but they all hold to the fundamental doctrines. So it has always been. And the doctrine of future punishment is one of those fundamental doctrines of the Bible, which they have uniformly embraced -while, with but few exceptions, they have as uniformly rejected the doctrine of Universalism. Eighteen centuries of time have rolled away, and yet Universalism has not numbered among its advocates ten highly learned men, to say nothing of their piety.

The talents, and piety, and learning, of the church of God, have been uniformly arrayed against this pernicious system. Martyrs there have been, but none in the cause of Universalism. The servants of God have been sent to the loathsome dungeon-to the flames of the stake, and to the terrors of the wheel and the saw, for their opinions-but Universalists have escaped unharmed. The only martyrdom which they are known to have endured, is a martyrdom to the contempt and pity of the whole Christian world, for fifteen centuries.

Three centuries rolled away, before this climax of absurdities was even thought of. This we assert, without the fear of contradiction. And even now, the number who profess to believe in this doctrine, are few, in comparison with the great body of the Christian church. On which side shall we stand, then, in this matter? On the side of those, whose piety, talents, and learning, is as one hundred, or on the side of those, whose piety, talents, and learning, is as ten?

THIRD REASON.

If Universal Salvation is true, then the Bible is calculated to lead mankind into error. The majority of the Christian world, from reading the Bible, have been led to the belief, that there is a state of future punishment. But if the doctrine of Universal Salvation be true, why is it not so revealed, as not to leave millions in doubt? Repentance is clearly revealed. Faith is clearly revealed. The being of a God is clearly revealed. The divinity of Christ is clearly revealed. The necessity of regeneration is clearly revealed. The im mortality of the soul is clearly revealed. The everlasting happiness of the righteous is clearly revealed. And if Universalism is true, why is not that clearly revealed?

Suppose a benevolent individual should hear that the inhabitants of a certain island were threatened with famine, and should send them ships, for the purpose of transporting them to a land of plenty, and yet, by his letters to them, should leave them in doubt, whether all, without any qualification, were to go, or only those who had certain traits of character? What would the inhabitants think of his benevolence, as compared with his communications?

Suppose twenty criminals should receive a pardon, under the gallows, from the hands of the president, and yet, when the officers of justice should

unseal it, the statement should be so ambiguous, as to leave them in doubt, whether he intended to pardon the whole, or only such as would promise submission and obedience to the laws of the land? What would be thought of such a pardon, if it were asserted, that the interests of justice would allow of a pardon being extended to all, without distinction? What would be thought of the benevolence of the president's heart?

Let a man read the Bible, and he will at once come to this conclusion: If God intended to save all, he would not have revealed any thing which would throw perplexing and harassing doubt upon the subject. He would, somewhere in the Bible, have said, without qualification, "There is and shall be no future punishment for the wicked." But there is not such a sentence in the Bible. Search the Bible, from Genesis to Revelations, and no where can you find the sentiment" No future punishment." But listen to Universalist ministers, and you hear them say, repeatedly, in a single sermon, "No future punishment for the wicked! No future punishment for the wicked!" And are Universalist ministers more tender of the feelings, and more solicitous about the happiness of men, than God himself? If there is no future punishment, could not God state the matter as forcibly and clearly as a Universalist minister can do? But God has so stated the matter in the Bible, that a Universalist minister is called an inge nious man, if he can reconcile one-half of God's statements with his doctrine. And they employ

no small part of their ministry, in clearing up, as they call it, doubtful passages. And to show that there is nothing too hard for their sophistry, they will sometimes preach on the "unpardonable sin." As though they could beget confidence in their belief, by preaching from those very texts which reveal most clearly the damnation of the finally impenitent! But when they stumble on such fearful texts, it lets us into one secret: the secret, that the truth and the conscience are yet struggling for dominion over a depraved heart. The sophistry and impious satire of Universalist ministers, in handling those texts which speak of future punishment, convinces us, that even they do not deem the doctrine of Universalism as clearly revealed as it might have been had it been true. Suppose for a moment that the doctrine of future punishment is true. Then you can understand the Bible-then all is consistent. But suppose for a moment that the doctrine of Universal Salvation is true. Then the Bible contradicts itself then the whole Bible must be altered to suit this doctrine. This passage must be tortured. That passage must be misinterpreted. This doctrine must be denied, and all the power of irony and ridicule must be brought to bear upon a plan of conditional salvation, which has Genesis for its foundation, and Revelation for its top-stone.

FOURTH REASON.

If Universalism is true, then the majority of men reject a doctrine which harmonizes with all the feelings of the natural heart. The majority of the Christian world reject the doctrine of Universalism. A doctrine more than any other calculated to please wicked men, and lull them into carnal security. How is this to be accounted for? The doctrine of future punishment is so ungrateful to the natural heart, that nothing but the clearest evidence of its truth could induce men generally to believe in it. All the natural prejudices of men are against it. And yet we find a majority in all ages believing in it! How is this? The doctrine of Universal Salvation is most evidently false, while that of future punishment is most evidently true! This is the reason why men will believe a doctrine opposed to their inclinations-because it is most evidently true. And this is the reason why men will not believe a doctrine which harmonizes with their depraved hearts-because it is most evidently false. Had not the evidence been against them, Universalists would now number more converts than any other system under heaven. For this simple reason, their doctrine of “no future punishment" is just what men in rebellion would love to have true. But men, even in rebellion, will not believe, and cannot believe, against evidence. There may be here and there one who professes