universal redemption is set forth, or implied; but we deem the above sufficient to satisfy any reasonable mind on the subject. We shall, in our next, answer a number of popular objections brought against the doctrine of universal redemption.

XXI. EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT.

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED.

There are some texts of Scripture which seem to speak of Christ as having died for the elect only; but such passages, when properly considered, are not at variance with the doctrine of Universal Redemption. A quotation from Mr. Carpenter. The fact that all are not saved is no proof that Christ did not die for all. The death of Christ necessary if only one be saved. The sacrifice offered by Christ sufficient to atone for all. God, in the gift of his Son, had other objects in view than redeeming man. A quotation from Finney. All beings in heaven are benefitted by redemption. Redemption no failure, whoever be saved, or whoever be lost. Man's salvation conditional. God uses means for the salvation of sinners. Some of God's ways incomprehensible. The reason why God does many things which we cannot comprehend. "Did Christ die for those who were in hell before his death?"-answered. The idea of God reprobating to damnation a portion of the human family, not Scriptural. Dr. Payne and Finney on this subject. A stricture on Mr. Parke's peculiar notion. The notion that God has so circumstanced some that they cannot obtain salvation-answered. Young children; idiots; Heathens. The reasons why we should send heathens the gospel, even if they can be saved withont it. Impenitents. The doctrine of universal redemption not novel. The Bible must be the standard. Quotations from Bishop Davenant, Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Augustine, Primacius, Athanasius, Miller, &c., to prove that the doctrine of universal redemption was held in the primitive ages of Christianity. Cyril, Chrysostom, and AmbroseFlodoardus, and Gotteschalchus the monk-Luther and Calvin, believed in universal redemption; so did Bullinger, Benedict, Arctius, Wolfgang, Latimer, and Bishop Jewel. It is the doctrine of the Church of England. References to several learned commentators. A quotation from E. Polhill. Many eminent theologians in the present day advocate this doctrine. Preached successfully by the various Methodist bodies. The reason why some Calvinistic divines embrace the limitarian doctrine. A limited atonement inconsistent with the most glorious doctrines of the New Testament. The Calvinistic notion of the divine decrees is inconsistent with reason and Scripture, and irreconcilable with the justice of God. A quotation from the " Evangelical Rep." page 14.

To the doctrine of universal redemption many objections have been made; to a few of them we shall briefly and respectfully reply. It would be superfluous and unedifying to offer strictures on every frivolous objection raised against this doctrine, but such as appear to be of any weight or importance, or which, on account of their singularity, have gained notoriety, we shall distinctly notice.

1. There are some passages in the Bible which speak of the Saviour's death, as though it effected the salvation of the elect only; such as, "I lay down my life for the sheep" "God purchased the church with his own blood;" and others of similar import.

man.

Ans. In these passages there is certainly something special implied; but still, in relation to redemption, the language is not exclusive. We have no conclusive evidence, in expressions like these, that the atonement applies to the elect exclusively; such passages therefore ought not to induce us to set aside, or to put a forced construction upon, these delightful parts of divine truth which express most decisively that Christ died for the "whole world," and for every In comparing these two classes of passages together, we find no contradiction, nor even anything paradoxical. Christ "laid down his life for his sheep." "He is the propitiation for our sins," (or for the sins of the sheep,) "and not for ours" (or theirs) "only, but also for the sins of the whole world." What contradiction do we discover in comparing the above passages? None at all. Christ purchased the Church "with his own blood," and "he tasted death for every man." He not only purchased the Church, or those who believe in him, but he bought those who deny him, and who thereby bring upon themselves

swift destruction. 2 Peter ii. 1. On this subject the Rev. H. Carpenter makes the following judicious remarks: "If some portions of Scripture tell us that our Lord laid down his life for the sheep, and that his sheep are special objects of his love, and they shall never perish, why should we not receive these declarations in their plain and obvious meaning, and be thankful that the Lord has special purposes of mercy towards his people? And if, again, other portions of Scripture, greatly out-numbering those just referred to, testify that our Lord's death is an atonement for all sin—a remedy open to the whole world, available and applicable to every child of man-why should we not receive these declarations too, in their plain and obvious meaning, and be thankful that the Lord loved the world, and willingly offered himself for the sins of all ?"

2. Another objection to the doctrine of universal atonement is based on the fact, that all are not saved. The objection is put thus: If Christ shed his blood for all, and all are not saved, then Christ died in vain. This remark frequently occurs, both in the writings of the learned and in common conversation among the unlearned. But the objection is invalid, and may be easily answered. In the first place, we might remark that it is evidently erroneous. Those who make this objection seem to suppose that the sufferings of Christ were regulated in proportion to the number of individuals for whom he died; and that consequently the greater the number for whom he died, and who are benefitted thereby, the greater must be the aggregate amount of his sufferings. This view brings the death of Christ before us as a mere commercial transaction, and robs it of all its moral grandeur. We need

not, therefore, wonder that it is nowhere expressed in Scripture; and it is only by a tortuous method of reasoning that certain isolated texts can be made apparently to countenance it. The value of the death of Christ, as a means of reconciliation between God and man, lies in the motive power which it presents; and such is the character of sin on the one hand, and the moral power of the atonement on the other, that the death of Christ was indispensably necessary to secure the salvation of any; and should the posterity of Adam be multiplied by millions more than ever will be born, it would be a full and sufficient sacrifice -a perfect atonement for them all. The death of the Lord Jesus, like the light and warmth of the sun in the heavens, is indispensable even for one individual; and like the same luminary, it is amply sufficient for all men, even though they were multiplied as the stars of the heavens in multitude, or as the sand which is upon the sea shore. Besides, we must also bear in mind that God, in giving his Son to die for the whole world, had other purposes in view than the salvation of human souls, namely the development of his own glory, and a stupendous manifestation of his moral character. In fact some able divines have concluded that this was God's chief end in the gift of his Son and the redemption of the world by him; as it is infinitely fit, and right, and necessary, that he himself, and not man, should have the pre-eminence in all things. On this subject Professor Finney very properly remarks, in his Theol. Lec., page 262: "God does all things for himself; that is, he consults his own glory and happiness, as the supreme and most influential reason for all his conduct. This is wise and right in him, because his own glory and happiness are