to become holy. Let the ¢éah-
did remember this.

As an offset to any atgiiment founded
ever,’’ I request the reader te look into the
where the same words are applied to temporal objects.
hight can never prop up endlésa toftiires. :

The Dt. is dreadfully afraid of liberality. Perhaps he is ready

to say with the fotinder of Methodism, ‘I am no republican myself,
and never intehd to be;’’ of with A. Campbell, the pope of his
party, ‘‘all reptiblics aré inhatural forms of society.” But for one,
though my voice is weak, and may ere long, be hushed in death, I
am not ashamed to own myself a republican of the Jeffersonian
school; and a friend to liberal principles. My soul is budyed up 18
the hour of distress by these good old Bible principles of liberality,
to which Dr. Pierce and many of his speli-bound brethreil are as
yet strangers. “cNvo Liberal soul shall be made fat.” Prov. 44:
95. The reverse of this is that the i]liberal soul shall be made lean.
I leave it with those who know him best, to say, whether the Doc
tor’s soul is fat or lean. ‘But the liberal deviseth liberal things,
and by liberal things shall he stand.’ Isa. 82: 8.

To crown the whole argument upon this subject, and to put the
seal of utter condemnation upon the old, musty, conservative prin-
ciples arrayed against Universalism, I obsetve that God himself is
a liberal giver. Hence James says, he ‘‘giveth to all men liberali~
tsa Le :

I am as much opposed to
truly and conscientiously 5ay

on the words ‘‘forever and
84th chapter of Isaiah
Day and

libertineism as any one, but I can
with Jefferson, in one of his letters to68

the great Dr. Rush, who was 4 Universalist, that “I am opposed te
the corruptions of Christianity, but not to thé genuine principles of
Jesus himself.’? And I say letthe mind be free to examine, to
sift, to weigh well the evidence on the subject of man’s destiny bes
yond the grave, and then speak out its convictions, in tones; starts
ling it may be, to a slumbering world. |

As Matthew H. Smith’s book has been recommended, and ag
pedlers are busily engaged in circulating the samie, I here take the
liberty of making extracts from the ‘Investigator and Herald”’ the
first of which was prepared by myself, the other by the editor.

Some of M. Hale Smith’s Inconsistencies,

The reader is hereby apprized that the followitg qtiotations are
made from Smith’s largest work, 5th edition. On pags 180; hé
says, ‘‘whatevor is consistent with God’s ulichahgeable ¢hafacter in
one age, is consistent with it ii all ages and in all worlds.’ But
on page 208 he agsefts, that ‘a just distribution of rewatds and
punishments does not here take place!’’ So then, according to Mr.
Smith, it is consistent with God’s character that a just distribue
tion of réwarfds and punishmeiits shall never take place.

This, it all conscience, is bad énough. But on page 109 we
have something, if possible, still worse. He declares that here the
innocent suffer with the guilty, and often times more than the
guilty.”’ This will be the case, Smith being judge, in all ages atid
all worlds. Then Wu. S. Balch, the innocent party, will suffer
more in eterhity than M. Hale Smith, who is guilty of falsehood
by his own confession.

On page 192, he says, “It is hot true that punishment is re-
formatory in its nature.’ This is diréctly ih the teeth of Holy
writ. Leét those who hawk about such contradictory books tfead
the 26th chapter of Leviticus, and blush for shame. But as it is
at those who deny punishment ig
reformatory in its nature, have never read that chapter attentively,
I will quote the verses to which I refer—I will also send wild
beasts among you, which shall Tob you of your children, and dez
stroy your cattle, ahd make you few in number; and your high-
ways shall be desolate. And if ye will not be reformed by me by
these thitigs, but will walk contrary unto me, then will I also walk

contrary unto you, and will punish you yet seven times for your
B1ns.’’—26: 22, 28, 24.69
_ ITs ie Hot a8 cleat a8 the light of an tincloaded noon, that God
thtends to reform by punishmeht? But Mr. Smith says, page 944,
“Tf the phrases everlasting punishment, everlasting destruction,
eternal damnation, do not point out an eiidless state of suffering,
then there can be tio proof of endless felicity: for the samé epithets
are uséd tb denote duration of puiiishrient that are used to denote
the duration of felicity. Mo dthers are used! No atrotiger cat be
used.’” He night Have said, with as niuch propriety, that if the
everlasting priesthood of Aarot, the everlasting possessibii of
Canaan, etc., do not point out Aaron’s priesthood as continuing
forever, then there cait be tio proof that God’s throne will endure
forever. When it is said, as just quoted, ‘that no others are used,
ho stronger can be used,’ Mr, Smith utters what is palpably false:
Others are used, much, yea, a thoisand times stronger. For inz
stance, ‘salvation, world without end,’ ‘endless life,’ “immortal,
‘fadeth not away,’ etc. ales

I must turn to his first allegation, vii. : ‘Whatever is coiisiat=
ent with God's unchangeable character in one age, 1s consistent
with it in all ages.’’ This contradicts the Lord Jesus Christ, and
Consequently must be false. For he says there is no marrying in
the resurrection state. But Smith contends, that if it is consistent
with God’s plan of conducting the world to ordain mattiage in this
age, to increase the human family, it will be cotisisterit to have
matrimony in the immortal state of existence! Whata wonderful
logician, what a poor ahalogist 1s this man Smith!

Let us make a personal application of this hypothbsis. Then it
will follow, as a matter of course, that as the Almighty did not in-
terfere to prevent Matthew Hale Smith from preaching 12 years
against endless punishment, telling a lie for the purpose of getting
a fat salary, missing his aim and becoming bankrupt in eharacter,
then quitting Universalistn and trying to join the Unitarian, but
failing in that, he united with the Calvinists, atid Hoi preaches
brimstone for his bread and butter; so all these scenes, inter-
mingled with evdsious, subterfuges, and various twistifications, are
to be re-exhibited on the plain of eternity, by the hotbrious M. H,
Smith, who has gulphed down partialism with its head and horns.
For remember reader, that if the Lord permitted these things in
time, he will permit them beyond the grave, yes, throughout all
eternity. Why really, if Smith is correct he will have quite a time18

of it, wont hé? | ) | ae

When Smith professed Universilisiti, itid wis pfeachitig it 1H
Hartford, Conn., he sent me one of his sermons on the end of the

world, furnace of fire, etc. He also wrote me a long letter private
ly on Matt. 25: 81-46. He assumed the position that the end
bf the world, Matt. 18th chapter was the conclusion of the
lige, ahd that the furnace of fire was itt Jerusalem. If he, of
tiny one else will prove to my satisfaction that this position is in*
correct, I heréby promise to give him $50, dhd tetiotitice forever thé
dogma of iitivetéal adlvation. Will ths ttial ever be made? Per:
haps it will, atid pethaps tot?
MATTHEW HALE SMITH.

As the book which this individual ptt forth a few yénts since;
figaihst-Uhiversalism, is how beihg citttlated in the South, where
the true character of the author is but little known, We ittend td
state a few facts relative therett, atid stibstantiate theni by Mr.
Smith himself.—-We charge Him with premedttated and deliberate

falsehood. Stich a task, to us, 16 pditfil atid unpleasant, but juse
tice reqtiites it at our hahds. 3
In 1886 Rev. Wm. S. Balcli revéived 4 tihanimous invitation td
take the pastorial charge of 4 Universalist Society, in Providence,
Rhode Islatid. Mr. Smith had his ey tipon this very society him-
self, and forthwith endeavored to foréstill Mr. Balch, by addressing
him the following letter—
| ‘‘ Providence, Jan. 12, 1886.

Rev. SirI write because I atm yotir friend. Befotte yott remove to this
place you should be rtade acquainted with the fact, that the sotviety here
are not united in you, especially the lddies. I hope you will corte, but in jus:
tice to you I have told a pldin truth, that youl tay core with your eyes
open. If you denidnd it; 4 Comrhittee will give you the real facts.

Your Friend,
| A Mritber or tut Soctrry.

Mr, Balch at once accused Swith with Beltig the atithor of this strangé

bpistle, To thi he replied as follows

Rotbury, March 24, 1886.

Rev. W.S. Baton, Dear Stet Ireceived at the Trumpet office to-day, a
letter from you, on the subject of two letters which you say were received by
you, inClareinont. Ihave already received two letters from Providence on
that subject—ole from a particular friend, acquainting me with the fact that
& person in Providetite hd accused me of the Heed=“the othe! ftom Wm, A74

statement I made, and then requested me to tell him a fact which must rest
upon my own assertion. In reference to the letter in question, I can only
Say to you, as I have said before, that I AM NOT the author of the letters to
which you refer. I have ro knowledge of the author, and have never had any
more connection with the writing of them than yourself—I have no mears by
which I can prove a negative—and what ever any one may think or say, I have
the consciousness of innocenee myself, and am Willing, if my word is disbe-
lieved, to wait tili the author shal] own the deed and clear the innocent.
Yours respectfully,

W. H. SMITH.
Notwithstanding all this, Matthew Hale Smith did write that very letter!

Rev. H. Ballou accused him of it in the most pointed terms, to which he re-
plied as follows—

Salem, Jan. 5, 18389.

Bro. Bat1tou—I haye mo reluctance in penning the following statement
1. I wrote the letter to W. 8. Baleh, which on Friday last L saw in your
hands. 2. Though I designed him no wrong, the principle involved deserves
censure. 3, The denial of writing the letters was an evasion equally un-
ehristian and wrong. 4. The whole deed was an act of imprudenze that hag
occasioned me more remorse and shame than any actof my life. If any one
feels aggrieved or injured thereby, I humbly solicit their forgivness.

W. H. SMITH,
Subscribed, ‘‘Rev. H. Ballou, Boston, Mass.”

L. R. PAIGE, Standing Clerk of the Mass. Convention of Universalists,

For this most reprehensible cond uct, Smith was tried by the Massachu-
setts Convention of Universalists. and came very near being expelled
at once from the ministry, and in fact the only thing that saved him was his
pretended penitence and promised reformation.

Notwithstanding all this, many of our ministers had lost confidence in
him, and would not keep his company nor exchange pulpits with him. Smith
finding that Ichabod wax written upon his fordhead, insomuch that there was
a considerable discount on him, at onee tried to raise his fallen plumes, by
leaping over into the Presbyterian fold; and throug) a spirit of revenge put
forth his unholy book against us, because we would net uphold him in his
talsehoods and wickedness.

Were we disposed, we could more than fill our paper in detailing matters
eonnected with this same M. H. Smith. He has changed his religious faith
EIGHT times. and has not been contented with slandering a Jarge and respec:
tuble class of Christians, but has given vent to his vonomed tongue upon the
head of his aged father, now cold in death, as I stand ready to proye by Rev.
D D. Smith, a brother to Matthew! Where Smith is known, his. book, which
is now being hawked through the South, is thought but little more of than an72

old Almanac? As an evidence of this, I would state that sometime since, a
lot of his books, which here sell for $1 per copy, sold in Boston for the enor-
mous sum of five cents! Yet this is the book now paraded through the coun-
try to stop the tide of Universalism! And never did famished hounds, seize
upon a putrid carcass with more zest than do many endless miserians seize
upon this libellous work. Asa vindication of the character of Universalists
from the’foul asperations of Smith, we append the following from an honest
and worthy man, who left our ranks tojoin what is called the Campbellite
church. Hearhim. In writing to the editor of the Christian Record, a pa-
per of the Campbellite order, he says —

‘‘T cannot close this brief letter without referring tomy late nominal con-
nection with the Universalist brotherhood. Most cheerfully doI bear testi-
mony to their many virtues, and the system of sound morality which they in-
culeate. Among their ministers are numbered some of the most learned and
pious men of the present age. I have been conversant with their writings for
many years, and with a clear conscience can I testify, that I haveseldom, if
ever seen anything fall from their pens that was not dictated by pure hearts
and sound heads. To them, inmy judgment, is due much of the christian
liberality of the present day. Sectarian bigotry has ever encountered an effi-
cient foe in the Universalists, and sureIl am, that no man was ever made
worse by the adoption of the Universalist faith. Practical benevelence, love
of justice, and reverence for thename of God should characterize those who
profess a belief in the doctrine of love, as Universalism has been, and not
very unappropriately, termed. As Reformers, I admirethem. Whatever er-
ror they teach, I trust they may be corrected, and the truth grows bigger and
brighter the more they proclaim it. Yours in hope,

: WM. MATTHEWS.

I closa by exhorting all who read this pamphlet to lay aside
their prejudices as far as they can, and to judge impartially for
themselves. And may the light of Divine truth gladden their hearts
in the hour of death, Amen.

C.F. BR. 8 Be A.

Ys yy Gee

= RE te

S
pS

Uy

WY