LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY PRINCETON, N. J. BX 9946 .M35 1870 Manford, E. 1815-188A. A discussion on universal salvation and future Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive in 2009 witii funding from Princeton Tlieological Seminary Library littp://www.arcliive.org/details/discussiononunivOOmanf ^j^V^^Vi •» 9 • • .,• /%^ . . % A DISCUSSION Jniyei^al Salvation FUTURE PUNISHMENT, BETWEEN E. MANFORD, Puhlishir of Manford^s Magaxini, Chicago, J. s. Sweeney, PaitQT tftht First CongrtgJtlon af DiscifUs, Chicago. " Prove all things; hold fast tliat which is good." — Paul, CHICAGO: Rand, McNally & Co., Printers, 51 Cl.ark Street. 1870. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1870, by E. MANFORD and J. S. SWEENEY, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. PREFACE There is a College in Kirksville, Mo., the President of which is a Disciple, one of the Professors is a Presbyterian, one a Methodist, one a Universalist— all ministers. Kindly they had often canvassed the points wherein they differed; and finally concluded to have an Oral Discussion in the Chapel of the Col- lege, on Universal Salvation and Endless Punishment, and secured the undersigned as the Disputants. The Discussion was accordingly held, vast numbers listened to it with deep interest, and the following pages contain a report of the Debate. E. MANFORD. J. S. SWEENEY. Chicago, May, 1S70. Oral Discussion. UNIVERSAL SALVATION. Proposition First. The Bible teaches that all WHO leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved. [mr. manford's first speech.] Gentlemen Moderators., Ladies and Gentlemen : We have assembled to consider subjects of vast im- portance to us — to all. We know that we now live, and we are taught by revelation that we shall live forever. Mr. Sweeney, my opponent on this occasion, and myself admit this. But we differ widely, entirely, concerning' the condition of mankind on the other side of the River. He will affirm in this discussion, that part of our race will be doomed to suffer endless punishment, while I ex- pect to affirm the final reconciliation and salvation of the world. The proposition we shall fii^st consider, and to which we shall devote two days, I being in the affirm- ative, reads thus — The Bible teaches., that all -who leave this world sin- ful will finally be reconciled to God^ and saved. 8 Oral Discussion. It will be observed, that I do not affirm Jioiv or when this reconciliation is effected; only, "that all who leave this world sinful W\\\ finally be reconciled to God, and saved." I am fearful that all, or about all, the adult por- tion of mankind leave this world more or less sinful. The wisest and best well know their imperfections and shortcomings. With sorrow the}'' acknowledge that they fall far short of spending life as the Master requires, for he admits of no compromise with sin. "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God," says he, " with all thy heart, soul, and strength, and thy neighbor as thyself." " Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." "Bless, and curse not." " Render good for evil." " Be ye there- fore perfect even as your Father who is in heaven is j^erfect." All this the Master requires. This is the Gospel stand- ard. All who reach it are perfect Christians — Christlike, Godlike. All who fall below are sinners. There are grand and glorious characters in the world — multitudes of them — but do the best reach the Gospel standard.'' If not, then "all leave this world sinful." If Mr. Sweeney is right, I do not see but all the adult popula- tion of this world are on the direct road to hell. Is the infant portion of mankind any better off than the adult.'' It is well known that the Catholics, and a majority of the Protestants, will have it, that children inherit from father Adam a sinful nature. And this seems to be the creed of Mr. Sweeney's church. If I am wrong he will please correct me, as I do not wish to misrep- resent his people. Rev. Alexander Campbell, a great man in his communion, is very clear on the infant de- pravity question. There is no mistaking his meaning. " Thei'e is, therefore," he says, " a siiz of our nature as well as a personal transgression." " Our 7iature was corrupted Universal Salvation. o by the fall of Adam before it was transmitted to us." ''All inherit Vi fallen, consequently a sinful nature, though all are not equally depraved." " Condemned to a natu- ral death, and greatly fallen and depraved in our xvhole constitutiori we certainly are in consequence of the sin of Adam." Christiafz Syste?n, pp. 28, 29. All mankind, according to Mr. Campbell, come into this world /a//c?/z, greatly fallen, depraved, sinful. If this is correct, all who die in childhood must die in sin. They come into this world sinful and must leave it sinful, if Mr. Campbell is correct, for in the same book he repeats time and again, that " no one can scripturally be said to be converted to God until he is immersed in water," and he and his whole church discard infant baptism as an abomination in the sight of God. They believe in infant depravity, but not in infant baptism, or infant conversion to God. Children are born sinful, live their brief life sinful, die sinful, enter the other world sinful, and I do not see but they must be sinful forever if conversion to God is not allowed in that world, and that is Mr. Sweeney's ground. I call partic- ular attention to this point, for it looks very much like WHOLESALE INFANT DAMNATION. If the gentleman's church is right, all, or about all, of Adam's race, infants and adults, will be " gobbled up " by satan. In affirming, then, " that all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved," I am advocating the Im- mortal Interests of mankind, for if the converse Is true, the world en masse will go headlong down to hell. The New Testament, as I read It, places all mankind in three respects on an equality, ist, All are mortal, and must die; 2nd, All shall live again, and forever; 3rd, All shall finally be reconciled to God, and saved. But all do not die at once; all are not raised from the lo Oral Discussion. dead at once ; all will not be saved at once. Salvation is progressive here and hereafter. It is a growth in grace. The consummation is to be realized in the fullness of tijnes, as the apostle Paul expresses it. And Peter speaks of "the times of the restitution of all things." Our truest, highest, and best conceptions of God, are derived, not from physical nature, but from Man. He is the offspring of God, the image of God, the type of God, and therefore partakes of the character of his parent, his archetype ; hence Man has all the attributes of God in a latent or active condition, but in ^finite degree. Our Savior was a Man — " The Man Christ Jesus " — a Man anointed and qualified to instruct his brethren, mankind, in the ways of truth and righteousness, and thereby save them. He was a perfect Man, a colossal Man, the wisest of the wise, the best of the best; hence it is said he "was God manifested in the flesh," was "God with us," and for the same reason he said, " I and my Father are one." He was so Godlike that a Prophet actually calls him " The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." Isa. ix. 6. If we would know God, then, we must know Man, especially the Man Christ Jesus. Let us, then, see God through Christ — learn the character of God, by learning the character of Christ,who was emphati- cally the Image of God, the Glory of God, the Son of God. If this is so — and what Christian will question its cor- rectness? — the Old Testament, and the New Testament, the Law and the Gospel, yea, all God's providences in all ages and climes, must be interpreted by Christ's Life and Character. When properly understood, they pei"- fectly harmonize with the Life and Character of our Lord and Master. This view of our Redeemer makes him doubly dear, precious, and necessary to the world. Universal Salvation. ii We may, then, expect to learn the Will, Purpose, De- sire and Pleasure of God relative to human destiny; we may expect to learn how the Love of God, the Justice of God, the Mercy of God, will dispose of mankind; we may expect to learn how God, by his Law and Government, will deal with our race ; we may ex- pect, I say, to learn all this by studying the Life and Character of Christ as he was " God manifested in the flesh." I. What was the Will of Christ concerning man's final Destiny ? Did he will our salvation or damnation ? Did he will that we should ascend to heaven, or sink to hell ? Did he will that we should do God's will, or eternally frustate it? I expect Mr. S. will admit that it was the will of Jesus that all should be reconciled and saved. All that Jesus ever said or did shows that the blessedness of mankind was the will of his soul. " M}- meat," says he, " is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work." John iv. 34. " Thy will be done" was his con- stant prayer. An apostle clearly states what is the Will of God. " God will have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth." i Tim. ii. 4. This being the will of God it was the will of Christ. The will of Jesus never changed. From his baptism in Jordan to his ascension to heaven, under all circum- stances, among friends and foes, the will of God was his will. When betrayed by a professed friend, when for- saken by his disciples, when being murdered by a brutal and blood-thirsty rabble, he w^as true to the will of his heart, to the will of his God, and hence prayed amid the yells of the mob, " Father, forgive them." So God's will for the salvation of men will never change. It is his will now that all shall be saved, and it eternally 12 Oral Discussion. will be his will that all shall be saved. Will this be denied ? In perfect harmony with the unchangeable will of God, Jesus called on all men to do his will. " Repent," cried he, "when he began his -work, "for the kingdom of God is at hand," " Come imto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." " If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink." After his resurrection he commissioned his disciples to " go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." In the last chapter of the last book of the Bible, and almost the last verse, is the last verbal communication of Jesus to the world, and how exactly it con-esponds with all he had ever uttered. " I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. Let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And who- soever will, let him take the water of life freely." Rev. xxii. i6, 17. These words of Jesus are the words of God. Jesus never revoked them. God never revoked them. The Spirit now cries to every soul that God ever created, let that soul be where it may, in the body or out of the body, in this world or in the immortal world, " Come — come from your wanderings, come to your Father's house and he will joyfully give you of his abundance." Never, in time or eternity, will a soul be put beyond the reach of mercy. Salvation is now free as the air, free as the sunshine ; it ever will be free to mankind, whether they walk the earth, or tread the courts of the immortal realm. I know Mr. Sweeney emphatically denies all this, and contends equally as emphatically, that an endless hell where mercy will never be allowed to enter, is to be the doom of all who depart this life unregenerated. But I Universal Salvation. 13 see no good reason for the imperfections of earth being perpetuated through the ceaseless ages of eternity. Would wisdom, goodness, justice, humanity, be sub- served by immortalizing our Adamic frailties and imper fections ? 11. The Purpose of Christ — of God. The purpose of Jesus corresponded with his will. He did not will the salvation of a//, and purpose the salvation of part, of mankind. What he willed he purposed to accomplish ; and he lived, and labored, and died to effect the purpose of his heart. The son of a heathen god left heaven, and declared in a most positive manner — so mythology says — that he would not return till every soul was regen- erated. So Christ resolved that God should be all in all before he would cease his reign. See i Cor. xv. 24-28. "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to me." John xii. 32. This wonderful declaration of our Savior shows distinctly the purpose of his heart, the purpose of his mission. Again he says, "And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not ; for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world." John xii. 47. Substitute mankind for "world" in this passage, and we have the Saviors meaning. Evidently he purposed the salvation of all. The purpose of Christ reveals the purpose of God. He was imbued with the spirit of God's purpose. The Bible is radiant \vith this glorious theme. " Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he hath purposed in himself, that in the dispensation of the fulness 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." Eph. i. 9, 10. It is the purpose of God, then, that 14 Oral Discussion. "all things in heaven and on earth" should be gathered together in one—on^ body, one fold. The purpose of God is clearly revealed in all those passages that speak of the intent of Christ's mission. " For God sent not his Son into the w^orld to condemn the world, but that the woi'ld through him might be saved." John iii. 17. " We have seen and do testify, that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world." i John iv. 14. Who can doubt that it is the purpose of God to save the world? The purpose of Christ was as unchangeable as his divine character. He never deviated an iota from the grand aim of his life. What he was born to accomplish he lived and died to accomplish; hence, it is said by the apostle Paul, that "he tasted death for every majt;" "gave himself a ransom for a//." So the purpose of God changeth not. With him, it is said, there is " No variableness, neither shadow of turning." Ao-ain, " He is of one mind and who can turn him.?" Men, beino- imperfect and short-sighted, often change their plans and purposes, but God, being perfect in knowledge, and all- seeing, never changes his plans or purposes. Can God's purpose fliil .? Did Jesus foil in any of the purposes of his life ? Did he not on the cross, cry, " It is finished " .? He had accomplished all he was sent to do on earth. And not only the life of Christ, but the Bible teaches, that God's purposes will be accomplished. " The Lord of hosts hath sworn, saying, surely as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I hscvQ pur- posed, so shall it stand." " For the Lord of hosts hath purposed., and ivho shall disannul it P and his hand is stretched out, and xuho shall turn it hack ? " Isa. xiv. 34, 27. ''I have purposed it, I will also do it." Isa. xlvi. 1 1. Universal Salvation. 15 III. Christ desired the reconcihation and salvation of mankind. I need not spend time in proving this after having showed that universal salvation was according to his Will and Purpose. Christ not only manifested this truth of God to the world, but it is revealed on every page of the Bible. It is also a clear and certain inference from all we know of the divine Being. If God is Love, and not hate, if he is Good, and not evil, if he is our Friend, and not our foe, if he is our Father, and not a cruel des- pot, he must desire our welfare. This was the perpetual desire of the Savior; and that this desire of his great heart might be realized, he freely laid down his life. He invited all to come, and doomed none to endless destruc- tion. So with his Father and our Father. As God now desires the salvation of all, none are excluded, none are doomed. Salvation now is as free as the air we breathe. And as God eternally will desire the salvation of all, not a soul in time or eternity will be banished beyond the reach of heaven's mercy. God desires the salvation of all now, and so invites all to come and be saved. He will eternally desire the salvation of all, and, consequently, he will eternally invite all to come — ■ come up higher, come and partake more and more of the feast of fat things. Will this be controverted ? Will Mr. Sweeney contend that God's desire will change.'' That in the distant future he will desire the endless misery of countless millions of his children ? Will Mr. S. turn Calvinist.'' I want to hear from him on this subject. IV. It was the Pleasure of Christ that all should be reconciled and saved. It would be slandering Jesus to deny this. As it afforded the shepherd pleasure to recover the lost sheep, the father delight for the lost son 1 6 Oral Discussion. to return, the angels joy when sinners repent, so the Savior was well pleased when souls were born into the kingdom of God ; but he was grieved when they walked in the ways of sin. So our heavenly Father hath pleasure in the redemption of his children, and he ever will have pleasure in their redemption. As it is pleasing to him for sinners to become saints, he entreats all to do so, and as it ever will be pleasing, he ever will entreat them to come to him and live. But Mr. S. will main- tain, I suppose, that by and by it will afford God no pleasure for sinners to be converted, and so he will pro- hibit their conversion, and delight in their death and damnation. V. The Love of Christ — of God. Christ in his Character and in his Life, manifested and commended the Love of God to the world. John, whom Jesus especially loved, bears this testimony, " Hereby perceive we the Love of God, because he — Christ — laid down his life for us." i John iii. i6. And Paul, commissioned after Christ's ascension, says, " But God coimnendcth his love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." Rom. v. 8. The wonderful love of Christ for this sinful world is the most astonishing fact of history. He knew that all, even the chief of sinners, were the children of God, were created in the image of God, and consequently worthy of his most ardent love. This explains the mystery. And if we were properly impressed with the same, it would kindle into a blaze our love for fallen man. But the belief that all but a select few are the children of satan, and in the image of satan, engenders hatred and its attendant sins. It can have no other effect. That is its legitimate result. This dosriTia makes countless millions moui^n. It is the father Universal Salvation. ly • and the mother of all the cruel persecutions, and bloody wars, that have cursed the earth, and blackened the pages of history. But Jesus knew man. He knew he was a child of God, and an heir of heaven, and hence he lavished on him his heaven-born love, and sought his salvation. Christ did not exaggerate the love of God. "God is Love," writes an apostle, i John iv. i6. St. Paul de- nominates him "The God of Love," 2 Cor. xiii. 11. Dr. Payson, a celebrated and eloquent orthodox divine and writer, in the spirit of revelation, thus writes of God's love : "In the words 'God is Love,' we have a perfect portrait of the eternal and incomprehensible Jehovah, drawn by his own uneiTing hand. The mode of expres- sion here adopted, differs materially from that usually employed by the inspired writers, in speaking of the divine perfections. They say, God is merciful, God is just, God is holy. But never do they say, God is mercy, God is justice, God is holiness. In this instance, on the contrary, the apostle, instead of saying, God is loving^ or good^ says, God is Lovk — Love itself. By this expression we must understand that God is all pure, unmixed love, and that the other moral perfections of his character are only so many inodifications of his love. Thus, his justice, his mercy, his truth, his faithfulness, are but so many different names for his love or goodness. As the light which proceeds from the sun, may be easily separated into many different colors, so the holy love of God, which is the light and gloiy of his nature, may be separated into a variety of moral attributes and perfections. But though separated, they are still Love. His whole nature and essence is Love. His will, his word, and his works, are Love, He is nothing, can do nothing, but Love ! ! " Dr, Adam Clarke, inspired by the theme, says : '■'•God is Love. An Infinite Fountain of Benevolence 1 8 Oral Discussion. and Beneficence to every human being. He cannot HATE, because he is Love! He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good ; and sends his rain on the just and the unjust. He has made no hiima^z being for perdition ; nor ever rendered it impossible^ by any neces- sitating decree, for any fallen soul to find mercy. He has given the fullest proof of his love to the whole human race, by the incarnation of his Son, who tasted death for eveiy man. How can a decree of absolute, unconditional reprobation of the greater part, or a7iy part of the human race, stand in the presence of such a text as this? It has been well observed that although God is holy, just, righteous, etc., he is never called Holiness., Justice., etc., in the abstract., as he is here called Love. This seems to be the essence of the Divine Nature, and all other Attributes to be only modifications of this ! " This is the character of him who gave us being, and in whom is our destiny now and forever. That Love created this earth, this universe, and made man in the divine image — made him immortal. That Love has never forsaken the children of men, and it never will forsake them, in time or eternity. Jesus was an embodiment of God's Love, and he never abandoned a soul to endless sin and wo, and God never will. VI. The Mercy of Christ — of God. That our Sav- ior's Life and Character were imbued with the spirit of mercy, every reader of the New Testament well knows. When the disciples would have fire come down from heaven and destroy those who were assailing the Master, he exhibited his merciful spirit by saying to the former: " Ye know not what spirit ye are of. The Son of man came not to destroy men's lives but to save them." He had compassion, had mercy, for the ungrateful men who sought his ruin. He would save^ not destroy them. That is the spirit of God. When the erring woman was brought to Jesus for him to condemn, he had mercy on Universal Salvation. 19 her, and said, " I do not condemn thee. Go and sin no more." That also is the spirit of God. When he approached Jerusalem, full of wicked men — his persecu- tors, and future murderers — for the last time, he uttered no maledictions, breathed no words of wi'ath, but his merciful soul was moved to its depths, and the historian relates, that " when he came near, he beheld the city, and WEPT OVER IT, and said, O Jerusalem, 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." They had insulted him, slandered him, persecuted him, and were about to crucify him, yet he had mercy on them, and had come to that city on purpose to die for its inhabitants. That, too, is the spirit of God. The Bible is all aglow with statements of God's mercy. "Unto thee, O Lord, belongeth mercy T Ps. Ixii. 12. His mercy is great. " Thy jjiercy is great unto the heavens." Ps. Ivii. 10. 'Very great. " Let me fall now into the hands of the Lord, for \ cry great are his mercies." I Chron. xxi. 13. It would he great ^ very great mercy to bless eternally all his children, but very little mercy to bless a fe~ju and endlessly damn the 7Jiany. Plenteous., rich in mercy. "The Lord is mercifzcl and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteozis in mercy." Ps. ciii. 8. "Who is rick in mercy." Eph. ii. 2. This harmonizes with the fact that he will bless all., but refutes the decla- ration that he will eternally curse millions. Tc7ider and impartial. " His tender mercies are over all his works" Ps. cxiv. 9. This accords with the truth that he will kindly regard all forever, but refutes the dogma that he will be the eternal foe of multitudes. Sure mer- 20 Oral Discussion. cies. " I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David." Isa. Iv. 3. There need be no doubt about it ; it is as sure as that God lives. Now and forever we can depend on the mercy of God. God delights in mercy. " He retaineth not his anger, because he dcUghteth in mercy T Micah vii. 18. As he is unchangeable, he always will delight in mercy. Eternity will not reveal the day when God will not delight in being, merciful to all. But if he will eternally curse millions, will he delight in being merciful to them 'i His mercy Is zinending. " His mercy endureth forever." Ps. cvi. I. Can all this precious testimony concerning God's mercy be reconciled with endless punishment for the sin of this brief life.^ VII. The Justice of Christ — of God. JesUs in the New Testament Is tei'med " The Holy One, and the Just," " The Just One." Even Pilate, though he condemned Jesus, said he was a "Just person," and his wife called him a "Just man." Herod, likewise, who sought his destruction, admitted " He was a just man." Christ said of himself, " My judgment is just." The justice of Jesus was the justice of God,- for " In Christ dwelt all the full- ness of the Godhead bodily," hence it is said of God, "Just and right are his ways." Isa. xl v. 21. "Just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints." Rev. xv. 3. " Shall mortal man be more just than God ? " Job iv. 17. "Justice and Judgment are the habitation of thy throne." Ps. Ixxxix. 14. God then Is just. Infinitely, eternally, universally just. Just in himself, just to each of mankind, just to all. What does justice demand? That all eri'ors and wrongs shall be corrected. The justice of parents demands the obedience of their children. The justice of a state de- Universal Salvation. 21 mands the loyalty of all its citizens. The justice of God demands universal love, obedience and faithfulness. 'It requires that " Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low^ ; that the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough w^ays smooth ; and that all flesh shall see the salvation of God." Luke iii. 5, 6. And the voice of the Lord will cry in the wilder- ness till this result shall be attained. It shall be so, said Jesus ; it shall be so, said the prophet he quotes. «^'^ Parents, states, alwavs demand loyalty — never satisfied without it. God does^nd will eternally demand loyalty — will not be satisfied without it. He has not placed, and he never will, in this world or in the world to come, a soul where he cannot be loyal to him ; because now and forever God requii^es universal loyalty. \Time expired. [mr. Sweeney's first reply.] Getitlemejt Afoderators, Ladies and Gejitlemen : I agree with my friend Mr. Manford that the subjects we have assembled to consider are of vast importance to us all. We shall have no discussion about that. Nor are we likely to have any about the fact of our eternal existence. For, that we shall all exist forever I presume we agree. We shall differ inainly as to what shall be the condition, in the future, of such persons as " leave this world sinful." Mr. Manford has engaged to prove that they will all " finally be reconciled to God, and saved ; " and you are here to hear him do it. I am here to see how he does it. The gentleman seems somewhat " fearful that all, or about all, the adult portion of mankind leave this world 22 Oral Discussion. more or less sinful; " and it would seem that Mr. Camp- bell has led him into serious doubts as to whether " the infant portion of mankind is any better off than the adult." So I suppose we are to understand that he is here to prove that the veiy best of the adult portion of mankind, and all infants, will finally be reconciled to God and saved, as well as those who will not be recon- ciled and saved in this life ! But I shall insist on reliev- ing him of a portion of this work at the outset. /^Some persons are reconciled to God and saved in this world, jy-^^m and hence do not leave it sinful. ^Vs to the salvation of these he need give himself no trouble. As to the salva- tion of such, though they may leave this world imper- fect, I raise no question. Then, as to infants he need not give himself the slightest bit of trouble. They will all gotojieaven. They have in this world some imper- fection of nature, it is true, but they are not sinful in anysense that will, in my view, jeopardize their happi- ness in the future life. The Roman Catholics may, I grant, have taught some things respecting infants unwarranted by the Scriptures; and so may have Pro- testants. Mr. Campbell, too, may have said some things about hereditary depravity unsupported by Scripture. But "what of all that? Is Mr. M. really here to prove that little infants will finally be reconciled to God and saved ? Of course I raise no question as to the shrewd- ness of the attempt to mix up the goats with the sheep and lambs; but I shall seriously insist t|iat the gentleman meet the simple issue fairly and squarely. Everybody here knows just who are meant by " all who leave this world sinful." That phrase was not meant to include christians and infants. Let us then have no dodging. Let the gentleman come up to the work squarely and Universal Salvation. 23 bravely, and so maintain before this people his reputation as a debater. The gentleman is here to prove the final reconciliation and salvation of persons differing almost infinitely from infants. If his proposition is an honest one, it means by " all who leave this world sinful " to include, esjatcially persons, in scripture style, called " Dogs, and sorcerers, whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie." It afiirms that such persons, leaving this world so, " will finally be reconciled to God, and saved." There are many persons, we know, who, right in the blaze of Gospel light^ live and die sinful; and it is of the future reconciliation and salvation of such that many of us have serious doubts. If Mr. M. can prove that such characters will, in the future, or " over the River," as he has it, be reconciled to God and saved, I will give up as to the rest of mankind, and we will close the debate. " Salvation," the gentleman tells us, " is progressive, here and hereafter." "All do not die at once ; all are not raised from the dead at once ; all will not be saved at once." Will he be so kind, now, as to tell us what he means by " raised from the dead " .? I am curious to hear from him on this point. If by " raised " he means anything like what people generally mean wl^n speak- ing of the resurrection of the dead, I am ready to admit his assertion; and shall begin just there to upset his whole theory of universal salvation. Does he mean that there will be two resurrections ; one of the just, and one of the unjust ? Or does he really mean that thei"e will be as many resurrections as there shall be persons to die .'' — a resurrection every time a person dies ? It would be quite an accommodation to me, and I am sure it would help on our discussion greatly, for him to give us a sharp definition at this point. Will he do it.^ 24 Oral Discussion. In one sense, salvation is progressive here, I grant; but who knows about the " hereafter " ? All men " are not saved at once " here, I know. Indeed, some utterly- refuse to be saved here, and that such will be saved hereafter at all^ is more than I know ; and, with defer- ence to all, I think it is what no man has any sufficient authority to preach. The gentleman has something to say of man, as made in the image of God, and of Christ as a man, even a " colossal man," a " perfect man," " the best of the best; " " and hence it is said he was God manifested in the flesh, God with us." Now, I call attention to this, mainly to say tliat I fail to see the " hence." I have never learned that Jesus was called God simply because he was a " colossal man." Therefore I am not prepared to say, with my worthy opponent, that " This view of our Redeemer makes him doubly dear." But then I fully agree with him, that from Christ Jesus "we may expect to learn the Will, Purpose, Desire and Pleasure of God relative to human destiny." And this brings me to the first argument: I. " What was the Will of Christ concerning man's final destiny } Did he will our salvation or damnation .'' " I am ready to answer that he willed our salvation, present and future. He came, too, to do his Fathei-'s will, and taught his disciples to pray, " Thy will be done." And so we should pray. So far as the Father's will de- pended upon Jesus for its performance it was done ; but is it, by men., " done in earth as it is done in heaven " .? When I am convinced that it is, then will all my con- ceptions of heaven be utterly confounded. But to show what the will of God concerning human destiny is, the gentleman read Paul's language to Timothy — " Who Universal Salvation. 25 will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." Now, if this is an argument, it evidendy has one silent premise. To make it an argument it must be shown that all things whatsoever God wills, in the sense of the text, will certainly be accomplished. ■ Jesus came to do the will of God, and he did it. But God wills that men should obey him, even as he is obeyed in heaven. This, however, is not done. Mr. Manford will hardly say it is. So ftn as God's will depends upon man for its performance, I am sorry to say, it is not always done. And this is a fact that my friend will find continually and most stubbornly opposed to his theory; and while he may think it " only so much the worse for the fact," I incline to think it will prove so much the worse for his theory. The gentleman says, " It is his will now that all shall be saved, and it eternally will be his will that all shall be saved." Yes, it is his will now that all should be saved, and yet, all are not saved — some refuse to be saved. Why may not some be unsaved to all eternity for the same reason that they are unsaved now } But, what " eternally will be " God's will I am not prepared to speak so positively as some do. That 's more than I know : and, with all possible deference to my dis- tinguished opponent, I am more than half inclined to say it is more even than he knows. But, as I have already shown, even if it shall be so, what of it } God does not will concerning man as he does concerning rocks — does not govern mind as he does matter. But it cannot be shown that God never will abandon a will- ful sinner, either by scripture or reason. But, as expressive of the will of God, my friend cited the last chapter of Revelations — "The Spirit and the 3 26 Oral Discussion. bride sav, come. Let him that heareth say, come. Let him that is athirst come. And "v^diosoever will, let him take the water of life freely " — and informed us that "Jesus never revoked these words. God never revoked them." I agi*ee ^vith him that this grand invitation to men has never been " revoked." But in this same chapter we learn that the time shall come when the Judge of all will pronounce this sentence — " He that is unjust, let him be unjust still : and he that is filthy, let him be filthy still." And because this terrible sentence is to be pronounced, all heaven, and the good of earth, say to the sinner, "^ come." But my friend tells him God always will say " come." I say the invitation will be " revoked " when God shall say, " He that is filthy, let him be filthy still." Still I Still!! How long does that mean .'' And, by the way, when the Judge of the universe shall have decided that men have eflfectually resisted his love, and all his invitations, and shall have said, " He that is filthy, let him be filthy still," it will avail little for any poor puny man to stand up and say, "/can see no good reason for the imperfections of earth being perpetuated through the ceaseless ages of eternity," even though he should mildly call it " immortalizing our Adamic frailties and imperfections." IL "The Purpose of Christ— of God." As no power outside of himself can stay his hand, it follows that, when God's purposes depend alone upon himself for their performance, they will never fail. Hence, it is written. " For the Lord of hosts hath pur- posed, and who shall disannul it "i and his hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it back.^" And, "I have pur- posed it, I will also do it." These scriptures I, of course, believe as devoutly as my opponent does. Let him show Universal Salvation. 27 that God has purposed the reconcihation and salvation of all men with an absolute purpose, depending for its performance only upon himself, and it will be something to his purpose. Has he shown this ? Can he do it ? I fearlessly say, he cannot. He cites Paul's language to the Ephesians — " Having made known unto us the mys- tery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he hath purposed in himself, that in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which ai'e in heaven and which are on earth, even in him." It would be difficult to show conclusively that this pas- sage teaches anything more than the purpose of God to gather together in one place all things that are in Christy whether they be now in heaven or on earth; but, will- ing to allow my friend all he can claim as to its teach- ing, I will grant that the gathering together means reconciliation and salvation — thus making it teach the reconciliation and salvation " of things in heaven " — and that it applies to all mankind. And then what have we .'' why, simply that God made known to the Apostles the mystery of his will, that thereby " he might gather together in one " — or might reconcile and save all men. But does it certainly follow that all men will be recon- ciled and saved .'' I think not. Let us hear Paul on this subject : " God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech by us; we pray in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." 3 Cor. v. 19, 20. God beseeches men, and by the Apostolic ministiy, frays men to he reconciled to him. And this shows clearly that God's 28 Oi'al Discussion. purpose to reconcile all things to himself depends for its accomplishment somewhat upon the persons to be recon- ciled, and that it is not an absolute purpose depending only upon God for its accomplishment, as my friend must assume, to make an argument from the purpose of God. Some men refuse to be reconciled to God and saved, and God does not reconcile and save such. Will he ever change.'* No. Then who can prove from the purpose of God that all will be reconciled to God, and saved .'' It is true that God sent Jesus " to be the Savior of the world ; " but it is equally true that he does not save all in this world. And the reason he does not save some is that they refuse to be saved, and this may be the reason they are not saved to all eternity. Some live under the light of the Gospel in this world, and are not saved, but " leave this woiid sinful." And, now, my friend is in need of a passage that says Jesus was sent to be the Savior of such as leave this world sinful, and that he will save them any how. It is just at this point that his proposition is most pitcously crying out for help. And I think all its cries will be vain. III. " Christ Desired the reconciliation and salvation of all men." Yes; but men have lived and died sinful — have " left this world sinful " — notwithstanding they kneiu Christ " desired " their reconciliation and salvation. His "desire" did not reconcile and save them, so long as we had any account of them. Will he change, and recon- cile and save men who leave this world sinful as he would not while they were in this world,? Does my friend believe in a changeable Savior.? The gentleman quite eloquently says — "If God is love and not hate, if he is good and not evil, if he is our Universal Salvation. 29 friend and not our foe, if he is our father and not a cruel despot, he must desire our welfare." And I think he was most undoubtedly correct, as well as eloquent. God does " desire our welfare." But some refuse to fare well, though God has made all necessary provision for them. Some remain in this world sinful as long as they can, and then leave it sinful, knowing all the time that God desires their welfare. Now, let the gentleman find a passage of scripture that speaks of their welfare, where they go when they leave this world sinful. I will not, now, trouble him to tell us where they go ^ sinful. It would be shocking to ask him to say they go to heaven sinful; and as he has no future hell in his creed, he would fall under the necessity of making an entirely new survey of the universe, to find a place for " all who leave this world sinful," and that would consume more time than I want him to devote to a little matter of that sort at this stage of our discussion. Therefore, I only ask him to point out the scripture that speaks of the future reconciliation and salvation of such. If he knows of such scripture he should, for the sake of all interests, let us have it. But he wants to know if I believe God will change " in the distant future, and will desire the endless misery of countless millions of his children?" Cer- tainly not. Such a thought never once entered into my mind. I know, however, that millions, if not countless millions, of such persons as Mr. Manford calls "his children," are miserable in this world ; and yet it has never entered my mind that this is so because God desires it. Well, if countless millions of " God's children " sin, and are consequently miserable in this world, though he all the time desires their obedience and happiness, how will it go with such when they leave this world sinful, if God chancre not.^ 30 Oral Discussion. IV. " It was the Pleasure of Christ that all should be reconciled and saved." " And it would be slandering Jesus to deny this." God has no pleasure in wickedness, but wickedness is^ notwithstanding. God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but the wicked die, notwithstanding. God, and Christ, and Angels, and all good people, are " pleased to see sinners become saints ;" but all sinners who know this, do not become saints. Many of them, on the con- traiy, " leave this world sinful." My friend wants to know if I believe that " God will by-and-by prohibit their conversion." Certainly not. Does Mr. M. believe God will by-and-by compel their conversion ? V. " The Love of Christ— of God." The gentleman thinks the " Love of Christ the most astonishing fact in history," and I will allow it. The story of God's love for man, even sinful and miserable man, beggars all human language. The story of Christ's love for sinners can never be told in words. Let sinners behold him in the Garden of Gethsemane, up the hill, and on the cross, and then say who can tell the story of his love in words. I think my friend slightly wrong, however, when he says, "Jesus knew man was a child of God^ and an heir of heaven^ and hence he lavished on him his heaven-born love, and sought his salvation." The Bible affords no such representation of the case. Jesus knew man was not a child of God, was not an heir of heaven, but was lost^ was perishing in his sins, " and hence he lavished on him his heaven-born love, and sought his salvation^ Then the gentleman refers to the " belief, that all but a select few are the children of Satan, and in the image of satan" — and says " it engenders hatred and its attend- Universal Salvation. 31 ant sins." Well, I say that all who do his will are children of Satan, and bear his moral image. So Christ taught. Did it " engender hatred and its attendant sins" in him ? Will Mr. Manford deny that those who do his will are children of the Devil, and bear his moral image in their lives.'' But he says: "That love has never forsaken the child- ren of men, and it never will forsake them, in time or eternity." But I submit that it is pretty hard for poor weak mortals to tell just what may or may not happen " in eternity." Even my opponent will admit, to-day, that eternity includes quite aiuhllc. We may speak more positively of things of tunc. The love of God does not save every body in time, we know, for many " leave this world sinful." Will the love of God, itself, save such in eternity.'' Here we should like to have a litde good authority. But just here, alas! is where Mr. Manford's authority fails liim. VI. " The Mercy of Christ— of God." This argument is already answered in what I have four or five times repeated. I, of course, accept all the scriptures the gentleman quoted, which speak of the mercy of God. But God's mercy, of Itself never reconciled and saved a single soul. Notwithstanding God's mercy, many live sinful, and die and leave this world sinful. Will God's mercy take such persons to a heaven they seemed to despise as long as we had any account of them } But, speaking of mercy, did it ever occur to my worthy opponent that Universalism has no such thing as mercy in it? If I understand it, Universalism is as destitute of mercy as it is of grace, and as utterly destitute of both as it is of truth. It teaches that every man must be punished for all his sins. This I understand to be one 32 Oral Discussion. of the very pillars of the Temple of Universallsm. But if I am wrong, he can show it; if I am right, where then is the mercy of Universalism? No one is saved from any punishment in this life, as every one must suffer all the punishment due him for all his sins; and, of course, no one will be saved from any punishment in the fiiture life, for Universalism teaches that there is none there to be saved from. It puzzles me, therefore, not a little, to luiderstand how Mr. Manford can speak so eloquently and pathetically of that to which, if his theory is correct, he certainly is not, and never can be, debtor to the amount of one farthing . But I believe in a merciful God, and a merciful and faithful High Priest. In the matter of a sinner's recon- ciliation and salvation, however, there are other things besides mercy to be considered. God is noxv merciful, but men are not all reconciled and saved. God, if he changes not, may always be merciful, and yet some remain unreconciled and unsaved. VII. " The Justice of Christ— of God." I, of course, accept in their fulness of meaning all the scriptures the gentleman read, touching the Justice of God, and of Christ. But he asks, " What does Justice demand } " and answers, " That all errors and wrongs shall be corrected." This answer Is obviously evasive. Has justice ever demanded that a willful sinner shall be forced to reconciliation and salvation? Will it ever demand this? If not, how can any man argue the cer- tain reconciliation and salvation of all men from the justice of God.'* "Justice of states," we are told, " requires loyalty of their subjects." But what If some nvill 7tot be loyal .^ Shall they be subjugated.'' and is that reconciliation and salvation } Universal Salvation. -i-r But we are told, " God has not placed, and he never will, in this world or in the world to come, a soul where it cannot be loyal to him." But " souls" are somtimes found where God never " placed " them. A man may- place himself where God never would have placed him. Will my friend deny this.'* I believe I have noticed all the gentleman's arguments. I might have done so in much less time, and much fewer words. I might, very properly, have grouped the whole seven together. The answer to one is the answer to all of them. But I have chosen to notice them separately. [ Time expired, [mr. manford's second speech.] You have heard my friend's reply to my first speech. I will first give it due attention, and then proceed to offer additional arguments in the affirmative of the proposition before us. It seems that he admits the endless existence of all mankind — some to live in heaven forever, and some in hell forever. In that respect he differs from many of his brethren, for hosts of them contend with immense zeal, that all who " leave this world sinful " will be annihilated, soul and body. That is surely an awful theory; but it is infinitely better to burn that doomed class of our race up, than to burn them eternally. My friend's church, 1 am happy to say, seems to be a fro- gresslve church. It is fast giving up the terrible dogma of the endless burning of those for whom Christ died, and falling in with the milder view, that they will be burned to ashes. But I trust that it will not stop in the ashes theory^ but move onward and upward into the full blaze of gospel.light and love, and finally rest in the glori- 34 Oral Discussion. ous hope of the redemption of humanity. So may it be. But Mr. S. does not rank with the progressive wing of his church. He beheves in the old-fashioned doctrine of endless hell torments^ and is doing all he can to save his church from subscribing to the notion that God by-and- by will make an ash heap of the majority of his children. Either view is unspeakably dishonorable to God. The pile of ashes would be an eternal monument of God's folly and cruelty, and the walls of hell would proclaim forever and ever to the astonished universe, the infinite malignity of their builder. Yes, it is my business to prove that " all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved," and I thank God, that he has furnished such a cloud of witnesses, that this will be the result of making man in the adorable image of the Most High. If none enter the heavenly kingdom but those who arc regenerated in this world, alas for nearly all mankind ! Most of them will have to ' walk the plank,' if that partial dogma is true. It is a soul-chilling, and heart-rending thought. No won- der Henry Ward Beecher says, he " dare not think of hell." If that doctrine is true, most of the brave and noble dead of all ages and climes are this moment in hell. Nearly all the patriots who laid down their lives in three wars to save this country are now blowing the flames of perdition as a reward for their heroic deeds, for it will not be contended that they were all regenerated in tliis world. I showed in my first speech, that nearly all mankind leave this world more or less sinful — die unprepared for the purity, life, and bliss of heaven — and Mr. Sweeney admits, that even those who are termed "the saved" may leave it '-'■ imperfccV — imperfect, of course, in Universal Salvation. 35 christian character. If so, they are not entirely recon- ciled to God, are not perfectly Sdived in this world ^ to an endless hell, then, they must go, if he is right. I also showed that Mr. Campbell contends, that all ifi- fants are born sinful^ and my friend is careful not to say he discards that notion. I infer from his little eva- sion here that he and his church are of the same opinion. As they all deny the possibility of infant conversion, I do not see that one infant can possibly be saved in this world or the world to come, if they are correct. Put this and that together and behold the result, ist. All infants are born sinful. 3nd. Infant regeneration is a humbug. 3rd. No one who leaves this world sinful can be saved. These propositions certainly involve the damnation of all who die in childhood. He says, "in- fants will all be saved." But how can that be, if they are sinful, and cannot be regenerated .'' Some light is much wanted right here. If God will save infants, who are '"'•fallen., greatly fallen^ depraved^ sinful^^ as Mr. Camp- bell asserts, without regeneration in this world, and so die in a sinful condition, then he will save one-third of mankind who leave this world sinful. If he will save one-third of our race who die sinful, may he not save more? may he not save all? Mr. S. says, that the words " all who leave this world sinful " " were not meant to include christians and infants." If the former are " im- perfect" in christian character, and the latter " sinful," the words were meant to include both classes. Again, my friend says, " Is Mr. M. here to prove that little infants will finally be reconciled to God and saved } " If they are " sinful and greatly depraved," they are 7iot " reconciled to God and saved," and so they are the very ones I am to show will finally be saved. "Dogs, sorcerers," etc. 36 Oral Discussion. surely need salvation; and Jesus came to save them, according to the gospel I'ecord. He came to save the " lost," the " dead," the " chief of sinners." He came \.o save \h(t\x\ — not damn them. My opponent intimat- ed that I contend that God v\^ill force men to be recon- ciled to God. He must know that is a misstatement. But it would be more Godlike to force men into heaven than into hell. It is better to force men into the right direction than the wrong direction. It is preached, that God forces men into this world "sinful and greatly depraved ;" ybrce^ them into graves dug by the sin of Adam; WiW force them to the bar of an enraged deity; y/viW force them into hell, dii\d force them to lie down in death and destruction forever and ever. That is called sound preaching, gospel preaching. But if it is intimated that the grace of God will ultimately regenerate all souls, a howl loud and long goes up from ten thousand pulpits, and we are charged with teaching that God will force men into heaven! Truly, the spirit of Christ is much needed in this world. What the gentleman says about the resurrection will be attended to in due time. All he says concerning the Will, Desire, Mercy, Pleasure and Love of Christ, of God, will now be care- fully considered. He admits that Heaven loves all sinners now, his mercy extends to all sinners now, that he wills and desii*es the salvation of all sinners now; and that consequently, truth and virtue, life and salvation, are free to all sinners now. I go a step further, and assert that truth and virtue, life and salvation, will be free to all ETERNALLY, for the Same reasons that they are free to all fioijo — for the same reasons exactly. Now, if God will at some future period put part of mankind where they cannot receive the truth, cannot be righteous, cannot Universal Salvation. 37 partake of life and salvation, but be compelled to sin and suffer and die eternally, then his love will change^ his mercy will change^ his desire^ will and pleasure will change, and Mr. S. contends that God will thus situate a vast multitude of mankind. Christ then will be no longer Christ, and God will be no longer God, but both will be metamorphosed into fiends. This is worse than atheism, it is diabolism. But the Bible teaches that God is unchangeable. " I am the Lord, and change not." "He is of ONE mind, and who can turn him.^" But, says my friend, God is unchangeable. Then he surely will not perpetuate sin, depravity, death, damnation, hell, forever. He chains none to the car of satan 7io"Jo, he will not hereafter. He locks none up in hell now., he will not in the future. Salvation is now free to the " lost," the " dead," " the chief of sinners," it will be free as long as souls are in those conditions. If in the future world God will not permit a soul to be regenerated, I want the reason., the scripture for it. I do not affirm, that God's will, pleasure and desire, are done at all times, and in all places in this world. Mr. S. will please remember that during this discussion. But I do affirm, that as God is unchangeable, all, eter- nally, will have opportunities equal, at least, to those they have here., to grow wiser and better. Let him remember that too, for, unfortunately, he is very forget- ful on that point. That is the argument from the will, pleasure, and desire, of God. As my friend denies emphatically, earnestly, the correctness of tliis deduction from the character of God, it is for him to prove that he is right, and I am wrong — if he can. Let him address himself to this task. I shall press this point on his attention all through this discussion. Let him refute it. 38 Oral Discussion. or yield the field. It is an old Orthodox, Catholic, Mor- mon, Pagan and Savage dogma, that all who die unre- generated have no chance whatever of salvation; that nothing but sin, darkness, death, damnation, are provided for such. Hell is crammed full of such commodities, and its victims are doomed by the God of Love to feast on that horrid diet eternally. Love, mercy, goodness, charity, are all shut out of hell, and locked up in heaven. And this, it is said, is all done by him " Who is good unto ALL, and his tender mercies are over all his WORKS." This, in my estimation, is a monstrous error. Let Mr. S. show it to be the truth of God — if he can. The gentleman says, " It is God's will now that all should be saved, and yet all are not saved — some refuse to be saved. Why may not some be unsaved to all eternity, for the same reason they are unsaved now ? " But all can be saved now^ salvation \sfree to all now^ even to the vilest of the vile, because there is a God who is good; and as there always will be a God of goodness, all ever can be saved. That is my position ; and that is exactly what he denies. Let him prove that the God of love will compel all who die unregenerated, to sin and suffer forever — if he can. He can easier prove that God will be annihilated. Again, he says, " But what eternally will be God's will, I am not prepared to speak so posi- tively as some do. That's more than I know." But he is very positive on that subject. He is very positive, that after awhile God will will the eternal sinfulness and wretchedness of all who die unregenerated. He wills their conversion now, but as soon as the other world opens to the vision of those who pass the grave uncon- verted, their damnation is sealed by the divine will. He Universal Salvation. 39 does not like to say that in plain English. It is too horrible to utter without circumlocution, but that is the sum of his reasoning. According to Mr-. Sweeney, all those precious invita- tions of the divine Spirit, abounding in the Bible, to erring rnen to abandon the ways of folly, and walk in virtue's ways, are all to be revoked. They will no longer be required.^ no longer be ■po'rjiitted., no longer have an opportunity.^ to be virtuous, and then they will be damned forever, for not doing what they will not be allowed to do! And he even attempts to sus- tain such a ten-ible notion by the words of the blessed Jesus. He cites this passage, "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still; and he that is filthy, let him be filthy still," Rev. xxii. 1 1 . This sentence, he thinks, will be pronounced, at a great judgment day in the dis- tant future, on all who die unregenerated. A brief exam- ination of this passage will show the absurdity of his application. The verses immediately before^ and imme- diately after this passage read thus, " And he saith unto me, seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book, for the TIME IS AT HAND." " And behold, I come quickly." Eighteen hundred years ago, then, the time was AT HAND when the passage he cited was to be fulfilled. It was then to take place quickly. According to my learned friend, "at hand" and "quickly" mean several thousand years. Webster's Dictionary should be revised if Mr. Sweeney is right. The passage clearly has no reference to his judgment day, has no reference to the future world. But even if it does refer to the end of time, as he supposes, it will have to be altered before it will sustain his cause. "Let" will have to be changed to shall., and " still" to eternally. The gentleman will have 40 Oral Discussion. to prove, that " quickly " and " at hand " mean several thousand years, that "let" means shall, and "-still" means eternally, before the passage will contain one par- ticle of evidence that God's blessed invitations to sinners to cease doing evil, and learn to do good, will ever be abrogated. I am requested to "point out the scripture, that speaks of the future reconciliation and salvation of sinners." The good book abounds with such testimony. Some of it has already been presented, and more will be adduced from time to time. All through his speech he assumes, that because some die unconverted, their endless damnation is sure. With equal sense he might assume, that because some are not converted at the age of twenty-one years, their damna- tion is sure. God's mercy and saving grace are not restricted to any age^ or worlds ox place. That is one of the most precious truths of the Bible. God is an omni- cient Spirit. His love, wisdom, justice, mercy, are man- ifested here and every where, now arjd forever. . "I cannot go Where Universal Love not smiles around, Sustaining all yon orbs, and all their suns; From seeming evil still educing Good, And better thence again, and better still, In infinite progression. But I lose Myself in Him, in Light ineffable ! " Away, then, with the error, that the love and mercy of the august Being whose presence fills infinity, are all expended in regenerating a few souls on this little spot of the boundless universe of the infinite God. It is amazing that a christian minister should entertain such partial, such contracted notions of the Builder and Gov- Universal Salvation. 41 ernor of the universe. O my friend, sit at the feet of Jesus, and learn better. It is true, that many die sin- ners. But God does not die when sinners die; neither is he transformed into a fiend wlien sinners die. He still lives and loves ; his arms of mercy are still extended, and a new robe is ever ready for the penitent. " This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise," he says, to every repentant soul. The gentleman tells us, that the reason why Jesus so loved sinners was, he knew they were not heirs of heaven, were not children of God, but rather the children of satan. If Christ loved the children of an orthodox devil, he must have loved their father^ the devil himself. If sinners are really the children of such a devil, they are all devils themselves, for children always partake of the nature of their parents. If the devil is the father of sinners, they come into this world through the agency of satan, and are his offspring from their birth. If the devil is totally depraved, his infant children are totally depraved. This, perhaps, is what Mr. Campbell means when he says, that children are sinful. According to our friend's luminous exposition, Jesus fell in love with the devil's offspring, and is trying to smuggle them from their right- ful owner. Banish such folly from your mind, from your creed, from your heart. All mankind are God's children. Jesus tells sinners to pray, " Our Father who art in heaven." Jesus told his disciples, soon after he selected them, that they should love their enemies, " That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven." God was then their Father, and of course, they his children, yet Christ told them to do something, that they might be his childrot. This is the explanation. God was their Father, they were his children, but their 4 42 Oral Discussion. moral character was not yet Godlike, hence they were not God's children characteristically^ morally. So, all sinners are children of God by natuj'c, but not so morally. But when they observe the law of love, they are his morally, as well as by nature, and it was the mission of Jesus to transform our character into the divine image, and there- by make us God's children morally. He tells us, that " God's mercy of itself never saved a soul." But it is through his mercy that salvation is attained, and as long as he is a merciful God salvation will be possible. God is now merciful, and souls are being born into the kingdom of God. God eternally will be merci- ful, and souls will continue to be born into the kingdom of God, till God shall "be all in all." But God has no mercy if he deals with all Justly — so teaches my zealous friend. , He seems to think, that justice and mercy are deadly enemies. That all mercy is at the expense of justice, and all justice at the expense of mercy. Where he got his theology I do not know. The fact that God deals justly in punishing men fully, is given in the Bible as an evidence that God is merciful. " Unto thee, O Lord, belongeth mercy, for thou renderest to every man according to his works." Ps. Ixii. 12. The fact that he punishes, is proof of his mercy. But according to our brother here, the fact that God punishes is positive proof that God has no mercy. The mercy of God does much for us noxu^ and will do much for us for- ever, even if God does " render to every man according to his works." His mercy has given us a soul and a body of wonderful faculties. Has given us this earth to inhabit, and yonder heavens to behold. Has given us friends, and all the blessings of this life. Has given us knowledge of him, and of our duty and destiny. Has Universal Salvation. 43 made us immortal beings, to become purer, wiser and better forever. All these blessings are the gifts of divine mercy. But let my friend remember, that the fact that sinners receive all the punishment justice demands, does not entitle th^m to any of the blessings I have named. Those blessings are gifts of our Heavenly Father. But punishment is merciful because it is administered for a benevolent purpose. Speaking of my argument from the Justice of Christ — of God, he inquires, with wonderful simplicity, " Has justice ever demanded that a wilful sinner shall ho. forced to reconciliation and salvation } " Nonsense. Has this man had "fifty battles and fifty victories," as his brethren say, and still ask such a foolish question as that.'' I do not believe that any one will be forced into heaven or hell. I inquired, "What does justice demand .'*" and answered, " That all errors and wrongs shall be corrected." That he calls an evasion. No sir. It is the true answer. His view evidently is, that justice requires that errors and wrongs shall grow worse and worse forever. Because one commits errors and wrongs here, he seems to think justice demands that he be compelled to grow worse and worse eternally. A singular idea of justice! But then, he continues, after remarking that I said that gov- ernments require their citizens to be loyal, " What if some will not be loyal.'* Shall they be subjugated .'' And is that reconciliation and salvation.?" Certainly it is. The South was disloyal, but it was subjugated, and saved from destruction, and is now pretty well reconciled. We have seen that God punishes the disloyal for a mer- ciful purpose — that they may be subjugated, reconciled and saved. The purpose of God. My good friend admits, to use 44 Oral Discussion. his words, "When God's purposes alone depend on himself for their performance, they will never fail." That sounds about right. Now turn to the passage I quoted in my speech, and you will fiiad that to be the exact chai-acter of the purpose of God concerning mankind. I will again read it. " Having made known unto us the mystery of his will according to the good pleasure which he hath pui-poscd in himself." Let us pause a moment. He admits that when God's purposes depend on himself they are sure to be performed. This purpose, Paul says, God has purposed in himself — not in man or his works, mind you — but in himself- — in his own infinite power, wisdom and goodness. Well, what has God purposed in himself to do.'' The next verse, "That in the dispensa- tion of the fulness 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." Eph. i. 9, 10. This God has purposed in himself, and Mr. S, admits, that such a purpose is always -perfoi'ined. He tries to mystify the word might in this passage, but is careful not to tell us what it means. I will cite t\vo or three passages where the vs^ord occurs. "For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be the Loi^d both of the dead and living." Rom. xiv. 9. Is it not certain that he is the Lord of the dead and liv- ing.'' "For this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged." i Peter iv. 6. Was not the judgment sure.'' "Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren; that he might be a merciful and faithful High Priest." Heh. ii. 17. Is there any doubt about Christ being a faithful High Priest.'' So with the might connected- with the purpose of God. He has puiposed in himself Universal Salvation. 45 that all things in heaven and on earth might be gathered together in one, and it will be sure to be done. This is God's unalterable and eternal purjoose, and he employs ample means to accomplish it. *•' What he hath pur- posed he will perform." The passage does not read, that it is " the purpose of God to gather together in one place all things that are in Christ" as Mr. S. understands it. But that all things iit heave?t and on earth might be gath- ered together in Christ — baptized in his spirit, which is the true baptism, the " one baptism." We do not say, that men will be saved " anyhow," as the gentleman inti- mates. That one baptism is for all; and no one can be saved in this world or any other world, without that baptism. Before I close I will offer some additional arguments for the salvation and reconciliation of the world. VIII. God is the Governor of mankind. This I presume will not be disputed. The Psalmist says, " The Lord reigneth; let the earth rejoice; let the multitude of isles be glad thereof" Ps. xcvii. i. All rulers have a specific object in view, and that object corresponds with the character of the ruler. Some are puffed up with vanity, and only seek their own selfish ends. God being a wise and benevolent Ruler, seeks the good of his sub- jects — mankind. As his character will never change, he will, at all times and in all places, seek the good of all. This truth beautifully harmonizes with the doctrine of impartial grace, and accords with no other system. Well might inspiration sing, "The Lord reigneth; let the multitude of isles be glad." Yes, all have infinite reasons to be glad that such a God reigns. He reio-ns in wisdom, in love, in merc}^, in justice. If we are rebellious, he punishes — punishes wisely, benevolently, 46 Oral Discussion. justly. Not because he hates us, not to ruin us, but because he loves us, and to make us obedient subjects. True, there is evil in the world, but Goodness is on the Throne, and it is, and will be, overruled for good, and will finally end. •' Give evil but an end — and all is clear! Make it eternal — and all things are obscure ! And all that we have thought, felt, wept, endured, Worthless. We feel that e'en if our own tears Were wiped forever, no true cheer Could to the yearning bosoms be secured While we believed that sorrow clung uncured To any being we on earth hold dear. Oh, much doth life the sweet solution want Of all made blest in for futurity ! Heaven needs it too ; Our bosoms yearn and pant Rather indeed our God to justify Than our ownself Oh, why then drop the key That tunes discordant worlds to harmony.''" IX. The Law of God. The Moral Law of God is embraced in a few words. A lawyer asked Jesus, "Which is the greatest commandment?" This was the reply, " Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment, and the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." Matt. xxii. 36-40. Love to God, and love to man, is the sum of the law — the whole of religion. This was never repealed, and never will be. It is eternal and universal. It is the law of earth, it is the law of heaven. Men and angels, here and hereafter, now and forever, are required to love God supremely, and all Universal Salvation. £^ beings created in the divine image. If millions, as Mr. S. asserts, shall be banished to an endless hell, they will still be required to love God, and their neighbors as them- selves. This w^ill be their duty v^^hen they enter the fiery gates of their infernal prison, and will continue to be their duty forever and ever, in whatever quarter of satan's dominions they may be established. True, it is rather difficult to understand why they should be required to love the monster who is butchering them in hell eternally, but then, the whole system is full of difficulties. It seems to me, they would owe him nothing but intense hatred — hatred for cursing them with birth, with lite, with immortalit}'. To call on the victims of almighty wrath to love the author of their dreadful doom, would be adding insult to insult, mockery to mockery, diabol- ism to diabolism. But this terrible creed is a great error, is a libel on Love — on him whose name is Love. Hp calls on all to love him, and it is the duty of all to love him, because he is, and ever will be, the loving friend and father of all. This love will be fulfilled. Said Jesus, " Think not that I am come to destroy the lav/ or the prophets ; I am not come to destroy, but \.o f^dfill. For verily, I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled^ Matt. v. 17, 18. Here Jesus declares, that the law of God shall be fulfilled in every "jot" and "tittle." It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for the law of God to fail of being fulfilled. The ceremonial portion of the law was external, temporal, and local, of the earth, earthy, and was fulfilled in Christ's earthly life. But the Moral Law — love to God, and love to man — is internal, spiritual, universal, and eternal, and was not fulfilled in 48 Oral Disctission. the earthly life of Christ, but will be fulfilled when Jesus shall return the kingdom to God, and God be all in all. " Then cometh the end, when Jesus shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father, * * * * when all things shall be sulDdued unto him, * * * and God be all in all." i Cor. xv. 24-28. The ceremonial law was fulfilled at the end of Christ's earthly- life; hence he then said, "It is finished." The Moral Law will be fulfilled at the end of his reisfn. Accordinsr to the gospel, " Love is the fulfilling of the law." Rom. xiii. 10. "All the law is fulfilled in this word. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Gal. v. 14. And as at the end God will be all in all, the law will be fulfilled — eveiy "jot" and "tittle" of it. \^Time expired. [mr. Sweeney's second reply.] The gentleman's second speech, to which you have given such commendable attention, being almost entirely devoted to the work of reconstruction, I accept as a hand- some compliinent to my first reply. His woi-k of recon- struction, however, was by no means complete, notwith- standing so much of his time was so zealously devoted to it. Indeed, he seemed most of the time to be in the negative, defiantly calling upon me to prove this, that, and the other thing! When it comes my turn to affirm, I shall then try to prove my affirmative. At present, however, I am in the negative. Mr. Manford is in the affirmative. But he seems not a little troubled about "hell." My doctrine of an "endless hell," "hell torments," " endless burnings," seems to make him unac- countably nervous, even before I have uttered a word on Universal Salvation. 49 the subject. My advice to him is to be quiet, and save his thunder for the proper time. We vv^ill attend to the " hell " question, so far as I am affirmant, at the proper time. He need not be tormented by that question before his time. He thinks that in admitting the eternal existence of all men, I differ from my brethren, for, he says, " hosts of them contend, with immense zeal, that all v\rho leave this world sinful, will be annihilated, soul and body." If, by my " brethren," the gentlemen meant what I sup- pose most of you understood him to mean, I have simply to say, he is greatly in error. Perhaps I know almost as much about the views of my brethren as my opponent does. I think I know he has misrepresented them in this matter — unintentionally, of course. Wc, as a people, have very generally " contended with immense zeal " against the very error he charges upon us. I have found, moreover, that those who do contend that the wicked will be annihilated, and my friend Manford, use the same thunder. They and he must be " brethren." At any rate they howl alike. Hence, the gentleman thinks the views of Annihilationists "infinitely better" than mine. Still, he thinks "either view is unspeakably dishonorable to God." But the question comes up, are we infaUiblv safe in accepting just what he says, in a matter of this sort ? Who called and sent him to tell us just what is, an d what is not, " dishonorable to God"? Anyhow, might we not, without losing all our reverence, call upon him for some sign of infallibility, before accepting all he is pleased to say upon the subject. God did once even make a "pile of ashes" of some wicked people. Was that " a monument of his folly and cruelty " .'' Mr. Manford believes all sinners are in hell 5 50 Oral Discussion. nozv. Do the " walls " of the hell they are in now " pro- claim to the astonished universe the infinite malignity of their builder"? If so, will he tell us who was " their builder " ? Who builds the " walls " of the hell he believes in? Will he say the sinner does, himself? If so, will he allow me to agree with him on the subject of "walls" and their builders? We shall see. In the next place, the gentleman proceeded to say a good many things — that were easier for him to talk about, than to meet the issue fairly — upon the assumption that I had said, or the presumption that I would say, that " none will enter the heavenly kingdom, but those who are regenerated in this world;" while, in fact, I have said no such thing, and do not mean to. I do not believe, for instance, that infants are regenerated in this world, and yet I believe they will all enter the eternal kingdom. I do not believe they need any moral change to fit them for heaven. I thought I said this distinctly enough before. I do not believe Mr. Campbell ever taught any thing that involved the necessity of a moral change to fit infonts for heaven. I might admit that many who are not infants will enter tlie heavenly king- dom without being regenerated in this world, and come infinitely short of admitting the truth of his monstrous affirmation, as we shall see as we proceed. The gentleman thinks if I am right, " nearly all the patriots who laid down their lives in three wars to save this country, are now blowing the flames of hell," as their reward. Well, indeed, he must have quite a degraded opinion of the patriots, to think they " nearly all" go to hell when they die! And, by the way, he has given us a clue to what he thinks of them, while they live in this world. Of course, only such would go Universal Salvation. 51 to hell, were they to die, as are in hell now, if Univer- salism is true. So, in Mr. Manford's view, " nearly all " living patriots are in hell now ! And where are those gone, according to him, who left this world sinful,? Will he tell us } I have no hope that he will. Perhaps they are " blowing the flames of hell" to purify them- selves for heaven — and thus being reconciled to God ! But why this reference to patriots? Is it argument? Does my friend think it is ? Is this question to be settled by such references? Is it a question to be settled by a majority of the people, that one need throw himself out upon a course of electioneering for the sympathies of such as sympathize with the patriot dead ? Why does my friend use, with so much e.'nphasis, such language as " endless burnings," " endless hell torments," " blowing the flames of hell " ? Have I used such language ? Do you ever hear any body use it, but Universalists ? What worthy purpose does he hope to serve by the use of such language? Does he believe the Bible? I must, of course, not even allow myself to think he does not. But does he not know that his hearers, even skeptics, know that the language he ridicules with so much seem- ing pleasure, is more nearly the language of scripture than mine? He can only complain of me, that I apply the scripture language expressive of the punishment of the wicked to the future world, and make it eternal^ while Universalists generally apply it all to this world. Mr. Manford, however, only differs with me as to the eternity of punishment. Let us meet the question like men, sir, and not be found ridiculing what is so nearly the language of the book we both accept as from God. I admitted that such persons as are said to be saved — Christians — have nevertheless some " imperfections " 52 Oi-al Discussion. while they live in this world, and the gentleman thence concludes that they are therefore " not entirely reconciled to God," and will hence have to be reconciled and saved in the future world. But physical and constitutional imperfections, such as saved persons still have, do not imply irreconciliation. Christians are, by the Apostles, represented as being both reconciled and saved, already, and are, as such, promised that they shall lose the weak- nesses and imperfections they still have in the resurrection. N ow, will the gentleman tell us what he means by sal- vation? What, for perspicuity, does he understand the Savior to mean by " saved," when he said, " he that believes and is baptized shall be saved" ? Can I get a direct answer to this question? or will it be laid over till " due time," as was that one pertaining to the resurrec- tion of the dead ? A sharp definition here, will clear away a good deal of smoke. Is that desirable } The gentleman thinks I intimated that Universalists believe "God will force men to be reconciled and saved," when I "must know that is a misstatement." Well, it may be a misstatement of Universalism, but I certainly do not know it to be such. Man, as I understand Universalism to teach, will not only be forced into recon- ciliation and salvation, but he is now forced to do what- ever he does, and to be whatever he is. He is forced into sin — or into what is called sin, by the unlearned — forced to live in sin ; forced into hell — such as Universal- ists believe in — then forced to do what we call right, and will finally be forced into heaven. Indeed, this is the only ground on which Universalism has ever made ,any show of defense. It has been and it must be held, that man cannot in any case violate the will, the jourpose, the intention, of God ; otherwise there is not the shadow Universal Salvation. 53 of an argument to be thence derived for Universal ism. But let us see if I am misstating the matter. I suppose my friend will accept Hosea Ballon as an orthodox Uni- versalist. He says, [Treatise on the Atonement, page 16): "Now to reason justly, we fmtst conclude, that if God possesses infinite wisdom, he could never intend anything to take place, or be, that will not take place, or be; nor that which is, or will be, not to be, at the time when it is." Again, page 17, he says, "The above arguments are introduced to show the absurdity of admitting a violation of the intention of the Supreme Legislator. I now turn on the other side, and admit as a fact, ivhat I have siifficie?itly refuted, viz., that the in- tentions of God, as a supreme legislator, are violated by the sin of finite beings." Again I read, on page 36 : " But perhaps the objector will say, this denies the lib- erty of the will, and makes God the author of sin. To which I reply, desking the reader to recollect what I have said of sin in showing its nature ; by which it is discovered, that God may be the innocent and holy cause of that which in a limited sense is sin, but as respects the meaning of God, it is intended for good." * * * * " If it should be granted that sin will finally terminate for good, in the moral system, it will then be necessary to admit that God is its first cause, or we cannot say that God is the atUhor of all good" That's logic for you ! But to make good more than I " intimated," I read once inore, page 23 : " Perhaps the reader by this time is ready to say, according to this reasoning, there can be no such tiling as real evil in the Universe. If, by real evil, be meant something that ought not to be, in respect to all the consequences that attend it, / cannot admit of its existence." 54 Oral Discussion. If these readings do not make good all I intimated as to " force," according to Universalism, my friend has only to intimate that he is not quite satisfied, and I will help him to more. Now the trouble with Mr. Manford is, that he tries to argue universal salvation from the will, purpose, desire and intention of God, without maintaining the utter inviolability of the will, purpose, desire and intention of God. This, I submit, cannot be done. There is not a man living that can make an argument of it. I think I know logic when I see it, and I fearlessly pronounce my friend's argument, as he calls it, a huge burlesque on logic. He does not believe " God will save a sinner any how r Indeed ! Then how does he know that all will be saved } Unless the sinner is to be saved anyhoiv there is no certainty that he will ever be saved at all. The gentleman thinks the sinner is to be saved on the condition of his reconciliation^ and yet God will not force him to be reconciled. Well, that's about what I believe ; and how comes it to pass that he is a Universal- ist and I am not ? Can he tell "i I think I can. It is because he jumps to the conclusion without premises, and I do not. And on this question of logic, I have the strongest minds among his brethren on my side. I call in Father Ballou again, whose very garments are redolent of logic. On the hypothesis that salvation is conditional — which my friend admits — he says, " Is it certain^ according to this plan, that any of Adam's postei-ity will obtain salvation ? Is it not in the power of all men to 7ieglect those conditions? If it be not, it destroys the nature of conditions." — Treatise on the Atonement^ page 97. Ballou is logical. There is nothing more ob- viously true than that that which is conditional may or Universal Salvation. 55 may not obtain. To say a thing is conditional that must absolutely be, is to destroy the very nature of conditions. So it turns out that I have not, even by intimation, mis- stated Univcrsalism. The trouble with m< friend is, that he has switched off the track! And I venture to predict he will run into deeper troubles than those he has run off the track to avoid. To prove that all men will finally be saved, without a doubt, he must deny that it is conditional. He inust hold, in effect, that sinners will not only be forced into heaven, but forced to stay there eternally ! And judging from their manifest tastes and habits, nothing but force would keep some there, if there were any less holy place to be found in God's universe. Now, I think I fully understand what my friend calls the "argument froin the will, pleasure and desire of God." He does not affirm, as Uuiversalists have gene- rally done heretofore, that " God's will, pleasure and desire are done at all times and in all places in this world" He only contends, that as all now have the opportunity to be reconciled to God and saved, and as God is unchangeable, " all eternally will have at least the opportunity given them to grow wiser and better." Suppose I admit what my friend cannot prove at this point, though it is indispensable to his argument, namely, that sinners will eternally have the opportunity to be reconciled to God and saved, does the truth of his prop- osition follow ? By no means. How will he go about proving that such persons as slight, with all possible contempt, every opportunity of salvation in this life, will certainly accept and improve such opportunity in the future life.? He is a reasoner, a man of learning and large experience, and of course, if any one can prove 56 Oral Discussion. such a proposition, he is the very man for the task. I confess I am ahnost nervously anxious to see how he will go about the work. We cannot put up with guess work at this point. We must have proof, or his cause fiiils. This is plain to all. But then I do not believe that any man will have eter- nity in which to slight the goodness and love of God. I do not believe any man will have eternity in which to contemptibly disregard all heaven's invitations to virtue, salvation and life. That he should, is neither reasonable nor scriptural. Nor do I believe any one's opportunities will ever be cut off on account of any change in God, or Chi'ist, or love, or goodness, or mercy, or virtue, or heaven, either. Will men who, for example, "were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come," but, having fallen away, " have crucified the Lord afresh, and put him to an open shame," — have " counted his blood an unholy thing, and done despite to the spirit of grace," — will such persons have eternity in which to reject oflcred mercy and salvation ? Is it reasonable tliat they should.'* vShall it be proclaimed throughout the whole realm of intelligent being, that God, the governor of this universe, will allow one of his creatures to rebel against him, and despise his love and offered mercy to all eternity.'' Reason stands pale before such a proposition. Neither is it scriptural, as I think we shall see. But before noticing other scriptures upon this point, I shall give respectful attention to what the gentleman had to say of one I incidentally noticed in my former speech : " He that is filthy, let him be filthy stiil." He thinks this sentence has been already pro- Universal Salvation. ^y nounced. Will he please tell us zv/ieu God said, " He that is filthy, let Jmn be filthy still ? " I am quite certain it would be a bit of information to me, and I dare say it would afibrd some consolation to such as love filthiness, for the gentleman to show, that God has already said, " He that is filthy, let him be filthy still" ! If Mr. Man- ford believes this decree has already gone forth^ of course, he now says to sinners, " Be filthy still." I never heard him make this proclamation, but if God has made it, as he thinks, of course it is wrong for men to ask the filthy to turn away from filthiness. But we are told that the context says, " the time is at hand," "• behold, I come quickly," and so forth. "At hand," in scripture style, however, does not necessarily mean in a few days, or even years. And the word T'aku^ rendered quickly in the text, may mean no more than rapidly, or suddenly ; and so the Lord will come; and the7z it will be said, *' He that is filthy, let him be filthy still." The gentleman's attention is now invited to the follow- ing: "Then said Jesus unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins; whither I go ye cannot come. Then said the Jews, will he kill himself } because he saith, whither I go ye cannot come. And he said unto them. Ye are from beneath; I am from above; ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins; for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die In your sins." John viii. 21-34. This is the language of Jesus, addressed to persons who were determined not to believe in him. He knew their determination, and by this lan- guage taught them three things, i. That the time would come when they would "seek" him in vain. 2. That they should die in their sins — or, in the language of our 58 Oral Discicssion. proposition, "should leave this world sinful" — and, 3. "Whither I go ye cannot come." Now, it strikes me, that before this scripture and the gentleman's proposi- tion can be made to harmonize, one, or the other, or both, will have to be considerably tinkered. The propo- sition asserts, that " all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved," while the pas- sage of scripture seems to me to teach, at least, that those who live and die willfully and determinedly sinful, can never go where Christ is. Can both be true.'' If so, the gentleman, it is to be hoped, will be able to show us how they can. Attention is also invited to another scripture, which I think imports the same: "Strive to enter in at the strait gate; for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. When once the Master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying. Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not, whence ye ai"c : then shall yc begin to say, we have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets. But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not, whence ye are ; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out. And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God." Luke xiii. 23-29. Here, the Lord teaches that such persons as refuse " to enter in at the strait gate" now, hereafter '-'-will seek to enter in, and shall not he able" and this will be, Universal Salvation. 59 " ivhen once the Master of the house hath risen up, and hath shut to the door." Now, as to what is meant by the " door," here, my friend may say himself. Is it the door of the cl:iurch here, or of the heavenly kingdom ? In either case, has the Master of the house ever yet risen up, and shut it? Have men ever sought to enter into the church, and were not able, because the Lord had closed the door? I think not. I think the Lord "hath set an open door," and says to all, Come. But the time will come when some "will seek to enter in, and shall not be able," and will not be able because the Lord will have " shut to the door." And this shall be xuhen the persons whom the Savior addressed " shall SEE Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom," and themselves thrust away — "johen the righteous " shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God." We are told that " God's mercy and saving Grace are not restricted to any age, or world, or place." This, of course, means that if sinners do not choose to obey the Gospel in this world, they can do so in the world to come. If they choose not to obey in this " age," they will have time and opportunity to do so, in any of the millions of ages to come, and they need not be in any particular trouble about the matter either, as they certainly will " finally be reconciled to God, and saved." Then the gentleman gravely turns about and calls on me to prove some negative! He is in the afiirmative, and aflirms quite enough to keep him busy proving during this life, and a good part of the life to come. Let him^ therefore, bring on his proof, and not call on me to prove anything till my time comes. 6o Oral Discussion. Next, he says, " all mankind are the children of God," and that "Jesus tells sinners to pray, ' Our Father who art in heaven.' " And a good many other things he said in that connection which I think well calculated to injure the cause he advocates, in the estimation of all who believe the Bible to be the word of God. What did the Savior mean, I wonder, when he said to sinners, " Ye are of your father the dezdV ? And were they sinners whom Jesus taught to pray, " Our Father who art in heaven," or were they his disciples ? I might return my friend his own advice, every whit whole — " O my friend, sit at the feet of Jesus, and learn better." I admitted that when God's purpose depends alone upon himself for its performance, it will certainly be performed. The gentleman says, God has so purposed the reconciliation and salvation of men. Indeed ! Then why did he just before object to my intimating that he believes God will force men to reconciliation ? He under- took to prove this doctrine oi force by Paul; but his failure was too apparent to require much attention. There is some diflerence between God having "purposed in himself" the reconciliation and salvation of all men, and his having purposed to accomplish the thing himself, without respect to the will or agency of 7na7i. The former is the most that can be claimed Paul taught in the quota- tion in question; the latter is the doctrine of Ballou, and the Universalist fathers. VIII. "God is the Governor of mankind," is my friend's eighth argument. What a wonderful facility some men have for counting out arguments! Here is an argument with one premise! And, in this respect, it is very like the other seven. And what does the one premise mean } I pronounce it an Universal Salvation. 6i equivocal statement. "God is the Governor of man- kind." What does my friend mean by that ? Does he mean that God actually governs all men ? If so, I squarely deny it. Does he simply mean that all men ought to submit to the Government of God.? If so, what of it, as respects his proposition.? Just nothing. True, God rules for the good of the ruled ; but w^ho are the ruled } All men } Christ now rules all who will be ruled by him — rules them for their good ; chastises them for their good ; and makes all things work for their good. But some will not have him to rule them. Such per- sons he does not rule, because they will not be ruled by him. Nevertheless, "he must reign till he hath PUT ALL ENEMIES UNDER HIS FEET." Is that the reconciliation and salvation the gentleman contends for.? IX. "The law of God," is the gentleman's ninth argument ! " Love to God and love to man is," we are told, " the sum of the law — the whole of religion." Love for God and mankind does, I grant, involve the whole duty of man; but God does not compel obedience to this law; and as some will not voluntarily yield obedience to it, it is hence not obeyed by. all. Now, I submit that, God must either change and compel obedience, or man must change and volunteer obedience, or remain eternally disobedient, and hence eternally unsaved. My friend admits that God will never compel obedience. He also admits that men can never be saved without obedience. Then his conclusion depends upon two guesses: First, That men will always have the opportunity to repent; and secondly, That every man will certainly improve that opportunity. In both these guesses we have seen that 62 Oral Discussion, both scripture and reason are against him. Thus stands argument number nine ! But the gentleman says, " This law will be fulfilled." I suppose he means that every human being will accede to and obey this law. But the question arises, how does he know that .'' Neither God, nor Christ, nor any inspired man, has ever said so. Nor have I ever been able to discover anything from which I can infer that it will ever be so. Here, therefore, is where we are in need of proof — not inferences or guesses — but proof — good and sufficient proof. And here the gentleman instead of bi-ead gives us a stone. What is his proof at this point.'' It is this : " Said Jesus, ' Think not that I have come to destroy the law or the prophets, I have not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily, I say unto you. Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.' " And does this prove that every human being will obey the law that requires love to God and to man? Christ did fulfill the law and the prophets; but the obedience God requires of man — each man for himself — is certainly another thing. It was difficult for me to think the gentleman serious when he quoted this scripture to prove what needed to be proved. It required me to let down my appreciation of his scriptural intelligence. Docs he really believe that Christ so fulfilled the requirements of the moral law that all men will certainly be saved whether they become obedient or not } O, no ! But he thinks all men will yield to its demands of them, and be saved. Here he is guessing again. The scripture does not say, Christ must reign till all yield obedience, and then deliver up the kingdom to God, vs^ho shall be all in all. "■ He must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet" Universal Salvation. 6^ Then he will deliver up the kingdotn to God, who will be all in all in the kingdom. Then it will be too late for the enemies of the cross of Christ to be saved, even if they would. Then the Spirit and the bride will cease to say, "Come." Then the ten-ible sentence will be pronounced — '• He that is filthy, let him be filthy still." Then some who have despised the love and mercy of God, who would not love right- eousness, and virtue, and salvation, and life, and heaven, for their own sakes, in their terribley>'/V^/ "will seek to enter in, and shall not be able," because it takes more than fright to fit a man for heaven. Then those who have spurned, and scoficd, and sneered, and jeered, and scowled at the Savior, may take up the doleful lamenta- tion, " The summer is past, the harvest is ended, and I am not saved," and so sink forever down under the reflex influence of their now irremediable depravity. Does any one say, " the thought is terrible " } Well, it is terrible. But he is your friend that tells you of it now, and admon- ishes you to turn to the Savior and live. [ Time expired. [mr. manford's third speech.] It seems that Mr. Sweeney does not like to hear me talk about the fires of hell. Circumstances appear to vary the temperature of the infernal regions. When a revival is wanted, hell is a very hot place, and all soils of devils abound therein. But in a discussion like the present, it is quite a comfortable kind of a home — no devils belching fire, no imps pouring boiling lead down the throats of the damned, no serpents hissing; none biting, choking and devouring millions, made in the 64 Oral Discussion. image of God. This unwillingness to -defend iiell as it is preached, on revival occasions, is an excellent omen. It shows that its advocates dare not attempt to meet the argument against so terrible a doom. Notwithstanding his denial, I am well satisfied that many in his church are annihilationists. One minister, Mr. Russell, then of Indiana, advocated the utter destruction of the wicked in two debates I had with him. He was in good standing in Mr. S.'s denomination. That subject has divided, and is still dividing, its churches. I read three or four journals published by his sect, and that doctrine has advocates in their columns. It is creditable. to his people that they are giving up so dreadful a dogma as endless woe. Even Mr. Sweeney attempts to justify the destruction theoiy by saying, that if God will make an ash pile of a portion of his creation, he will do no more than he has done in this world. I sup- pose he refers to the burning of Sodom. Did my friend ever read the following passage, " And they"— the Sodo- mites— "were haughty, and committed abominations before me : therefore I took them away as I saw good." Eze. xvi. 50. Mark, God took them from this world as he saw good — did not burn them up, soul as well as body. Their bodies were destroyed, but their souls he took away to himself as he saw good. No inti- mation that they were cast into a furnace of fire seven times hotter than that which consumed Sodom. I have no doubt we make our own hells. But there is this difference between Mr. S. and myself — I cannot think that God will compel any to suffer the pains of hell eternally. There is redemption from them. David was delivered from the lowest hell. Its woes are for the good of the offender, and hence reconcileable Universal Salvation. 65 with the goodness of God. But my friend strongly con- tends, that if we pass into the spirit-land unreconciled to God, our doom is fixed for eternity ; and that doom is endless sinning, suffering, and dying. You might as well attempt to reconcile God to satan, as to reconcile this dogma with the goodness of God. It is quite evident from my friend's evasions again and again, that he and his church agree with Mr. Campbell, that we all come into this world sinful^ and that all who die in childhood die sinful. True, this last statement is not made in so many words. But they do say, " infants are born sinful," and that they cannot be regenerated in this world; they then must Hie sinful. Now, if they are not regenerated in the other world they must be sinful forever. Will he answer this question, yes, or no, — do you believe that any of mankind are born sinful ? While I do not suppose, that all who have been slain on the battle fields of this land were saints, I cannot think any of them deserved being chained in the dark caverns of hell forever, or that the good God will so chain them. But Mr. Sweeney's creed says that many of them richly DESERVE all that, and that God already has, or soon will so dispose of them. If they had been traitors, and staid at home, they might have died peaceably in their beds, and gone to heaven. But to prevent my exposin'g this horrid deformity of his foith, he cries that I am " elec- tioneei"ing." That cry will not deter me from doing my duty. A dogma that thus damns the Saviors of our countiy ought to die a death that knows no resurrection. "Reconciliation" and "salvation" are relative terms, like "good," and many other words. Jesus said, "Why callest thou me good .'' There is none good but one, that is God." Christ was good relatively but not absolutely. 6 66 Oral Discussio7i. So Christians are good, are reconciled, are saved, rela- lively^ but not absolutely. There is room to advance in those Christian graces. Some are partially good, recon- ciled, saved, now, but none entirely. And if there is no growth after death, the best of us will never be perfectly saved, or reconciled to God. As a " sharp definition" of salvation is much wanted, I will gratify my friend. Salvation Is deliverance from the imperfec- tions of earth. Is that "sharp" enough? If Mr. S. does not garble Mr. Ballou, and the latter means what my friend affirms, I do not subscribe to all he says. I have not time now to see whether he misrepre- sents Mr. Ballou or not. I believe that man is free, and that God is a Sovereign. Both propositions ai'e correct. We may not be able now to reconcile them with each other, for our knowledge is very limited. The light of eternity is required to make all clear here. And this view of God and man is that accepted by our deno}7iination. We contend, that God saves the sinner only through THE sinner's will. But there is a God, and he reigns, and will execute his purposes. And as he purposes " to gather together all things In Christ," it will be done. The Ishmaelltes who bought Joseph, and the brothers who sold him, mere free. Yet God ruled them — had a pur- pose, and that purpose came to pass. Judas was free when he did what " must needs " come to pass. Luther, Washington, Lincoln, were free. But God had work for them to do, had a purpose, which they were instrumental in executing. He was not a mere spectator of the stirring events of their times. God has a purpose running through the current of all ages, and alL eternity, and what he purposes will as surely be effected as God reigns, and rules. Yet man is free now and forever. Universal Salvation. 67 But my worthy friend seems to think, that because man is free, God can have no purpose in regard to him which ensui'es a certainty. From this we dissent with heart and understanding. The Bible is against it. The Gos- pel is against it. History is against it. Providence is against it. God is against it; for its truth admitted, God ceases to be God. In defending divine revelation, this is the course gener- ally pursued, — ist. Show that revelation is probable; 2nd. That it certainly has been made. So, I, in defend- ing the truth of the proposition before us, ist. Show that Universal Salvation is probable and possible; 2nd. That it is certain. I show that it is possible and probable because it is the Everlasting Will, Everlasting Pleasure, Everlasting Desire, of Almighty God, that all shall be saved ; because God's love for all is an Everlasting Love, his mercy Everlasting Mercy, his government an Everlasting Government, his ownership of man an Everlasting Ownership, his image in man an Everlasting Image, his command to be loyal to him an Everlasting Command ; because God is the Everlasting Father of man. I then show that all will finally be certainly saved, because he Purposes to save them, and has Promised to save them. The promises are yet to be noticed. Mr. .Sweeney, on the other hand, contends that it is possible for all now on earth to be saved, but one tno7fiejzt hence it may be utterly impossible for one of them to be saved. He seems to think, God has no purpose concerning man, that^man cannot defeat. He even goes so far as to deny that God governs all. He preaches Persian philosophy, not the Gospel ; he follows Zoroaster, not Christ, in this matter. That eastern sage taug:ht there were two Gods 68 Oral Discussion. — the God of heaven and the God of hell. The latter, the author of all evil ; the forraei", the author of all good. He also taught, that the good God ruled the good of our race, and the evil God — the God of hell — ruled the wricked. And that seems to be my friend's theology. What a spite my friend has for poor " sinners." He never lets a chance slip without giving them a kick. Did he ever read the following — "Two men went into the temple to pray ; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus : ' God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men, * * as this publican.' * * * And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, ' God be merciful to me a sinner.'" Luke xviii. 10-14. 1 do hope Mr. S. will learn a lesson from those simple words. It was the self-styled saints that Jesus denounced; he always had a kind word for sinners. May we all imitate him in this respect. The following words of his astonish me, " Shall it be proclaimed throughout the whole realm of intelligent beings, that God, the Governor of this universe, will allow one of his creatures to rebel against him, and despise his love and offered mercy to all eternity?" He adds, " Reason would stand pale before such a pro- position." I think so too. But his "proposition" is infinitely worse than that. Instead of "o«e "being in that condition forever, according to his creed, nearly all mankind will be. And instead of it being " allowed" most of our race will be compelled to "rebel against him" "to all eternity." That is exactly what he is advocating with so much zeal. I am glad to see him so horrified at his own "proposition." I entertain strong Universal Salvation. 69 hopes he will come out of this discussion a minister " of the grace of God whicli bringeth salvation to all men." " He that is filthy, let him be filthy still." This pas- sage was noticed in my last speech. I showed that for it to teach that millions of mankind fiiust be filthy eter- nally it should read, " He that is filthy shall be filthy ETERNALLY," which he did not notice. I also showed, that the passage when written was to be fulfilled '''•quickly" that the '•'•time was at hand'''' when it was to be fulfilled. And his reply is, that " at hand " in scrip- tural st3-le " docs not necessarily mean in a few days, or even years." The Greek, engus^ occurs thirty times in the New Testament, and is translated nigh fifteen times, near four times, from once, at hand ten times, and in every instance the word refers to matters that were near at hand. As this is an important passage I will read every place where it occurs, emphasizing the English, that is rendered from engus. " Summer is nigh" " it is nigh even at the door," "the Master saith, 'My time is at hand^" "that summer is nigh" "it is nigh., even at the door," " he was 7iigh to Jerusalem," " summer is now at hand" " the kingdom of God is nigh at hand" " the Jewish passover was at hand" " Enon near to Salim," " a feast of the Jews was at hand" " drawing nigh unto the ship," '■'■ nigh unto the place," "feast of tabernacles was at hand" " Bethany was nigh unto Jerusalem," ^'- country near the wilderness," "passover was nigh at hand" '•'•from Jerusalem a Sabbath day's journey," "the sepulchre was nigh at hand" "was crucified ttigh to the city," " Lydda was nigh tojoppa," " nigh whereunto was the city," " the word is nigh mito thee," "made ;?/V/z by the blood of Christ," "tothemy tliat were nigh" "the Lord is at hand" '-'•nigh unto 7o Oral Discussion. cursing," '''•ready to vanish away," "the time is at hand^'' " the time is at hand" My friend's criticism on takti^ rendered " quickly " in tlie passage, is equally unfortunate. He says, " It may mean no more than rapidly or suddenly y It is not trans- lated once in the New Testament by either of those words. Taku occurs thirteen times, and is always rendered quickly^ save in one place, where it is translated lightly. I will quote all the passages where it occurs. " Agree with thine adversary quickly" " go quickly and tell his disciples," "and they departed quickly" "'can lightly speak evil of me," "and they went out quickly" "she arose quickly" " I will come unto thee quickly" "I will come unto thee quickly" " behold, I come quickly" "the third woe cometh quickly" "behold, I come quickly" " behold, I come quickly" " surely I come quicklyy You see the absurdity of my friend's consti"uction of this passage. It was written nearly two thousand years since. Then the time was at hand when it was to be fulfilled ; all spoken of in it was then to take place quick- ly^ and yet he says it has not yet been fulfilled, and mil- lions of centuries may yet pass away before it will be fulfilled ! Clearly, the passage has no reference what- ever to what he applies it. " Ye shall die in your sins," said Jesus to the Jews on a certain occasion. I will ask my friend a question, and I hope he will answer it yes, or no, now, or in his next speech. Do you believe that none will be saved in heaven who die sinful? I shall look sharply for his answer. Jesus also told the Jews, " Whither I go ye cannot come." But he said the same to his disciples, " Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye Universal Salvation. 71 shall seek me; and as I said to the yews, ' Whither I go, ye cannot come,' so now I say to you." John xiii. 33. Now, if Jesus, when he told the Jews "Whither I go, ye cannot come," meant they never could be saved, then the disciples can never be saved, for he told them the same thing. He simply meant, he should soon leave this world, but the Jews and disciples would remain in this world. He did not tell the Jews they would not go to him because they would die in their sins. He did not say that, and there is no reason to suppose he intended to convey such an idea. The other passage he read, doubtless refers to the tak- ing of the kingdom from the Jews, and giving it to the Gentiles. They were once in the kingdom ; but as they rejected the "grace and truth" revealed by Jesus Christ, they were thrust out, — showing they were once in the kingdom, — where was " weeping and gnashing of teeth," words indicating their indignation and wretched condition, while the Gentiles, who " gladly received tlie words of truth," took their place in the kingdom. But those same Jews will finally re-enter the kingdom, for, in the sixth verse following the passage Mr. 55. read, the Savior said to them, " Verily, I say unto you, ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, ' Blessed is he that Cometh in the name of the Lord.' " Those same persons, then, who were cast out of the kingdom are to be restored. This passage affords the gentlemen's cause no aid. It was proved in my last speech, that God is the Father of mankind. One evidence offered was, that Jesus instructs us to pray, " Our Father who art in heaven." The gentleman contends that God is not the Father of sinners, and asks, " Were s:nners taught to pray thus, or 72 Oral Discussion. were they his disciples?" The words were addressed directly to his disciples ; and part, at least, of them were sinners. Judas betrayed Jesus, and Peter lied, and uttered rather profane language for a saint. As God was the Father of Peter and Judas, sinners as they were, why may he not be the Father of all sinners.'' I have already showed what is meant by being the children of satan, and Mr. S. has not attempted to show I was wrong. I offer no arguments containing only " one premise." I sometimes state a proposition, and then draw inferences from it. I said, God is the Governor of mankind; and from that grand fact, inferred that his government is a wise, just and benevolent government, and that it would result in the greatest good to all. The gentleman, seemingly, does not like to have old split-foot robbed of his glory, and so asserts, that God's government is not universal — he has given part of the government to fhe devil — they governing in partnership. My friend is behind the times. He lives in the dark ages. Wonder if he does not believe in witchcraft! Christ said, as has been noticed, that the law — the ceremonial and moral — shall be fulfilled. He fulfilled the ceremonial law when he was on earth. But his mis- sion is also to save the world, and thereby cause the moral law to be fulfilled. When all shall become the children of God morally, in the image of God morally, the law will be fulfilled in every soul. Love, which " is the fulfilling of the law," will be the law of every soul. I will offer some additional arguments for the restitu- tion of the sinful world. X. That God's knowledge is infinite, is a thesis of Revelation and of reason. I will read some of the Bible Universal Salvation. 73 testimony on this subject. " Why seeing times are not hid from the Ahiiighty." Job xxiv. i. "I am God, and there is none else, declaring the end from the begin- ning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done." Isa. xlvi. 9, 10. " Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world." Acts xv. 18. As God's knowledge embraces the past, the present, and the future, the destiny of every individual of Adam's race is perfectly known to him. If some will sink into hell to rise no more, God knows who they are, where they are, what are their names, where they were born, and when he will force them to make the fearful plunge. Now, would a God of Wisdom, Goodness, Mercy and Justice, have given being to millions on millions of immortal spirits, knowing that endless hell torments would be their sure doom } I have too exalted an opin- ion of my God to assent to such a monstrous thought. Yet, that is just what Mr. Sweeney advocates! He must be mistaken, or God is a demon. Surely, the God that Jesus revealed by his Life, his Character, and his Words, must have knoivtt that our existence would be a blessing to us, or he would not have conferred it. True, he knew we should sin, and suffer, and die; but he also knew that sin, suffering and death would end; and beyond them all, would be righteousness, happiness,/-and immortal life. He knew that evil was transient, and would be succeeded by an eternity of good. Knowing all this — knowing the end from the beginning — infinite Wisdom, Goodness, Mercy and Justice, rejoiced in the creation of man. But they would have wept if hell was to be the final home of countless millions. From God's knowledge, then, I draw an argument for the restoration of mankind. 7 74 Oral Discussion. XL God is the Father of mankind. " Have we not * all one father? Hath not one God created us? Why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathei's ? " Mai. ii. lo. From this passage we learn that God is the Father of all men, even of those who deal "treacherously," and "■profime the covenant of our fathers." The Gentile apostle told the citizens of pagan Athens that " God hath made of one blood all nations of men that dwell on all the face of the earth; * * * he is not far from every one of us : for in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your poets have said, ' For we are also his offspring.^ " Acts xvii. 26-29. The apostle sanctions the noble sentiment of the heathen poet, that mankind are the offspring of God, and he consequently their Father. Alas, some christians are not as enlightened as the heathen on that subject, for many of them contend, that millions of mankind are the off- spring of satan. Such persons need christianizing. The Lord thus addresses the wicked, " Return, ye back- sliding children." Jer. iii. 21. Those who have tasted the good things of the kingdom, and returned to the world, are more blamable than those who have never professed Christ. And if they ai'e still God's children, /^ the less sinful surely must be. Again, "One God and Father of all^ who is above all, and through all, and in you all." Eph. iv. 6. It is, then, certain that " God is the Father of all." It is true, the wicked are termed the "children of satan," and they are morally.^ but not by nature. The devil is not the author of their being. Wicked men are said to be the children of satan in the same sense that some persons are called the " sons of peace," " sons of Universal Salvation. 75 consolation," " children of disobedience," " children of wisdom," " sons of thunder," " sons of murder." That is, they resemble those qualities. So sinful men, being sinful, are said to be children of satan or sin. But, at the same time, and at all times, the bad, as well as the good, are, in their origin, and elements of their being, the children of God. So teaches the Bible, so teaches philosophy. The parental tie cannot be severed. Sons and daugh- ters may disobey, may forsake their parents, but all that does not make them any less their offspring. So God's children may be unfaithful, wayward, prodigal, but still he is their Father. Jesus illustrates this foct in one' of his instructive parables. A son left his father and father's house, became debased, degraded, and sunk into the lowest hell. But he finally returned to his father, as I trust all prodigals finally will, and his parent joyfully exclaimed, " This my son was dead, but is alive again; he was lost, but is found." When this prodigal was lost^ was dead, he was as surely the son of the good man as when he was found, alive. He was his son before he left home, when herding with swine, and when he returned. What is true of that prodigal is true of all prodigals. This youth, when wallowing in the mire of hell, wa? not morally the son of that righteous man, but he was naturally. So, sinful men are not morally the children of God, but they surely are naturally. God is now, and ever will be, the Father of all man- kind. Neither sin, death, the grave, or eternity, can sever that relation. It is immutable and eternal. As God is the Father of all now, he blesses all now. And as he eternally will be the Father of all, he eternally will bless all. Can this conclusion be false.'' His fatherly 76 Oral Discussion. care provides us with innumerable blessings as we journey from the cradle to the grave. But, as soon as millions enter the unseen world, will all these fatherly- blessings be turned into bitter curses? Will all love, mercy, goodness, be withdrawn from them, and that too by their heavenly Father, and they banished to eternal sorrow, despair, and death ? Let us not forget the words of our heavenly Parent, "Can a woman forget her suck- ing child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb ? Yea, she may forget, yet will I not FORGET THEE." Isa. iv. 15. It is barely possible for the mother to forget her child, but it is impossible for God to forget his. ' The good mother punishes her erring child, because she loves him, and for his good. So, our heavenly Parent punishes his erring children because he loves them, and for their good. But, God forbid that w^-should entertain the dreadful thought that the Father i)f our spirits will ever deal worse with us than the most degraded, the most cruel, the most brutal savage that ever walked the earth deals with his most hated foe. Let us not for a moment harbor the wicked thought, that he will fill hell with his own children, and that all heaven will say amen to the dreadful deed. \Time expired. [mr. Sweeney's third reply.] The gentleman mistakes me : I care not how much he talks about the " fires of hell," provided only that he will talk soberly, sensibly, and scripturally. Perhaps it would be well for him to so think as well as talk about the matter. It is possible, however, for one to repeat to satiety his own extravagant and distorted Universal Salvation. *jj representations of this or any other scripture subject. How often he has used the scripture word " hell," in his speeches already I will not attempt to say ; but has he attempted to show what is the scripture teaching upon that subject? to impart any light to us upon the subject? Has he not rather seemed to treat the whole subject as if it were no more than a mere theological bugbear, a grand farce? This is what I objected to. Does he call it argument? If so, could he not with equal logical pro- priety argue in the same way that there need be no fear in this country of capital punishment? This matter shall have due attention at the proper time. Now, we are on a different question — the reconciliation and salva- tion of " all who leave this world sinful " — and the gen- tleman is himself in the affirmative. Can he not address himself to the question ? Or must he fill up his time talking of irrelevant matters? It is insisted that many of my brethren are annihila- tionists. One Mr. Russell, for instance, with whom, it seems, my opponent had two debates, advocated this theoiy. I cannot imagine who that Russell was, unless it was P. T. Russell, who is known in this country as the author of a work against the annihilation theory! Then the gentleman insinuates that this theory is pretty generally advocated in our religious "Journals," some " three or four" of which he reads. If he is seri- ous in pressing this charge — and I begin to suspect he is — then I call for the papers. I most positively deny that he has any sufficient authority for such a charge. Now, Sir, let us have your authority, or no more of the charge, otherwise I shall feel constrained to brand it as it deserves to be. But, after all, what has this matter to do with the proposition he is here to prove? Why 78 Oral Discussion. should he spend his time on it? Is it because it is easier to talk about? This might be suspected. I did not say, neither do I believe, that God burned up the Sodomites, " soul as well as body." I simply said, " he did make a pile of ashes " of them, and that the gentleman admits. God burned up their bodies, but as for their souls, Mr. Manford says, " He took the?7i away from this world as he saw goody Yes, but "as he SVLW good" for whom ? And where did he take them away to ? He took them away from this world, we agree. I deny that he took them to heaven. What says my opponent? They left this world sinful. I suppose we will agree about that. Now, if the gentleman be- lieves they went directly to heaven, let him say so ; and then we will understand how they were reconciled to God and saved. If they did not go to heaven, then where did they go? If he can make us understand just xvhere they went, and that there they will have, and will certainly improve, the opportunity to be reconciled to God and saved, then he will have an argument worth the naming and numbering. Mr. Manford says " we make our own hells," but " God will not compel any one to suffer the pains of hell eternally." Wonder what he means by " eternally " ? Perhaps, however, that is an impertinent question, and I will not now press it further. Does God " compel any one to suffer the pains of hell" during this life? Of course my friend will say no. But do not many suffer the pains of hell during this life, and die in his hell ? The gentleman thinks there is always "redemption from thence." What! in the future world? Here is where I want proof. This is the precise point at which the proof is needed, and demanded. There are doubtless Universal Salvation. 79 some of my friend's hearers who arc c;'i^■ing ahriost breathless attention to hear his proof just at this point. And they are told, " David was delivered from tlic low- est hell." Yes; but that was all in this world; and there is no question about there being deliverance in this world. It should be remembered the debate is about those who leave this world sinful. Who was ever de- livered from the lowest hell in another world ? Here is where my friend is without scriptui^e authority. Yes ; and he is without even good Universalist authority. Let us see. Hosea Balioit says : " The common doctrine which teaches us that Christ Jesus came into this world to save us in another -world is contrary to all the representations which are found in the Scriptures." Lecture Sermons^ page 17. And Mr. Manford is found advocating that very doctrine which, according to Mr. Ballou, " is con- trary to all the representations which arc found in the Scriptures." Why ! he is not even a sovuid Universalist. I am afraid Spiritism has been working on him. The gentleman seems still a little troubled about infants. He is afraid I preach infant damnation. I can scarcely believe he is serious about the matter. I must answer, " yes or no, this question : Do you believe that any of mankind are born sinful .'' " No. Now let him come on with consequences. I shall hy to be present. Mr. Manford tells us, " Salvation is deliverance from the imperfections of earth," and asks if that is a defini- tion " sharp enough." Well, it is so much better than I expected to get that I am not at all inclined to com- plain. I am appi-ehensive, though, that he will have to give us another definition, or tinker this one considerably. When the Lord said, " He that believes and is baptized shall be saved," he meant, He that believes and is So Oral Discussion. baptized shall be delivered from the imperfections of earth! And when Paul said to the Ephcsians, "Ye are saved," he meant, Ye are delivered from the im- perfections of earth! And, again, when he said to Titus, " He saved us, by the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost," he meant. He delivered us from the imperfections of earth by the wash- ing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost!! When Peter said, "Baptism now saves us," instead of saying, " not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God," he should have said, not the answer of a good conscience, but deliverance from the imperfections of earth ! ! And, now, let it be borne in mind, that our discussion is about the reconciliation and salvation of such as leave this world — this earth — sinful. Will their salvation, if they are ever saved, consist in deliverance from the imperfections of earth ? Certainly if they are delivered from anything it will not be the imperfections of earth. The gentleman will do well to explain what he means by saying, " Christ was good relatively." I thought Christ " hzezv no sin" If I do not " garble Mr. Ballou," then the gentleman does " not subscribe to all he says." Well, the question as to whether or not I "garble" him, can be easily settled. Here are the books from which I read; / bought them from Air. Manford., upon his recommenda- tion. Does he recommend and sell that to which he does " not subscribe " .'' The worthy gentleman tells us that he believes both in man's freedom and God's sovereignty. So do I. He believes that " God saves the sinner only through the Universal Salvation. 8i sinner's will." I agree with him again. But, if this be so, why talk about the will, purpose, and desire of God ? If " God saves the sinner only through the sinner's will," then, of course, God has no absolute will in the case, as is assumed when men ai'gue universal salvation from the will of God. Since the gentleman admits that the sinner's salvation depends upon his will, he must prove that he will eternally have the power to will in the case, and that he will, at some future day, certainly exercise that power. All this he must prove before he has an argument. But he cannot prove that the sinner will always have the jDower to will. No man can do it. Here, therefore, his failure is manifest. He has no scrip- ture, and reason is against him. Many persons very much impair, if not entirely destroy, their own will-power even in this short lifetime. And, my friends, this is a terribly solemn reflection; one that should admonish us not to trifle for one moment with the power of volition. God will always be love, goodness, and mercy ; but we may not always be just what we are now, as to the power of loving, willing, and doing. I would therefore admonish the sinner that noiv is the time to will, and love, and obey, as it may one day be too late. It is true, No word of doom may shut thee out, No wind of wrath may downward whirl, No swords of fire keep watch about The open gates of pearl ; A tenderer light than moon or sun, Than song of earth a sweeter hymn, May shine and sound forever on, And thou be deaf and dim. Forever round the mercy seat The guiding lights of love shall burn ; But what if, hahit-bound, thy feet 83 Oral Discussion. Shall lack the will to turn ? What if thine eye refuse to see, Thine ear of heaven's free-welcome fail, And thou a •willing captive be, Thyself thy own dark jail ? " The gentleman thinks, or affects to think, I " have a spite at poor sinners," and improve every opportunity " to give them a kick," to use his own choice language. Let me assure him, however, that he is laboring under a very great mistake about that matter. What have I said that affords grounds for such an insinuation? My hear- ers may judge. I preach that sinners are lost, and Christ told them so. I preach that except tliey repent they will perish, and did not our Savior teach so? I preach that God " fzoxv commands all men everywhere to repent ; " that ?tow is an acceptable and safe time to tui"n unto the Lord ; that " To-morrow is with God alone, And man hath but to-day." And does not this great truth float upon the very sur- face of all scripture teaching upon the subject? But Mr. M. tells the sinner that if he does not choose to turn now, he can do so when he has a " more convenient sea- son"; if not to-day, he can to-morrow; if not in this " age," he can in the next age; or if not in the next age, he can do so at his eterjzal leisure — in any of the on- coming ages of eternity ! And under the influence of such teaching the habit-bound sinner may afford to sit down and sing away his whole lifetime: "Spare me awhile; the flesh is weak. These lingering feet, that fain would stray Among the flowers, shall some day seek The strait and narrow way." Universal Salvation. ■ 83 And yet the gentleman claims to be the special and real friend of sinners. I do not doubt that he feels — that he is — friendly to sinners; but I dare not say so much for what he teaches. It is well, is right, is Christ-like, is God-like, to love sinners; but not because they are sin- ners. We must not love sin. We must give none encouragement to live in sin. We dare utter no word of hope to him who ■will live in sin. The story of the Pharisee and the publican is a very fine thing properly understood and applied, but like every other good thing it may be abused. What one of his hearers saw how my friend made me out like the Pharisee, and himself like the humble publican, who was commended by Jesus.'' True, "Jesus always had a kind word for sinners" — especially penitent sinners — but not because they were sinners. He had no kind words for sin; nor one word of hope for him who would live and die in his sins — no promise for such as "leave this world sinful." Such as wish to lay the question of repentance upon the table, to be taken up in eternity, and to spend all this life in sin, CcUi find more to encourage them in any one of Mr. Manford's speeches than in the whole Bible. The Bible encourages no one " to leave this world sinful." I like to see whatever is done handsomely done, even if it is but the perpetration of a quibble. The gentle- man certainly quibbled quite handsomely in trying to make it appear that, according to my teaching, most of our race will be not merely allowed but compelled to rebel against God and despise his mercy to all eternity. His effort was, of course, only a quibble. Mr. Manford ought to know I teach no such thing. To "rebel" is from the latin rebello^ and means " to make war again." r 84 Oral Discussion. "Despise" is from a word meaning "to tread down," " to abhor." Do I teach tliat God will compel, or even allow, one of his creatures to make war against him again, and again, to all eternity ; and to tread dowjt^ and to abhor ^ his mercy forever? Certainly not. Christ " must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet." Then the war will be over forever. But my friend says the sinner will "e/er;2a//y have the opportunity tore- pent." This implies that he may eternally rebel against God and despise his mercy. Such a proclamation made from heaven would, I fear, demoralize and disorganize the whole universe. The passage of scripture I referred to in Revelations — " He that is filthy, let him be filthy still " — seems to give my friend much and very serious trouble. I know the word engus^ rendered " at hand" in the context, generally means "nigh," in the New Testament, and in classic Greek literature. It is accordingly defined by the lexicons to mean " near, nigh, at hand, close, next." And when we look at the coming of Christ, and the end of his mediatorial reign, as they stand related to our interests beyond, to eternity^ we may truly say, and feel, " the time is at hand, even at the door." A few thousand years are but as a few days compared with eternity. I know also, that taku^ rendered " quickly," in the passage, does ordi- narily mean quickly. But, as I said before, it may mean no more than rapidly, or suddenly. Such is its etymological force. It is defined by the lexicons — "quickly, speedily, rapidly;" and takeos^ which is from the same root, is translated " suddenly," in i Tim. V. 23. So that the gentleman gains nothing from his labored criticism of these two words. The Lord's coming is nigh, and, compared with eternity, always has Universal Salvation. 85 been nigh ; and he will come suddenly. Then, and not till then, will it be said by the Judge of all — " He that is filthy, let him be filthy still." What if " these words were written two thousand years ago," and it was then said " the time is at hand." Has the time come ? That's the question. Has the proclamation — " He that is filthy, let him be filthy still " — gone forth .? When did it go forth } W/ien, if ever, was it revoked ? If not revoked, why should not he that heareth, instead of saying " come," say " be filthy still" ? These are questions the gentleman must answer as he passes over the river of his difficulties. I called the gentleman's attention to John viii. 3i, where the Savior said to the Jews who were determined not to believe on him : " I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins; whither I go, ye cannot come." And what was his reply.'' Why, he simply repeated a part of the language — " Whither I go, ye can- not come" — and informed us that Christ said the same to his disciples, as recorded John xiii. 33. Did Jesus say to his disciples, "Ye shall die in yoicr sins" 9 I think not. True, he said to his disciples as he did to the Jews, "whither I go, ye cannot come;" but he immediately explained to them, " Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shall follow me afterwards" Did he so explain to the Jews, who, he said, should die in their sins.'' If he ever so explained to them I have not learned the fact. My friend seems determined to have the very best men in the world, christians and even infants, stand precisely In the same relation to the prom- ises of God, as do such as die in their sins, as do " all who leave this world sinful" ! By the words, " I go my way," Mr. Manford says the Savior " simply meant, he should soon leave this world." 86 Oral Discussion. Of course he meant he would " /ca^e this world;" but tvhere was he going to? '"''^go my way " — that is, I go to my Father, I go to heaven — '• I am not of this world." " I am from above." Then the Savior told the Jews that he was going to heaven; but that they, on account of their determined unbelief, should die in their sins, and should not go to heaven. Here we have a case just to the point. Here were persons who the Savior said would " leave this world sinful ; " and he said they could not go to hea- ven. My friend says they could., and did! But the gentleman says, " he did not tell the Jews they would not go to him because they would die in their sins." Indeed ! Because of what then were they not to go to him .? Will he tell us .? Because I say that God does not govern all men, the gentleman represents me as teaching that God has divid- ed the government of the world with Satan, and calls it " Persian philosophy." God has not divided his gov- ernment with Satan, but thousands of men have refused to submit to the government of God, and are, hence, not under his government, but are governed by Satan. If this be Persian philosophy, then the apostles were Persian philosophers, and our Savior himself was a Persian phi- losopher. But my friend does not even preach good Persian philosophy, or any other kind. He says God governs all men; and what a government it is! No pagan philosopher ever had so low a conception of his God as the gentleman seems to have of his! X. The tenth argument is drawn from the " Knowl- edge of God." The gentleman says. If any are to suffer endless pun- ishment, " God knows who they are, where they are, what are their names, where they were born, and when Universal Salvation. 87 he vjill force them to make the fearful plunge." Then he concludes that a God of Wisdom, Goodness, Justice and Mercy, " would not have given being to millions on millions of immortal spirits, knowing that endless hell torments would be their sure doom." Well, I suppose — as the gentleman does not subscribe to Mr. Ballou's doctrine, that there is no evil — he will admit that evil and suffering are in the world now ; that there are millions on millions of God's creatures that are sufferers now, and that it has been so for several thousand years. Now, if there are sufferers in this world, " God knows who they are, where they are, what are their names, where they were born, and when he forced them to take the fearful plunge," And, now, "would a God of Wisdom, Goodness, Mercy and Justice, have given being to millions on millions of immortal spirits, know- ing that a life of hell torments would be their sure doom } " Here we have levelled the gentleman's argu- ment against the existence of present evil and suffering, but still evil and suffering remain ! This proves that the argument is in fact no argument, but a sophism. " Why did God create men, knowing that they would be eternally lost ? " How often I have heard this ques- tion, it would be difficult to say. Why did God create men, knowing that they would suffer at all? Why did God allow evil to come into the universe } Why not restrain it in its very incipiency.? These are questions that perhaps no one can answer, even to his own satis- faction. But the fact is not at all favorable to Univer- salism. Universalists can no more satisfactorily solve these great problems than other people. God did create. This we know. Evil and misery are in the world. This we know also. But in connection with these facts there 88 07'al Discussloji. are some things the reason of which h.es a httle too deep for frail mortals such as we are. But as I have only to follow the gentleman, I will have time to make a few remarks, rather suggestive than otherwise, just at this point. I submit, that, The consciousness of having done the right from choice^ is the law of human happiness. The consciousness of having done wrong, affords us no hap- piness. Neither does the consciousness of having done right from compulsion or necessity. Neither does the consciousness of having done nothing. I suppose my friend will agree with me as to what I have called the law of human happiness. Then man, as God has made him, and as we know he is, to be happy, must have the power of choosing, that he may choose the right; but, having this power, he may choose the wrong, and suffer. The power of choosing being necessary to man's happi- ness ; and as he could not, have been made capable of choosing the right, without the power of choosing the wrong; it follows that man could not have been made capable of being happy without being, at the same time, capable of being miserable. I cannot see how a reaper could be made that should be at once capable of cutting wheat and incapable of doing any harm. Indeed, everything that, properly used, accomplishes good, improperly used will do harm. Now, I do not mean to say that God could not create a being capable of happiness, without being at the same time capable of unhappiness. But if he were to create such a being it would not be jnati. It would not be like man. I speak of man as he zV, and of what we know to be the law of his happiness. XI. " God is the leather of mankind," is a statement Universal Salvation. 89 from whicli tlie gentleman adduces his eleventh inference, called his eleventh argument. He quotes from the prophet Malachi — " Have we not all one Father? hath not one God created us all?" Now, in the first place, it would be scarcely possible for the gentleman to show that the prophet meant by " we" and " us," to include more than Jews, the peculiar people of God ; and, in the second place, he speaks of God as a Father only in the sense of creation — " Hath not one God created us all ?" Paul's discourse at Athens is also quoted — "God h^alCa made oi ono. blood all nations of men " — " We are also his offspring." All that these scriptures teach, is accepted as fully and as heartily by christians generally as by Universalists. And I was therefore astonished to hear the learned gentleman assert with so much seeming surprise that many christians " con- tend that millions of mankind are the offspring of satan." Now, if many christians so contend, it will, of course, be an easy matter for him to point out one^ and that one is called for. What christian contends that millions of mankind are the offspring of Satan ? If any do so teach, then I am ready with my opponent to say that, " such persons need chiistianizing." If, on the other hand, christians are, in this statement, only misrepresented by their opponents, then I shall ask him to join me in say- ing of the latter, '''-such persons need christianizing." Will he do it? Paul's language to the Ephesians — " One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all" — the gentleman certainly misapplies. The Apostle was writing to christians, and evidently addressed that language only to such ; while Mr. M. gives it a universal application. It may be properly applied only 8 90 Oral Discussion. to such as compose the "one body," having "one Spirit., one hope of their calling ; one Lord, one faith, one baptism," God is the Father of those having "one Spirit'''' in a sense that he is not the Father of such as have not " the spirit of adoption, by which we ciy. Fa- ther., Father" In order to receive this Spirit, and hence to be a cliild of God in a spiritual sense, one " must be born again" — "of water and of the Spirit." See John iii. 5. Paul says, "They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God." Rom. ix. 8. Again : " For as many as arc led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God," Rom. viii. 14, To be the children of God in this spiritual sense, persons must sub- mit to the government of God. But again, Paul says : "Ye are the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." Gal. iii. 26. And again: "Wherefore come out frx)m among them and be ye separate^ saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean, and I will receive you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters." 2 Cor. vi. 17, 18. God himself says : " He that overcometh shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be my son." Rev. xxi. 7. In this high sense, this spiritual sense, this sense in which we must be children in order to " inherit all things," all are not children of God, It is not sufficient for us to be children of God as brutes are. Jesus once said to certain wicked persons: "7/" God were your Father ye would love me; * * * yc are of your father the devil., and the lusts of your father ye will do." John viii. 42-44. Again he said : " The field is the world ; the good seed are the children of the king- dom ; but the tares are the children of the wicked one." Matt. xiii. 38. The Apostle John, who had as high and quite as just conceptions of the love of God as my oppo- Universal Salvation. gi nent has, said : " In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: wliosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God." i John iii. ro. So taught Jesus and the Apostles; and I believe my distinguished friend, Mr. M., pronounces this " the doctrine of Zoro- aster — Persian philosophy." If he is correct in this, then was Zoroaster a better teacher than he, and Persian philosophy is to be preferred to that of Murray, or Ballou, or even that of my severely philosophical friend, Mr. Manford. Granted, that all men, being the offspring of God, are in one sense — that of creation — the children of God; but in virtue of such a relation men do not " inherit all things" — spiritual blessings — salvation. All are now children in that sense ; but all are not 7tow reconciled and saved ; because this relation of itself does not reconcile and save men — nor luill it ever do so. The gentlemen tells us, " the parental tie cannot be severed." And what of it.? "The parental tie," of itself, makes no child happy or virtuous. So/net hino- more than parental love, parental goodness, parental mercy, and parental care, is necessary to the happiness of children. Parents may most fei-vently love and most bountifully provide for their children, but they cannot make \}i\Q.n\ enjoy ^wch provision. Alas! how painfully have many fond parents experienced this. And if it is true, as Mr. Manford has already admitted, that " God saves the sinner only through the sinner's will" then, with the profoundest reverence, it may be said, he can- not compel the sinner to enjoy the pi-ovisions of his amazing love and goodness. The sun that binds to- gether and flashes light and glory on worlds, has not the glory with which God has crowned his creature, man — 92 Oral Discussion. the glory of volition — will. Hence it is that he is at once so wonderfully and so fearfully made. Then, oh ! man! turn to God. Turn, not as a star turns in the heavens — not as the moon turns to the sun of its light — not as the sun itself turns to the great Sun of suns — but as a ma?i — as a free man — turn to God and live. Why does my opponent persist in insinuating that I believe that God will after awhile turn "fiend," or " savage," and '•'•force some of his creatures into an end- less hell," contrary to the feelings, desires and purpose of their lives.'' Have I said any such thing.'* Have I intimated it 'i Certainly not. I do not believe it. We know sinners can suffer, can be in hell, and God remain just as he is. God will never change. No sinner will suffer in this life or in the next because God is not love, mercy, and goodness. And if any one shall ever find himself beyond the possibility of reconciliation and sal- vation, it will not be because of any change in God, or Chi-ist, or the angels, or heaven, or love, or goodness. We shall see more about this when we come to discuss the next proposition. The gentleman can discuss the present qviestion fairly, or if he choose he can go on making distorted and ridiculous statements. " The wise shall understand." I wish only a fair and an honorable discussion. [ Time expired. [mr. manford's fourth speech.] My friend says I spoke lightly of endless hell-tor- ments. No sir. It grieves my heart, that so many good men and women think so wickedly of the God of heaven as to represent him as the eternal tormenter of countless Universal Salvation. 93 millions, made in his own adorable image. They do not, howev^er, I trust, sin willfully. They have eyes, but they do not see the glory of God. They have ears, but they do not hear the angelic song, " Glory to God in the highest." They have understanding, but they know little of the love of God. It is an awful thing to repre- sent him "who is good unto all" as crushing beneath his feet his own offspring, world without end. And to make such persons reflect on the enormity of the charge they bring against their Creator, I speak of hell-torments in pretty plain English. I do not whitewash hell inside or outside. I do not put masks on its devils, or hide them in the dark. I do not smother its fires with cologne, or scent its brimstone with " balm of a thousand flowers." I talk about this hell just as the creeds talk about it; just as standard orthodox authors talk about it. I want to awaken people to the horrors of their creed. When they see it as it is^ they will hate, loathe, abhor it, and banish it from their creeds, their heads, and their hearts. I am glad to see my worthy friend so uneasy, when I talk thus about hell. That is a hopeful sign. He is getting his eyes, ears, heart and head open to see, hear, feel and understand its horrors and abominations. He tries hard to hide its infamy, and make it appear respectable, and sort of comfortable. But by the help of God, before this discussion closes, I will expose its horrors, its injus- tice, and its cruelty. It is worse than a "theological bug-bear," or " a grand farce." It is too dreadful to be laughed at, or spoken of lightly. Belief in it causes too many tears to flow, too many hearts to ache, and sends too many of our brothers and sisters to early graves. We should weep rather than laugh that so many good men and women cherish so heart-rending a creed. May 94 Oral Discussion. God have mercy on them, and save them from the slav- ish fear of hell. It is true, the Bible talks about hells, and ere this discussion closes I hope to present the Bible doctrine of hell; also shall try to gratify my friend relative to the meaning of eternal. These, and all other imjDortant matters, relating to the questions before us, w^ill be attended to at the proper time. I did not say that destructionism is " generally advocat- ed in his journals," but that it has advocates in them ; and my friend knows that to be correct; and some of those advocates are members of his denomination. He knows that also to be correct. 1 am pleased to find that he discards Mr. Campbell's notion, that we come from the hands of our Creator, sinful. If Mr. C. is right, not an infant can be saved. They are born sinful, live sinful, die sinful — so Mr. Campbell teaches; and if those who " leave this world sinful " cannot be saved, as Mr. S. asserts, not a child can be saved. Mr. Campbell and Mr. Sweeney together, send all children to hell. I said, " salvation is deliverance from the imperfections of earth," and that is the truth. What is the good man saved from, if not from the imperfections of this world } The Bible reveals no evils that have not their root here. I know this fact cuts my friend's theory right and left. He evidently thinks, that the evils we are subject to did not have their origin in this world, or in man, but came from hell; that the devil hatched them there, and brouglit them from the infernal regions, and sowed them broadcast all over this earth, and salvation is deliverance from Satanic principles, Satanic influence, and satanic rule. The gentleman is wrong, and St. Paul is right, for he says, " Sin is the work of the Jlcsh" and St. James says, " Every man is tempted when he is drawn Universal Salvation. 95 away of his own lust " — not the devil's. And doubt- less, some of the imperfections of earth will adhere to all, more or less, when they change worlds. Neither being buried in water, or in the grave, sanctifies the soul. It is the grace of God that redeems, now and forever. And right here my earnest friend is puzzled. He cannot understand how a person dying unsanctified can be saved. He really does not seem to know much about salvation. He is looking for salvation from an outw^ard hell, and from an outward devil; and he cannot com- prehend how a person after being pitched into hell, and gobbled up by the devil, can get out of that place, or his clutches. It would likely be a difficult matter, if his Satanic majesty is as good a jailor as is represented. But this is all wrong. We make our own devils, our own hells, and salvation is from those inward evils, and God has given us ability and grace to make our salvation sure. Now, suppose a man leaves this world sinful, as all do more or less, why cannot he be enlightened by divine wisdom, and sanctified by divine grace.'* He will be the same man he was before his body was dropped in the grave. He will still be in the image of God, and a child of God. As he will have intellect, what will prevent him from believing in God, believing in Jesus .^ and as he will possess moral qualities, what will prevent his loving and obeying the truth ? Saul, on the road to Damascus, with blood on his hands, and hate in his soul, was converted instantly by one glimpse of the risen Jesus, and one word from his lips. And will not all the glory of the upper world redeem a soul .'' What a philo- sophy and theology that must be that says nay ! The truth is, according to the popular theology, we shall be shipped directly to hell, and given over instantly to the 96 07-al Discussion. devil, for fear, it would seem, that the realities of heaven might make a good impression. I cannot see, but regeneration will be effected infinitely easier on the golden shore than in this world, if opportunity is given. Here we are mortal, there immortal; here chained to bodily appetites and passions, there freed from them; here there are not only temptations within, but without, there we shall be removed from them ; here we are in the material world, there in the spirit-world; here we stand near the grave, there nearer God's throne. With all these advantages how will it happen that not a man will become better in the spirit-world .'* I want to know why this will be so. The laboring oar here is with my friend. All have the grace and ability to walk in wis- • dom's ways in this world. God now invites, commands, entreats, all to be wise unto salvation, and why is all this reversed as soon as we enter the land of Immortality.^ Let him give the reason for it. Let him prove it is so. God invites all, till they draw their last breath, to come. This he admits. And why, instantly after, is the invita- tion all turned to curses .'' I demand the evidence of this, and the reason for so sudden a change. If this was the first time this doctrine was proclaimed, the people would be struck dumb. But they have heard it preached so long they do not generally see its inconsistencies, injust- ice and cruelty. But, thank God, the Christian world is pondering this subject, and a brighter day is dawning. But then, Mr. S. thinks, the will of man stands, like a hydra-headed monster, ,in the way of God's purposes. In fact, he makes out that man's will is all-powerful, entirely uncontrollable; that God, Jesus, angels, are all defeated, humbled and crushed — their purposes are — by the will of a worm of the dust ! The truth is, the will Universal Salvatiojt. 97 of man is easily influenced by a skillful hand. What an influence men have over men. How they control each others' vs^ill. How parents affect their children, children parents. What an influence a piece of music, well rendered, has on a promiscuous assembly. It afiects all present. How quick and easy was wicked Saul's will subdued, when Jesus said to him, " Why persecutest thou me.'"' What an influence Plato, Mahomet, the Pope, Confucius, have had in the world, and are still having. What an influence Josephine had over the will of the conqueror of Ein'ope. Reason, love, mercy, and justice, when properly directed, will subdue the most obstinate will. Here is a case: A fev^'' years since, two pirates were sentenced in Bos- ton to be hung. Rev. Joseph Tuckerman was present when the jury brought in their verdict of guilty, and he says one of them broke out in a most violent strain of horrid and blasphemous cursing. Tiiis minister of Christ followed the wretched man to his cell, went in with h).n, requested the jailor to turn the key upon them, and call for him in an hour. He spent an hour in kind con- versation and prayer with the felon, but to no visible eftect. He seemed as impervious to moral influence as a stone. My friend would say, " He has sinned away the day of grace," his " will-power is entirely destroyed," and " God cannot and will not save him." Only see how Mr. S. errs. The good man spent an hour with his de^oraved pupil the next day. This visit terminated like the first, and when about to retire, Tuckerman said to the pirate, " / will call and see you again to-morrow." '•'• I care nothing about it ; all I want is to go to hell, where it is hot Oi\ the next day's visit, when this true Christian was 9 98 Oral Discussion. engaged in prayer, the jDirate responded Amen. The ice was broken. His will was giving way. On the next visit, when his friend knelt in prayer, the pirate dropped on his knees with him. He had uttered but few words, when the lost wretch broke out in an impas- sioned strain of earnest supplication and entreaty to the Father of mercies. "• 1 never," says Tuckerman, " had witnessed such a case of child-like, heart-broken peni- tence. He seemed a little child. His heart was all broken to pieces; and my own heart came nigh break- ing from the force of my sympathy in the scene. And," continues he, " v/hat effected this was the discovery, on the part of the poor lost wretch, of a Father in God. I tried no other means, I labored to convince him that he had a Father in heaven who loved him; that there was goodness on the throne of eternity. At the moment this conviction reached his understanding, it bi-oke his heart. And if all men," he adds, " were brought to really see this single truth, God is the Father of all^ I will answer for it, that their conduct toward each other would be that of brethren." That man's faith in hell did him no good; but the moment he saw God as his loving Father his stubborn will was subdued. That knowledge will have the same effect on every man, let him be in this world or the im- mortal world. My friend has talked about being forced into heaven. In the proper sense sinners will be forced into the ways of life — forced as that pirate was. "'I WILL," saith the Lord, ''put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people. And they SHALL not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ' know the Lord ; ' for all Universal Salvation. 99 SHALL know me from the least to the greatest." Heh. viii. 10, ri. "For as the rain cometh down and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watcreth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater; so shall my woixl be that goeth forth out of my mouth : it shall not return unto me void ; it shall ac- complish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it. For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace; the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands. Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir-tree, and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle-tree ; and it shall be to the Lord for a name, and an everlasting sign, that shall not be cut off." Isa. Iv. 10-13. This was God's fur pose; and if language has any meaning, that pur- pose is to be executed. That is sure. But no comj^ul- sion, as Mr. S. uses the word, of the will of man is implied. Jesus did not force Peter to repent, nor Thomas to believe, nor Saul to become a member of his kingdom, and an apostle of the truth. There was no coercion in those cases ; neither is there in the salvation of any, and there never will be. He says, I must prove that man will eternally have the power to will to serve God. I have proved that over and over again, and that finally the will of God will be the will of all. But let him show, if he can, that the ability to will to do the will of God will be destroyed. He will have to have a new revelation before he can do that; and that, I am sure, would not come from heaven. According to the gentleman, God will destroy the will in millions to do right, and then, because they will not do what they can- J lOo Oral Discussion. not do, he will damn them eternally! He does not say this, of course, in so many words, but that is what his reasoning amounts to. My friend asks, " Does God compel any to sufler the pains of hell during- this life ? " He compels all who sin to suffer, and he always will. But the sinner here has the ability to reform, and thereby be delivered from the pains of hell. But in the other world Mr. S. says he will have no such ability, and so be damned eternally for not doing what he was not allowed to do ! The good Lord, he thinks, will make infernal machines of nearly all his offspring — force them to be devils forever. He intimates that I teach immoralities. Let him name one. I challenge him to name one. I shall be ready for him when he enters on that field. Do you hear that, Mr. Sweeney.^ " At hand," " quickly," he will have it, means several thousand years. When Jesus said, " Agree with thine adversary quickly" he meant, wait several thousand years — did he.^ When the angel at the tomb of Jesus told Mary to go quickly and tell his disciples that the Lord was risen, he meant any time within ten thousand years would do — did he .' When Jesus said, " My time is at hand" " the summer is at hand" " the kingdom of God is at hand" " the passover was at hand" he meant several thousand years — did he.'' He says that '■'■ taku rendereei quickly, ordinarily means quickly." It ahvays means that in the New Testament, as I showed in my last speech. Again he says, '■'• Engus rendered at hand, generally means nigh." It always means nigh, as I have proved. He inquires, ••' Has the passage been ful- filled.?" If Christ told the truth, it has. He continues, Universal Salvation. loi " Has the proclamation, ' He that is filthy, let him he filthy still,' gone forth ?" No doubt of it, as Jesus was a true prophet. He again asks, " Was it ever revoked ?" Not that I know of. One more of his wise questions : "If it is not revoked, why not say, 'Be filthy still' instead of ' come ' ?" Brother Sweeney, can you not understand plain English? The passage does not say they shall be filthy one day. The passage has reference to the rejection of the Jewish nation as the peculiar people of God. Hereafter, special favors were to be denied them ; they were to be on an equality with other nations, and if they preferred sin to holiness, they could have it. They would not be compelled to choose the wrong, and hence Christ said to them, " Come." Jesus did not tell the Jews they would not go to him because they would die in their sins. That is an important fact, and fatal to my friend's view of the passage. He inquires, "Because of what were the Jews not to go to Jesus ? " For the same reason the disciples could not go to him, for he told them, as well as the Jews, they could not go to him. He was to die shortly, and leave them in this world. He is sure the Jews were not to go to him because they would die in their sins. But let it be remembered that Christ does not say so, does not intimate such a thing. He told them they would die in their sins, but said not a word about the result of so dying. Let that be remembered. I asked my friend, in my last speech, if he believed that none would be saved who die sinful, but he did not answer. He can answer the question now if he pleases, or in his next speech. I want an answer, yes or no, and must have one. But afterwards, Christ told both parties they would finally go to him. He stated distinctl}'- f03 Oral Discussion. / to the Jews that the time would come when they would /' say, '''•Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord," " I ivill draw all men to me" and through Paul he said, " For of him and through him and to him are all things," "yl// Zsvac/ shall be saved." I will notice this passage again when the gentleman answers tny question. The gentleman will have it, that the devil of the creeds governs a large part of mankind. That men are sinful is ti'ue, but that the sovereignty of this world is divided between God and the gentleman's devil is a degrading superstition. We have only his word for it, and he will please excuse us if we do not subscribe to such a monstrosity. He quotes my words, "God governs all men," and adds, "what a government it is!" Did an Atheist ever utter more irreverent words? Never, never. I hope he will see the folly of such lan- guage, and retract it. In my argument on the knowledge of God, it was stated that a being of infinite Wisdom, Goodness, Jus- tice, and Mercy, would not have given existence to countless millions, knowing that existence would be an endless curse to them, but must have known it would be a blessing. How does the gentleman meet this formidable argument ? " There is suffering in this world, and God knew there would be, and therefore, according to Mr. Manford, it is not an evil." Does he not see the sophistry of this answer ? The evils of this world have an end^ according to my view, and 50 ai-e reconcilable with goodness; but the evils of an endless hell have no end, and cannot be i-econcilcd with goodness. Rev. C. H. Townsend, an Episcopal minister, sees this, and hence writes, " Give evil an end — and all is plain ; Make it eternal — all things are obscured!" Universal Salvation. 103 I said, " Would God create men knowing they would be eternally lost?" He answers by asking, " VVliy did God create men knowing they would suffer a/f a'!?" He can see no difference between suffering a fezv days, and suffering to all eternity I Nobody questions that we now have the power of choice, and we are happy or miserable as we choose right or wrong. Now, give the inhabitants of hell the power to choose right "or wrong, and if they choose wrong eternally, let them suffer eternally. They ought to. But he tells us they will not have the liberty to choose right. No such privilege will be granted them. He talks about reapers; but li \\.\\ix% knoT.vn that they n^t only killed millions of men and women every har- vest, but sent them, soul and body, to an endless hell, McCormick would not have made the money he has. Here again he tries to be blind to the difference between the evils of a few days, and endless evils. I do not believe Mr. McCormick would make or sell another reaper if he knew that his machines sent souls to an endless hell. He would be a monster if he should persist in doing what he knew would hurl souls to end- less torments. And yet God daily is creating Immortal souls, knowing all the time that eternal destruction will be their end — so Mr. S. asserts. Another argument was based on the Fatherhood of God. God is the Father of all, now and forever, and he will always deal with all fatherly, kindly. My friend seems to be in a fog-bank here. He denies that God is the Father of all men, and yet contends that all men are the offspring of God, What does he mean? Is here not a contradiction ? When the prophet says, " We have all one Father," my friend says it means Father in 104 Oral Discussion. the sense of creation. Yes, creation in God's image, and hence his children. But this only means^tlie Jews. Veiy well. But those Jews were " treacherous," " pro- fane," so wicked men are God's children. In a former speech he asserted, that the saints only were the children of God, and I cited this passage to prove that sinners also were, and it proves it. When Paul said " One God, the Father of all," he meant, the gentleman says, that God was only the Father of believers. But some of the believers in Paul's day held the truth in unrighteousness, and if God was their Father, why not the Father of other sinners? I have shown, time and again, that all mankind are God's child- ren because they are made in his image^ and that that is an eternal relation, but that all are not God's children morally. The gentleman pays no attention to this dis- tinction, although it is a very important distinction, but talks as if most of mankind in their origin are the children of satan. I am amazed at the course he pur- sues. I contend that no one is, or can be, saved till he is morally a child of God, till he is in God's moral image. Mr. S. knows this; and why then all this misrepresenting ? As my allotted time has nearly expired I will present some additional testimony of the restitution of all things. XII. Man is in the Image of God. This is one of the grandest truths of revelation. It is taught in the Old Testament, and in the New Testament; in the Law, and in the Gospel; by Moses and by Christ. " And God said. Let us make man in our image^ after our likeness. * * * So God created man in his own ima^e. in the iviarre of God created he him." Gen. i. 26, 27. "In the day tliat God created man, in the Universal Salvation. 105 likeness of God made he him." Gen. v. i. "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed : for in the image of God made he man." Gen. ix. 6. It is an error of the creeds, that man has lost the divine image in which he was created, and is noiv created in the image of satan. If this is so, the devil must now be the creator of mankind, for surely the all-wise, and all-good God would not make beings in the image of the foe of God and man. It seems that when the New Testament was being written, man was still created in the image of God. The apostle James says, "There- with bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God." Jas. iii. 9. And the apostle Paul uses even stronger language, " For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God." I Cor. xi. 7. Eighteen hundred years ago, then, God, not the devil, was the creator of man; and he was made in his image and glory, not in the image of satan. It is not meant that man physically is in the image of God. God is a spirit, and man is a spirit. In that respect he is in the image and glory of God. The spirit is the real man. This body is in the image of the earth, and is earthy, but the spirit is in the image of God, and is heavenly. For this reason men are said to be children of God, and he their Father. They are his offspring, and partake of his nature. It is true, that tnorally the wicked are not in the image of God, and so are not characteristically his children. We must be careful to make the proper distinction between our spiritual na- ture, as God creates us, and our moral character, which is our own making. We are now, and ever shall be, as the Creator formed us — in his image and glory — and so 106 Oral Discussion. are liis children ; but all of us are not morally in God's image, not characteristically his children. •• None are wholly God-forsaken, All his sacred image bear ; None so lost but should awaken In our hearts a brother's care." What will God do with his images? Annihilate them } Put them into hell .'* Shut them up with devils .? Damn them eternally.'' As the apostle Paul would say, "• God forbid ! " How dare we charge our heavenly Father with doing so dreadful a thing! He has not built a hell on purpose to fill it with his own images. He has not made a devil on purpose to degrade, debase and tor- ment his own images eternally. The reverse of this is the truth. Man was made in the image and glory of God for a wise and holy purpose. He may abuse his noble nature, may sink deep in the mire of sin and corruption, but God's image is still there; as the diamond, notwith- standing it is sunk in the cesspool, is a diamond still. Take it from the pit, remove its rough exterior, and it is a thing of beauty. So, raise man from his degradation, purify him by the word of truth, and the divine image is seen in all its glory. I will close this argument in the sublime words of Sir Humphrey Davy, written more than one hundi^ed years ago. Speaking of man being in the image of God, he says, " A sacred spark, created by His breath, The immortal mind of man His image bears; A spirit living midst the forms of death, Oppressed, but not subdued, by mortal cares. A germ, preparing in the winter's frost To rise, and bud and blossom in the spring ; An unfledged eagle, by the tempest tossed, Unconscious of its future strength of wing ; Universal Salvation. 107 The child of trial, to mortality And all its changeful influences given ; On the green earth decreed to move and die ; And yet, by such a fate, prepared for heaven." XIII. All shall p-aise God. " All thy works shall praise thee, O Lord." Ps. cxiv. 6. If all God's works shall praise him, then all mankind will praise him. But what does praising God mean? Would the impreca- tions, blasphemies, groans, and shrieks of damned spirits be praising God ? Mr. Sweeney seems to think that is the kind of " praise " millions will be forced to render forever. But he is surely mistaken. We praise God in our bodies and our souls as we make a proper use of the faculties of our nature — not when we abuse and debase ourselves. Children praise their earthly parents if they are wise and virtuous; and we praise our Heavenly Parent when we are faithful children. The promise is, that finally all shall praise him, shall go and worship before him and glorify his name. XIV. God is the Owner of all mankind. This is taught, directly or indirectly, on most every page of the inspired volume. " Behold, saith the Lord, all souls ARE mine; as the soul of the father, so also, the soul of the son is mine." Eze. xviii. 4. This is clear, distinct, emphatic. All mankind belong to God. They are his property, and are his most precious possessions. Now what will God do with his owji? Will he protect or abandon his own ? Will he purify or debauch his ovjn ? Will he save or endlessly damn his oxvn ? A christian can give but one answer to those questions, and that is, that God will protect, purify, save his own, made in his own image. [ Time expired. loS Oral Discussion. [mr. Sweeney's fourth reply.] My opponent does not mean, he says, " to speak lightly of endless hell ; " means not to ridicule the sub- ject; means to make no extravagant and distorted statement of the subject; means no misrepresentation of the teaching of his opponents as to the character of God; but is only "grieved at heart to think that so many good men and women think so wickedly of the God of heaven;" and therefore he " speaks of hell-torments in pretty plain English." He does not mean to " white- wash hell inside or outside," " to mask or hide its devils in the dark," to " smother its fires, or scent its brim- stone with ' balm of a thousand flowers ' ; " but he does mean " to awaken people to the horrors of their creed." Scoffing at "hell;" ridiculing the idea of " everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels," — as if there were in reality any devil and his angels — burlesquing the notion of " brimstone," — as if such a word were used in the Bible in connection with the punishment of the wicked ; " awakening people to the horrors of their creed," — as if any, even civilized, man would think of saying, " knowing the terrors of the Lord, we persuade men," or, " it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of God," or, " our God is a consum- ing fire;" how the gentleman reminds us of Jesus and all the apostles ! Let him be as good as his word. Let him not "whitewash hell inside or outside;" not "smother its fires;" not "scent its brijnstone;" not " mask or hide its devils; " but speak of the punishment of the wicked in Bible language, and we shall have a profitable debate. I will promise him, if he will do all this, that I will not use one word or phrase descriptive Universal Salvation. 109 of the punishment of the wicked that I cannot find so used in the Bible. Will this aflord the gentleman — so grieved at his heart " to think that so many good men and women think so wickedly of the God of heaven " — any relief? Then let us speak of this subject in Bible language, and confine ourselves to the real issue, which is as to the eternity of punishment. We should, however, bear in mind that we are still discussing, or should be discussing, the first proposition. What do I care for the language of the "creeds"! What care I for the extravagant and even silly language that some men, believing in " everlasting punishment," have used concerning it ! Am I here to defend either the one or the other? I think not. I am sorry to say, that extrav- agantly and foolishly as some of the advocates of the doctrine of "everlasting punishment" have expressed themselves, even their language will not answer the pur- pose of my opponent. He puts his wits to torture to construct still more ridiculous and incongruous phrase- ology, by which to present the views of his opponents in the most hideous and distorted manner possible. This I have found with most Universalists to be more than half the battle. And he thinks I am " uneasy " when he " talks thus about hell." "Uneasy," forsooth! " Uneasy " about what ? Will he be so obliging as to tell us what he supposes I am uneasy about when he is having a little sport about hell ? Does he think he is terrifying me? I am not that man. The " hosts " of my brethren who advocate annihila- tion the gentleman has about frittered away. He says now that " some " of them advocate that notion, and that I " know that to be correct." And now, as he seems determined to run this little irrelevant matter no Oral Discussion. through our discussion, I have a proposition to make to him : For every man he can find belonging to the church of wliich I am a member and preacliing annihilation views, I will find him a Universalist preaching deism. Let him count out his " hosts," Speaking of infants again, the gentleman says, " They are born sinful, live sinful, die sinful, as Mr. Campbell teaches^ How Mr. Campbell's language fluctuates on my opponent's Ups! It's wonderful! Mr. Campbell never said what he represents him as saying. Mr. C. only said, " we all inherit a fallen, consequently a sinful nature" — that we are " condemned to natural death, and greatly fallen and depraved in our whole constitu- tion." Does Mr. Manford mean no more by the woixl "sinful" in his proposition than this.'' Does he mean to affirm no more than that all who leave this world sin- ful merely in the sense of having a depraved natui"e, a weak and imperfect constitution, and hence condemned to natural death, will finally be saved.? He means almost infinitely more than this. He means that all who leave this world guilty of willful and unrepented trans- gressions of God's law, persisted in during life, and hence in irreconciliation and rebellion against God — though they may curse God and die — will finally be reconciled to God and saved. And in his attempt to cover the enormity of this affirmation, he tells you, with much seeming seriousness, that " Mr. Campbell and Mr. Sweeney together send all infixnts to hell." Does he really believe this.? Did Mr. Campbell teach that by nature we ai^e more than " condemned to natural death " .? Of course not. I think Mr. Campbell might better have used some other word instead of " sinful ; " but he did not mean by sinful what we ordinarily mean. Universal Salvation. n i He did not mean, as every one who has read the article from which this clause is quoted knows, to teach that we are born giiilty of sin. For no man did ever more unmistakably repudiate a dogma than Mr. Camp- bell did the dogma of infant regeneration, and the necessity for it. I am understood, of course, to speak of regene- ration in a moral sense. Infants do not leave this world in irreconciliation^ or morally corrupt, and hence guilty of sin; and hence they are not included in the gentle- man's proposition, much as he would like to have them there. And his effort to bring them in shows, to my satisfaction, that he feels that the enormity of his j^ropo- sition is ciying out for some mitigation. I saw early in our discussion that my opponent was trying to confound the weaknesses and imperfections of our nature with positive sinfulness and guilt, and de- liverance from these weaknesses and imperfections with salvatiofi from sin and guilt ; and, therefore, I asked him what he meant by salvation. And his answer is precisely what I expected to get, if I was to have any. He says, and repeats, that " salvation is deliverance from the imperfections of earth." The confounding of nat- ural law with ethical law, and constitutional imperfec- tion with moral transgression, is a mode of thought akin to Pantheism, and one which I think Christianity regards with intense antipathy. Innocent infirmity and iniquity belong in very different categories. If sin is not the transgression of, or voluntary apostasy from, obedience to a law which commands but constrains not, then the very foundation of the Christian system is gone. Who is " delivered from the imperfections of earth " .'' Nobody, in this world. Then who, according to this definition of salvation, is saved } Who ever has 112 Oral Disctission. been saved in this world ? Nobody. But is this apos- tolic? Did not the apostles represent all Christians as being saved in this world? Certainly. As I expected he would, the gentleman makes death infinitely a greater Savior than Jesus! Death, with him, is an Almighty Savior! It lifts the veil, and at once lets all "the glory of the upper world " in upon a sinner, who has long resisted all the love of Jesus, and he is " converted in- stantly" by one "glimpse" of heaven! Why, if he is right, did Jesus come into this world to save sinners? And then, what is there in the cross or the blood of Christ, to save men, like the Almightiness of death, that at once ushers the vilest sinner directly into the effulgence of " the upper world," where all sins " instantly " dis- appear ! ! Why does not God save us all as he did the Egyptians, and the Sodomites, and the wicked Jews when he destroyed their city, by sending glorious death to sweep us at once into " the glory of the upper world " ? Perhaps, after all, Judas understood the plan of salvation better than the men of his time, or most men of our time. When his soul was borne down by guilt till he could bear it no longer, and not feeling disposed to wait to be relieved by the slow processes of the Gospel in the outer court, he concluded to leap at once into " the glory of the upper world," and be converted " instantly " and sa\ ed eternally ! Then there were Ananias and Sapphira who lied to the Holy Ghost, a sin that could not be for- given " in the Jewish age or the Christian age," as my friend would say ; they were sent off to the glory of the upper world to be instantly converted, sanctified, and glorified! And in proof of this doctrine of conversion and salvation by death, or through death, we are referred to the case of Saul. The gentleman thinks he vs^as Unive7'sal Salvation. "3 saved " instantly," and " by one glimpse of the risen Jesus, and one word from his lips." I think, however, that he would do well to re-examine that case, de novo. By doing so carefully, he may discover that Jesus did not appear to Saul for the express pui"pose of savi?zg him by his glorious pr-esence., and " one word from his lips." He may also discover that Saul was not saved instantly, when he saw the Lord, but came to the rc7nis- sion of sins some time afterward, and by willing obedi- ence to the Gospel. He may discover, furthermore, that Saul's salvation did not consist in " deliverance from the imperfections of earth." So the gentleman has at last informed us where all ■who leave this world sinful go to. They " drop their bodies in the grave" and go immediately into "the glory of the upper world," where they are " converted instant- ly," and fashioned like unto all heavenly beings! Then why did he set out so cautiously, saying, " I do not affirm how or when this reconciliation is effected — only that all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God and saved " .'* Why did he not at once relieve all possible suspense by telling us that all who leave this world sinful go at once into " the glory of the upper world," where all their sins and moral pollution are melted away, as frosts are melted before the rising sun, only a little more "instantly".^ What a wonderful work death alone accomplishes for the sinner^ agreeably to my friend's teaching! It makes him "immortal" — of course whether he has sought for it or not — frees him from all wrong "appetites and passions;" lifts him entirely above " all inward and outward temptations ; " and brings him "near God's throne"! And no marvel the gentleman thinks that "regeneration will be effected lO 114 Oral Discussio7i. infinitely easier on the golden shore than in this world " ! "With all tiiese advantages," as my friend says, how will any fail of reconciliation and salvation, after they get into heaven ? What a grand place heaven must be for successful missionary work! But we must not forget death; for it almost finishes the work as it carries the sinner through to " the glory of the upper world." It rids him of all hindrances. Then sinner, take courage. If you find it a hard matter to overcome the world, the flesh and your subjective devil, you may "knock under" and wait for death to usher you into " the glory of the upper world," where, "with all its advantages," your " regeneration will be effected infinitely easier than in this world." True, you may " die in your sins," but whither Jesus has gone you shall go immediately, and be instantly saved and glorified with him ! How the gentle- man's doctrine reminds one of the teaching of Jesus, and, indeed, of almost all he ever read in the Bible ! The gentleman says "we make our own devils." Well, did Jesus make his own devil, that tempted him in the wilderness.-* If sinners will not have opportunity to be reconciled and saved in the future world, the gentleman wants to know " why it will be so." He thinks the " laboring oar is with" me, here; and therefore he says, "Let him prove it will be so." I think, however, the laboring oar is his. In fact, I know it is. Let him prove that sin- ners will have, in the next world, the opportunities they slight in this. He must do this, and ?nore, before he can claim, with any show of reason, to have made out his case. He must show not only that sinners who slight all opportunities of salvation in this life will have those opportunities in the future life, but that they all Universal Salvation. 115 "joill certaijily improve them, and be saved. But he has no sufficient authority for asserting either the one or the other. God has revealed nothing to us concerning recon- ciHation in the future world. And to say that God will offer greater motives to virtue in the future world than he has offered here, is to impeach both his divine Wis- dom and Goodness, and put an excuse in the mouth of sinners for their disobedience. The man who deliber- ately rejects Christ is gone — forever gone, when he passes into the future world. So the Bible teaches, or it teaches nothing. We are informed that according to my teaching the purposes of " God, Jesus, angels, are all defeated, hum- bled, and crushed, by the will of a wortn of the dust" that is, the " Image of Gotl." This the gentleman thinks is quite shocking. Well, I suppose I must notice this matter of the "will" of man and "purpose" of God ao-ain. I will submit the whole matter of contro- versy in a trilemma. It is true either, first. That God purposes that man should do whatever man does and be whatever he is ; or, secondly. That God purposes that man should do good and be happy, and man defeats that purpose, does evil and is unhappy; or, thirdly, That God has no purpose concerning man's actions and happiness that disregards man's will. I submit this as exhaustive. Now, which horn of the trilemma will my opponent take? Will he, with Ballou, take the first, and make God the author of w^hatever man does, and the cause of whatever he is; and then deny that there is any " real evil in the universe," rather than make God its cause? Or, will he take the second, and thus allow that the purpose of God is defeated " by a worm of the dust".? Or, will he take the third, and^ thus allow that Il6 Oral Disczission. God so purposes concerning man's actions and happiness as that his purposes to some extent depend upon man's will for their performance ? I hope the gentleman will select his position and let us hear from him in unequivo- cal terms. My position is, I think, unequivocal. I want it tested severelj-. It is true, as the gentleman said and argued so length- ily, that man's will can be " influenced ; " but can it be com polled? That's the question. Can God himself will for man and yet treat him as having a will of his own ? We cannot argue from the divine attributes that he will do so, even in order to man's recovery from sin and eternal ruin ; there are too many unknown elements in the problem. God may never be willing to dishonor his own image in breaking down the freedom of the creature; and so the very dignity and worth of man, about which my friend has so much to say, may stand in the way of his recovery. I am very slow to accept conclusions drawn merely from what are called the divine attributes. They are not a legitimate subject of human reason. We must know all the premises contain before we can thence draw entirely reliable conclusions. What I have said on this point applies to all my oppo- nent's arguments. That was a sad and touching story we heard concern- ing the "condemned pirate." I was nevertheless a little amused at its abrupt, not to say farcical, conclusion. Finally "the lost wretch broke out in an impassioned strain of earnest supplication and entreaty to the Father of mercies" — for what? thought I, if Universalism be true. Had not the gentleman come so near shedding tears over the story, I believe I should press that question a little upon him yet. Universal Salvation. 1 17 My wortliy opponent is In trouhlc with his doctrine of "force." He is evidently tired of the old Univcrsalibt doctrine, that all God's "shalls" arc absolutely uncondi- tional ; and then, again, he docs not get on very well with- out it. He oscillates. Sometimes he seems orthodox, and at other times heterodox on this question. And I am not quite certain but that at times he gets a little out of humor. For what purpose . did he cite all those scrip- tures containing the words "shall" and "will," empha- sizing those words so heavily.'' Was it not to make the impression that the promises with which they were con- nected, were absolutely unconditional, and the commands were absolute decrees to which all will be compelled to yield obedience, willing or unwilling.'' I think it was. But such a i:)OsItion is easily shown to be untenable. One passage of scripture is sufficient to show it. Let us read Acts ill. 23, 33 : " For Moses truly said unto the fathers, ' A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall sa}^ unto you. And it shall come to pass that every soul which will not hear that prophet shall be destroyed from among the people.'" Now, in the first verse of this quotation it is said, " Him 5/^(2// ye hear;" from which, I suppose, the gentleman would argue the absolute and unavoidable certainty that every soul will hear that prophet. But that this would be fallacious the next verse shows most conclusively. "And it shall come to pass that every soul which xuill not hear that prophet shall be destroyed." Thus we see that although God says "him sliall ye hear," he recognizes the fact that some may " will not " to hear. When, therefore, God says, "him shall yc hear," he simply reveals, or declares, duty, and every ii8 Oral Discussion. man ought to do it; but he can oppose his will to the will of God, and take the consequences. And this is the key to all the passages he quoted. My friend goes back to Revelations. And there is nothing clearer than that he finds "great tribulation" there. I said " quickly " and " at hand " do not indicate that all that was spoken of in that passage was to be fulfilled even in a few years. I say so still. We agree as to the usual meaning of the words rendered " quickly " and "at hand." But all our words indicating divisions of time are in scripture often used to indicate almost infinitely more than they usually do ; as, for instance, " day," " week," and "year." So the words rendered " shortly," " quickly," and "at hand" are used. Com- pared with eternity a thing may be said to be " at hand," or coming " quickly," though it may be hundreds of years in the future; and as compared with a man's nat- ural lifetime, a long way off. A father is absent from his faiTiily a year, and it is called a long time; and when eight months arc to pass yet before his return, his com- ing would not be said to be " at hand ; " but when that man's whole probable lifetime is spoken of, as it stands to eternity, it is called but a moment, but a span, and death, which is in all probability years in the future, is spoken of as "at hand," "at the door" — comes " quickly." My friend understands this matter, and so uses words every day. Indeed, he did so in his last speech, and I noted the fact. You remember, he wanted to know if I could " see no difference between suffering a. few days^ and suffering to all eternity." By a "few davs" he evidently meant a lifetime; and why did he call it a '■'•few days" P Because he spoke of it in com- parison with eternity. Why, in the very first verse of Universal Salvation. 119 the book of Revelation, it is said that the " things " therein spoken of " must shortly come to pass." But my friend himself does not believe they have all come to j^ass yet. He puts some of those things in the future which eighteen hundred years ago it was said " must shortly come to pass." So, he " will have to revise Web- ster's Dictionary." But we are told that the passage in controversy has "reference to the rejaction of the Jewish nation." The time was " at hand," was coming " quickly," when the Jews " were to be on an equality with other nations." But in this position the gentleman is unfortu- nate again. For the Jews were already " on an equality with other nations." Peter had said, fifty years before, " God is no respecter of persons, but in every nation^ he that fcareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted with him." Acts x. 34, 35. " He that is filthy, let him be filthy still," means " the rejection of the Jewish nation"! That caps the climax! Well, I would like to know, if there is one of all the "little unpleasantnesses" of the Bible that does not "refer to the rejection of the Jewish nation," which one it is. That "rejection of the Jewish nation" was certainly, according to Universalism, one of the most extensive and most everlasting affliirs in the history of the world ! The gentleman says, he " must have an answer to his question, whether I believe any will be saved who die sinful." He has a harder question than that before him. He affirms that " all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved." Let him prove that, or, if he thinks he can do it better piecemeal, let. him go to work and first prove that some who die sinful will be saved. We are told that the Jews who died in their sins did I20 Oral Discussion. go to heaven, because Jesus told them they should not see him henceforth till they should say, "• Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord." And does that prove that they w^ere saved? Not quite satisfactorily. Then the gentleman quotes, "All Israel shall be saved." He left off the ''so." Put on the "so," Mr. M., and read, " So all Israel shall be saved." Tell us whom " all Israel " includes ; and how all Israel shall be saved .'' But Christ will save those Jews whom he told they should die in their sins, and whither he went they could not go, we are told, because Paul said "of him, and through him, and to him, are all things." But if that proves universal salvation, it proves that all were already saved when Paul wrote that language; for he said, "of him, and through him, and to him, are [now] all things." This is the wrong witness, evidently. When the gentleman speaks of the "devil" as he does, why does he say " the devil of the creeds^'' or " the gentle/nan's devil.'*" Is it to hide a trifle of skepticism.'' I have spoken of the devil, and always do, strictly in scripture style. The worthy gentleman seems to think me as "iri-ev- erent" as any "atheist," because I will not allow that God is all in all. I repeat with emphasis all I said. Some men " are not of the Father," but are of " their father, the devil, and his will " they do. My friend admits I am coiTcct as to the law of human happiness. He says, "we now have the power of choice, and are happy or miserable as we choose the right or wrong." Now, this lays the axe to the root of the tree of his argument, as he calls it, drawn from what he thinks he knows of the " knowledge of God." Man's capability of happiness involves his capability of unhap- Universal Salvation, 12 1 piness; and as he may be eternally happy, so he may also be eternally unhappy. This Is admitted. But, says the gentleman, " allow the inhabitants of hell the power to choose right or wrong, and if they choose wrong eternally, let them suffer eternally. They ought to." This gives iip Universalism, as taught by all the fathers ! But as my friend does not "subscribe" to what any of them say, I'll take him alone. Grant, now, for the sake of argument, what is both unscriptural, and unreason- able, namely: that men can never lose this power of choice — that their moral condition will never become fixed — that human life with all its laws and conditions of happiness will be an endless cycle — then can it be proved that men who will not in this world certainly will in the next choose and do the right.? Does the Bible say so.'' If so, where.? And what does reason say.? That prolonged indulgence in sin increases the probabilities of reform .? I think not. All analogical reasoning is against my friend here. Golden opportuni- ties slighted, do not press upon us etei-nally. It is a significant scripture fact, too, that the "rich man" did not seem to have the power of choice after he left this world. What the gentleman had to say about McCormick's reapers was more shrewd than pointed. The McCor- mick reaper does not propose to " reap life everlasting." To the extent that anything is " a savor of life unto life " it may be a " savor of death unto death," but no farther. So says my moral philosophy. My opponent claims that I misrepresent his argument drawn from the " Fatherhood of God," and he is " amazed at the coui-se " I pursue. I am sorry I cannot help him out of his trouble. If he would receive the II 123 Of'al Discussion. truth I could. But how stands the " argument " on the " Fatherhood of God " ? The gentleman makes two admissions that knock it all to pi. He admits that " all are not God's children morally" and that " no one is, or can be, saved till he is morally a child of God." Then all are not saved now, because all are not God's children morally. Well, has he proven that all ever will become God's children in a moral sense.? If so, I failed to hear him. When he does so — and not till then — he may begin to talk about his " argument from the Father- hood of God." No wonder the gentleman is " amazed," and frets a little at times! He makes a few incoherent statements, calls them an argument, and when they crumble to pieces in my hands at the slightest touch, and disappear, " Like the baseless fabric of a dream," the gentleman stands completely " amazed " ! XII. " Man is in the image of God," the gentleman tells us, " is one of the grandest truths of revelation." Well, it is a grand truth, an awfully grand truth, I grant. Now, while I am not exactly " amazed," I am a little astonished that the gentleman should call this his '''' twelfth argument." Why, has he not had more or less to say about it in every speech he has made ! And have I not once or twice disposed of it, to his utter amazement.'' But after saying several things, true in the main, he asks, "What will God do with his image?" Well, what does " God do with his image " nozv ? And what docs that image do with itself ? These are grave questions, but the asking of no one of them proves my friend's proposition. He asks, again, " Will God put Universal Salvation. 123 them into hell ? " Where does he put them now ? And where do they put thetnselves ? The gentleman is con- stantly trying to make the imjDression upon your minds that I " charge our heavenly Father with so dreadful a thing as the eternal punishment of the wicked." / do no suck thmg. Please bear that in mind. I do not " charge our heavenly Fatlier " with even the punish- ment we know the wicked suffer in this world, as Uni- versallstn has always done. I think my hearers gene- rally understand me on this point, however. XIII. "All shall praise God," is my friend's 13th argument. He quotes Psalm cxlv. 10—" All thy -works shall praise thee," leaving off the following words, " and thy saints shall bless thee." God's " works " praise him, and his saints bless him. He even nvikes the wrath of man praise him — " Surely the wrath of man shall praise thee." Ps. Ixxvi. 10. In the sanie Psalm from which the gentleman quoted his scrap, David says, "The Lord preserveth all them that love him; but all the wicked ivill he destroy; my mouth shall speak the praise of the Lord." But after talking- awhile about praise, the gentleman told us that " finally all shall praise him, shall go and worship before him, and glorify his name." Did he intend we should receive that as Scripture? If so, I want to know where to find it. XIV. "God is the Owner of all mankind." The an- swer to the argument from the " P'atherhood of God " is the answer to this. In one sense God may be said to be the " Owner of all men," but not in a moral sense. True, he says " all souls are mine," but he follows that up by saying "the soul that sinneth, it shall die." Morally, we are expressly told in Scripture, tliat some souls " are not of the Father" 134 Oral Discussion. The gentleman asks, " what will God do with his 0W71 ? " What did Jesus do with " hie own," when "he came to his own, and his own received him not"? But, my friend continues, " Will he purify or debauch his own ? " He will certainly not " debauch " them. But what will " his own " do with themselves ? Will they " purify or debauch" themselves? What do they do with themselves now ? - Some of them " de- bauch " themselves, notwithstanding they are '' his own." [7^//;2t? expired. i \ [mr. manford's fifth speech.] My good friend will have it, that I slander the hell he so ardently defends. That is impossible. If hell ineans endless banishment from all of God's love, mercy, and goodness; from all hapj^iness, all life, all hope; if its countless millions are given over, soul, spirit and body, to the entire control of satan; if naught but darkness, death, and black despair, reign within its dismal borders, it is utterly impossible to slander it or its infernal keeper. No tongue or pen can do justice to such a place, to such a doom. We may attempt to illustrate such a hell by Nebuchadnezzar's furnace heated seven times hotter than common, but the illusti'ation is poverty- stricken. It is infinitely worse than can be imagined because all its horrors are endless in duration. If after a hundred millions of years, its damnation should cease by its victims being a7tnihilated^ we might, form some conception of the reality, but if its woes are never to end, it is awful beyond any idea we can form of it. That place, that condition, is what I mean by the " hell of the creeds." The banishment, the death, the hells, Universal Salvatioit. 125 the Bible speaks of, are quite unlike that terrible fiction of the disordered brain of man. I do not war against a " Thus saith the Lord," but against the follies and crimes of this world. Mr. Sweeney says, he uses only Bible words when he talks about punishment. His proposition for to-moiTow is " endless punishment." I have never seen such a phrase in the Scriptures. My friend says, he will find a Deist among my breth- ren for every Annihilationist I find in his ranks. We are all called Deists by our enemies because we believe the first commandment, so he might find several hundred thousand of such Bible Deists to offset the Annihilation- ists in his church. My zealous opponent does not believe, with Tvlr. Campbell, that God ci^eates all mankind sinful, yet he defends his father in Israel as if he accepted all he says on that subject. Does not his denomination adopt Mr. C.'s view.'' I dwell on this matter because it is veiy important. If God has created us sinful, he must have designed we should be sinful. Beside, that doctrine makes God the author of sin. These two conclusions cannot be avoided if we receive a sinful nature from our Creator. Most other denominations contend for infant depravity, but they have a way of saving children. Mr. Camp- bell and his church believe in infant depravity and sinfulness, but have no method of saving children. Aly friend intimates, that Mr. C. meant that only our physical constitution is sinful. That gentleman was not such a ninny as to think the body is sinful. Sinfulness only pertains to our moral nature. The words of Mr. C. are that our " whole moral constitution " is depraved and. greatly fallen, that we are born with a " sinful 1 26 Oral Discussi07t. nature," "hence," he says, "that hercditaiy imbecilit}' to do good, and that proneness to do evil, so universally apparent in all beings," He also calls the sinfulness we are born with a " moral distemper," " a disease in the moral constitution." According to this view, all infants have a sinful nature, are depraved in their whole moral constitution, have a moral distemper, are diseased in their moral constitution. This is called the primitive truth, and he adds, " Let no one open his mouth " against it. Now, if this is even half correct, will Mr. Sweeney tell us how a child dying in childhood can be saved .'' It certainly dies sinful if his spiritual father is right, and both of them contend that infant regeneration is a Satanic delusion. How then can a child be saved.? A being whose " whole moral constitution " is sinful, depraved, and greatly fallen, surely needs regeneration. If anybody needs the washing of regeneration such characters do. They are not regenerated in this world, he says ; and he also contends that no one can be regen- erated in the world to come. What then becomes of them ? In my third and fourth speeches I asked the gentleman this question — Will any be saved who leave this world sinful '^. He has not yet answered that ques- tion. If he should reply, that none will be, then he and Mr. Campbell together damn all children who die in childhood. If he should reply, that persons can be saved who die sinful, he and I will be one on that ques- tion. I hope he will have the goodness to answer that important question in his next speech. As he makes a great ado because I cherish the hope that even those of my race who depart this life unregenerated will finally be purified by the grace of God, I want to know exactly where he stands on that subject. He must not dodge that point any longer. Universal Salvation. 127 It is well known that my friend's church teaches, that water baptism is a condition of parv'on. They all tell us, that the Gospel gives no assurance that sin can be forgiven without immersion in water. If they are cor- rect, all who live and die without baptism — and nothing but immersion, they say, is baptism — must live and die in sin. What then becomes of all such persons? Will the gentleman enlighten us? If he will tell us how one adult can be saved, who leaves this world unimmersed, I will tell him how all can be. Will death do the work ? Will God do it? Please be so kind and condescending as to answer these questions clearly. Pi"ay, brother, do not go into any more spasms about my advocating the salvation of all who die unregenerated, till you attend to these matters. I have not said, that those who die sinful go directly to heaven, or that they are saved instantly. I have not said, that the good and the bad go to heaven together, for I do not believe it, and there is not a man or a woman in the church with which I am connected, that believes it either. I have not said, that the apostle Paul was saved instantly. When my friend gets excited, he some- times talks strangely. But I am not surprised at his excitement, for he evidently sees breakers dashing all around his craft. Let the old hulk of endless damnation sink, brother. It is not worth saving. Jump into the staunch ship of salvation, whose owner is the Father of our spirits, whose captain is his Son Jesus Christ, and whose passengers are the pure and good of all ages and climes. It will outride the storm, and finally enter the haven of eternal rest, loaded with all of God's children, redeemed, and purified. Jump in, and let the old craft, built by savage hands, go down. There is not a plank in it worth saving. 12S Oral Discussion. The gentleman sneers at the cheering truth, that the resurrection places man nearer his God, nearer to the spirits of the just made perfect, and consequently amid holier influences than those of earth. He thinks it is an abomination in the sight of heaven, that God should make an effort to better the condition of one who leaves this world unregenerated. He seems to think, that death is the end of God's mercy, and that beyond all is dark and infernal to most of our race. If he can find any consolation in such a faith, he is welcome to it. I prefer to trust in God as a universal and everlasting Savior. He placed us in this world for a wise and holy purpose, and when in his wisdom he transfers us to' the spirit-land, I trust it wdll be for an equally wise and holy purpose. But this soul-cheering view of the divine economy seems to disgust Mr. Sweeney ; and I am sorry to see, that he is evidently delighted that Judas, Ana- nias, Sapphira, and as many more as there are pebbles on the sea shore, will, according to his creed, be damned as long as God lives to damn them. But he may be sure that savage spirit is not of God, of Jesus, of Heaven. It is all of the earth earthy, and he will have to be regenerated by grace divine ere he can partake of the love of the upper world. He thinks it is an awful thing for a soul to grow wiser and better after departing hence, but a blessed tiling for millions, made in the image of God, to be consigned to the flames of hell, and to the claws of the devil. That is a blessed hope, that makes the heart leap with delight, that sanctifies the soul. He says, " The man who deliberately rejects Christ, is gone forever, when he passes into the future world." Now see the beauty of his creed. If such a man, one hour before he dies, accepts of Christ he is saved forever, Universal Salvation. 139 according to Air. S.'s creed. He may liave rejected Christ seventy years, but by accepting of him one short hour before death he goes straight to heaven. If that is not offering a bounty ior unbeHcf, what is it? And then, according to this notion, the act of one hour fixes one's condition eternally. Is that what the Bible means when it says, that God will "render to eveiy man according to his works " } The gentleman thinks that is a glorious display of wisdom, grace, justice, and love. Our friend admits at last, that God can " influence " man's will. It is wonderful, that he should for a moment admit that Almighty God can possibly do so much as that. But says he, " Can God co7npcl? " He has preached so much that we believe God will compel men to be saved whether they will or not, he is in a peck of trouble because I show that allegation to be slanderous. Making this evident, takes all the wind from his sails, and powder from his guns. He admits all we ever thought of, or contended for, namely, that God ca;?, and does injlueiice^ the will of man. It is his purpose to influence all for good till life and salvation shall bless all souls. Because a pirate was influenced, by the discovery that God was his Father, to repent of his sinful life, and pray for forgiveness, the gentleman cries, a farce. If he had been converted by fire and water, it would have been a glorious affair in his estimation. We are taught in the Bible that " The goodness of God leadeth to repentance," and are "persuaded by his mercy T But according to this professed minister of Christ that is all & farce. Jesus said, "Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand." That is another farce. If he had said. Repent, for the kingdom of hell is at hand, it would have been sublime, and this minister would have screamed Amen. 130 Oral Discussion. In my last speech I read one of the grandest passages in the Bible, concerning the influence of grace and huith on the heart and life. The " word," the Lord says, " Shall not return void," it '•'■shall accomplish its work " in the redemption of man, it ^'' shall prosper" in doing that for which it "was sent. God had a purpose in giving the world the word of truth; he purposed that the world should be saved by it, and that purpose SHALL be effected, saith the Most High, and I believe it. Shall, here means certain, and it has that meaning in all the Promises I expect to cite. Let us have no more of this stale nonsense about " compel," and " force." My breth- ren believe nothing of it. The gentleman only makes himself ridiculous by splitting his throat, and knocking this pulpit to pieces with those words. But he jumped from the Old to the New Testament, from Isaiah to Acts, to find, as he thinks, a "shall" that means 7tothing. " Him shall ye hear in all things," he quotes, and then adds, "I suppose he thinks that is certain'^ Of course I do. Its meaning is as clear as daylight. It shall be their duty to hear Christ in all things. And it is noiv^ and it eternally will be the duty of all to hear Christ in all things. I know he denies this, and contends that after awhile it will not be the duty of millions to hear Christ, but to hear and obey satan. The gentleman sticks to it, that "at hand" and " quickly " means from two to one hundred thousand years, or even a million of times longer for all he knows. Why will he not heed evidence, I'eason, and common sense? Was revelation given to deceive or instruct.'' In addition to what has been offered, note this verse — " Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand." The book was not to he scaled for Universal Salvation. 131 the reason the thnc was at hand when it was to be ful- filled, showing to all who want to know the truth that " at hand " and " quickly " docs not mean thousands of, ages. If thousands of years were to pass away before the prophecy was to be fulfilled, the angel would have said, " Seal the book, for the time is not at hand." But even if the gentleman's absurdity here should be admitted to be correct, namely, that at hand does not mean at hand, and quickly does not mean quickly, and that the passage refers to the great judgment at the winding up of the material universe, it does not prove that some will be sinful eternally. Wc have seen that "let" does not mean shall^ and "still" does not mean endless. My friend is a wonderful expositor. " Shall " means nothing, or next to nothing, when it refers to the purposes of God, but it means shall loud and long when it relates to the damnation of man. And " still " in the passage he labels endless because he thinks hell is in it. I will read a few passages where still occurs, to enlighten him concerning that Httle word. "As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus." i Tim. i. 3. "Silas and Timothy abode there 5////." Acts xvii. 14. "Then Martha, as soon as she heard that Jesus was coming, went and met him; but Mary sat still in the house." John xi. 20. According to brother Sweeney's luminous exposition, Silas and Timothy are at Ephesus yet, and will stay there eternally; Mary is sitting in her house in Bethany, and will sit tlicre eternally. If after all this testimony he will contend that "let" means endless^ " shall," nothing, and " at hand" and "quickly," thou- sands of years, I shall have to give him over to hardness of heart. In a previous speech he cited my words, " God gov- 132 Oral Discussion. ernsall men," and then added, '•'•What a government V I told him that an Atheist never uttered more iiTcvei^ent words, and he replies, " I repeat, with emphasis, all I said." But he did not repeat those infidel words, but some others, and I am glad he did not ; but he should not have said he did. Because I said we have the power of choice, and he is evidently sorry I said so, he jumps headlong to the con- clusion that some will choose to sin eternally. Has not God the power of choice.'' Plas not Christ the power of choice.? Have not the angels the power of choice.? Have not the redeemed the power of choice.? This, I suppose, he will admit. Then may God, Christ, angels, the redeemed, sin eternally .? If not, then none of man- kind may sin eternally, though they will have the power of choice. But he thinks the damned will not have the liberty of choice, that they will be compelled to go down, down, forever, and he refers to the rich man, and says, " The rich inan did not seem to have the power of choice after he left this world." That is a mistake. He chose to have his tongue cooled; he chose to save his brethren from coming to that hot place ; he chose to make a good prayer, and he made it. If the hell in which was the rich man is a place of endless torment, it is a place of ■prayer. What does brother S. think the devil was about to allow one of his subjects to pray .? He tells us, that two statements I made, namely, that all ai'e not God's children morally, and none can be saved till they are God's children morally, " knock my faith into pi." It does, I admit, as it is represented by our opposers, and as, I suppose, Mr. S. generally represents it. But both statements are fundamental truths with us, and much dwelt on in our ministrations. Universal Salvation. 133 I showed in my last speech, that all mankind are, and eternally will be, in God's image. He does not deny this. I then asked, " What will God do with his images ?" Mr. S. does not answer this question, but says, " what does God do with his images noxv ? " My reply is, God is good to all now, he is merciful to all now, he is bless- in^w world. In the spirit of Jesus, I trust, I deeply mourn the sad fact. But mourning of the righteous alone cannot save sin- ners, or tears, partly divine, would have saved Jerusalem, as they would doubtless save all men. I would " have all to be saved and come unto the knowledge of the truth," and for an end so devoutly desired, I think I am willing to labor as long and as earnestly as any one, in the ratio of my ability ; but I must be pardoned, if it be my crime, that I think telling sinners that " regenera- tion will be eflected infinitely easier on the golden shore than in this world," and that all who leave this world sinful will certainly be saved there, better calculated to defeat than to accomplish the end. I am sorry my friend thinks I have " a savage spirit." But I should be inore so to think it myself. If he is right in his judgment of me, then he is certainly right in telling me that I " will have to be regenerated by Grace divine ere I can partake of the love of the upper world." Will he preach that way to all who have " a savage spirit," and have done with his unauthorized and wretchedly licen- tious doctrine, that " regeneration will be effected infinitely easier on the golden shore".'' The Savior said, " Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God> " and if my friend would catch up the theme and devote his talent and energies to it, it would do vastly more good, in my humble judgment, than all he knows about " regenera- tion on the golden shore." Universal Salvation. H3 The gentleman has many things to say about my " beheving in hell," "hoping in hell," making "■God a fiend," and " hating the sinner," that, for very obvious reasons, I shall pass by. I w^ill be judged by what I say, and not by what Mr. M. says of me. If he thinks thus to irritate me, it were well for him to know that I am not his man. Who, but my opponent, has understood me to teach that one " may have rejected Christ seventy years, but by accepting of him one short hour before he dies, go straight to heaven " } I have very little faith in such conversions. I class them all with the conversion of that "condemned pirate" that the gentleman recited to us yesterday with so much pathos, and mark them "doubtful." One who purposely delays accepting Christ till " one short hour before he dies," or till he reaches "the golden shore," and gets "one glimpse" of " the glory of the upper world," may, perchance, " seek to enter in, and shall not be able." True, one may be converted just before he dies, but it will not be likely to be one who has all his " seventy years " deliberately cal- culated to accept Christ " one short hour before he dies." Such an one will perhaps be disappointed in his calcu- lation — as may he who defers his return until he reaches the golden shore, where, he may have been taught, with all its "advantages," "regeneration will be effected infi- nitely easier" than here, where he is compassed with infirmities, " appetites and passions," and a mortal " body." The man who received full wages for a day's work begun at the eleventh hour, was the one whom no one had offered employment earlier. We are not to be judged by the number of deeds done in the body, and justified or condemned as the good or bad may outnum- 144 Oral Discussion. ber, but by the moral character of the deeds of hfe — and Christ received by faith and held fast by faithful and prayerful obedience, will give moral character to one^s life. Universalism tinkers about all the atonement out of the Gospel, and hence my friend's trouble on this point. But Mr. Manford thinks that "pirate" was led to repentance " by the discovery that God was his Father." Perhaps so. It is a case open to suspicion, however. It might be suspected that the "discovery" of his approach to the gallows: — to doom — to " fire " — had something to do with it. He says the pirate " pi'ayed for forgiveness." Indeed ! And does he believe in forgiveness " one short hour" before death.'' It would be interesting to have a Universalist tell us what "forgiveness" a dying man should pray for, since they all hold that every man must be punished for eveiy sin he commits — that there is no pardon, really! I am not at all inclined to add to the troubles my opponent has with his " shalls," for his case has already drawn largely on my sympathies. But I must keep things straight as we go on. We are told that, as God has said, " Him shall ye hear in all things," " it eternally will be the duty of all to hear Christ in all things." Well, I deny that it eternally will be even the privilege of all to hear Christ. So here we have a plain issue. My friend thinks it will be the duty, and of course, the privilege, of all " eternally to hear Christ." I deny it, squarely. I say that when " all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth, they that have done good unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation," then the privilege of hearing Christ, as Prophet, Priest and Universal Salvation. 145 King," will have forever gone. I consider this matter vital in our controversy, and therefore have not brought it forward until I am satisfied I understand my oppo- nent fully. We live in a Dispeiisation. God's dealings with us are dispensational. This Dispensation w^ill end. This fact seems to havew^holly escaped my friend's atten- tion. His theory cannot admit it. And if I hold this position, it, of itself, upsets all his arguments at once. Then to the law^ and the testimony we go. " For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive; but every man in his own order; [and this accords with Christ's own testimony— " They that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation " — but we go on with Paul's testimony]; Christ the first fruits; after- ward they that are Chrisfs at his coming. Then Com- eth THE END, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father— when he shall have put down all rule, and authority, and power; for he must reign //// [not eternally, but till] he hath put all enemies [who are they ?] under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed [enemies are to be destroyed, mark,] is death. * * * * And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also him- self be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." i Cor. xv. 32-28. Let it be observed that all "enemies" are to be "put under his feet," are to be " destroyed." Death is one of these " ene- mies." But what other enemies are to be " destroyed " ? Paul himself shall tell us : " For mafzy walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weep- ing, [not "delighted"], that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ; whose end is destruction." Philip, ui. 13 14^ Oral Discussion. 18, 19. When "the enemies of the cross of Christ " have rushed on to their own " destruction," and, refusing to accept Christ as their Savior, have been " put down," " put under his feet," then 'will come the end of the reign of Christ. The kingdom will be delivered up to God, even the Father, and in that kingdom., God will be all in all. Then the enemies of the cross of Christ will only have the privilege of hearing him say, once for all, " De- part from me, all ye workers of iniquit}%" God will still be Love, and Goodness, and Mercy, and Holiness, and Justice; but there will be no longer a Mediator — no longer a mediatorial dispensation. We may criticise this, I know, and murmur, and complain ; but God does all things righteously and justly, whether we can now understand all his ways or not. Now, he says to all, " Come ; " but he will not eternally say it. And when he shall say, " Depart," it will be right, because " the Lord God hath said it." This is an overwhelming thought, I know ; and I am willing my friend should make all of it he can. Let him multiply his boisterous and horrific exclamations. They who are not obeying the Lord, and do not mean to, need be most alarmed, and the sooner such are aroused from slumber the better. We are not done with the passage in Revelations yet — " He that is filthy, let him be filthy still." The Sav- ior added, " Behold, I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." I have said what I have to say about " quickly " and " at hand." My friend thinks these words make it certain that the fulfillment of all that is here spoken was only a few days, or years at most, in the future. I have tried to get him to say when it was fulfilled. He is too cautious for that. True, he has said the whole passage Universal Salvation. 14V "refers to the rejection of the Jewish nation;" but I sho^ved that the Jewish nation, as such, had been rejected and put upon "an equahty with all other nations" fifty years before these words were spoken. Even Jerusalem had been destroyed, agreeably to our best chronological calculations, at least twenty years before. Hence my friend's extreme caution. Now, I wish to call attention to what follows the words, "Behold, I come quickly." I he Lord adds, "and my reward is with me, to -ive eveiy man according as his work shall be." Is all this fulfilled ? Has " every man » been rewarded accordino- to his work for nearly eighteen hundred years.? I thtnk not. But further, the Lord adds, "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last." Was he only the "Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last," of the Jewish nation? Christ refers to himself as "the etid'^ in connection with his coming, and the rewarding of every man, and the time when it shall be said — "He that is filthy, let him be filthy still." Of what is the " end," pray .? Only of the Jewish nation .? Note this fiict also; that notwithstanding it is said in the first verse of this book of Revelations that the thinc^s herein revealed "must shortly come to pass," yet my friend himself does not believe that they have all come to pass yet. I fail to get his attention to his own view of this book, and to the meaning of '' shortly ." I have not said that "let" means "shall," or that "still" means " endless." The gentleman's confusion is so deep that he has forgotten the purpose for which I called up this passage. It was simply to show that he was wrong when he quoted the words, " the Spirit and the bride say, 'Come,'" etc., and assumed that the Spirit 148 Oral Discussion. and the bride would " e/cr^a/Zy say, Come." And the passage senses the pui'pose exactly for -which I quoted it. The gentleman says that even the rich man had the power of choice, after death. " He chose to have his tongue cooled." But did he get it "cooled".? "He prayed " — " His hell was a place of prayer." But was his prayer answered? It seems to me he found his power of choosing good or evil somewhat restrained. But my friend asks, with an air of triumph, "what was the devil about, to allow one of his subjects to pray } " I suppose the devil concerns himself very little about the prayers of his subjects after it is too late for praying to do them any good, as in the case of the rich man. XV. Affirmant's fifteenth argument is based on the " Promises of God." Before quoting quite a catalogue of passages, he told us Peter asserted that " the restitution of all things was spoken by all God's holy prophets since the world began." Peter never asserted that. The gentleman will have to put on clear glasses. There is almost an infinite diflfcrence between what Peter said, and what the gentleman represented him as saying. Then we were referred to Gen. xii. 3, xviii. 17, 18, xxii. 18, xxvi. 3, 4, xxviii. 14. The first passage reads thus: "And in thee all families of the earth shall be blessed." This was God's promise to Abraham ; it was renewed to Isaac and Jacob, and is fulfilled in the Gos- pel, by which salvation is offered to all nations, instead of to Jews only. But my friend's proposition cuts him off from all these promises. He has made a bold move- ment in affirming that " all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved," but has given up the great reservoir of Universalist argument — Universal Salvation. 149 the " absolute promises." All these promises refer to " na- tions," "•kindreds," and "families of the earth;" while his proposition refers to such as " leave this world sin- ful," and go from the " earth," go where there are no "nations," no "kindreds," no "families," go into the eternal world. A blessing promised to " the nations of tlie earth " may not reach one who has gone into the eternal world sinful. My friend will have to tell where those go " who leave this world sinful," and then show that that place, wherever it is, comes within the scope of the promises. This he cannot do. The gentleman says this promise made to Abraham "includes the resurrection." This brings up the impor- tant question again, ivhat Is the resurrection? The gentleman should answer. With my view of the resur- rection, it matters not if this promise does " include the resurrection." My view of the resuiTection does not involve the reconciliation and salvation of all men. I believe in the " resurrection both of the just and the unjust" — some will come forth "to life," and some " to condemnation ; " " every man in his own order." I know the blessing promised to Abraham, in Christ, is universal — in that it was promised, not merely to Jews, or any other one branch of the human family, but to all nations. Agreed, that that promise contains the salva- tion of the Gospel. But now I have two questions for the gentleman. i. Is that salvation conditional or unconditional.'' 2. Is man, or is he not, free to comply with the conditions as he may choose.'' My position here is unequivocal. As the gentleman's argument depends upon his answer, he is logically bound to make an unequivocal answer. I affirm, and if I can prove anything, I can prove, that the individual and per- 150 Oral Discussion. sonal enjoyment of any blessing God has ever promised to men, is conditioned upon obedience. It matters not whether any condition is expressed in connection with a promise or not; it can be shown that such promise is, nevertheless, conditional. Then I say with Mr. Ballou, that if salvation is conditional, it must be in tlie power of men to neglect the conditions thereof; and that to deny this is a logical abnegation of those conditions, and, in effect, the destruction of their nature. Mr. Man- ford must be a consistent Universalist, or, logically, cannot be one at all. He must say salvation is abso- lutely unconditional, or he must concede that if all men shall ever be saved, it is not susceptible of proof in ad- vance. He must fall back behind the old earth works thrown up by Mr. Ballou and others — tinconditiojtal salvation — or he will certainly, to use his own jDhrase, be "gobbled up." Universalism can only be defended upon the ground that God has absolutely decreed the salvation of all men, without any regard to voluntary faitii and obedience upon their part; and Mr. Manford, it seems, has found that this ground is untenable. \Time expired. [mr. manford's sixth speech.] \ My worthy friend complains that I associate him with the great man of his church, Mr. Campbell, in his doc- trine of the moral depravity and sinfulness of mankind by nature; and says I should be manly enough "to be done with infant damnation," as he does not believe in it. I have not asserted, that either of them believed in infant damnation, but that Mr. Campbell advocated infant sinfulness ; and as he denied infant regenei-ation Universal Salvation. 151 in time and eternity, infant damnation follows as surely as two and two make four. That is what I said. And as Mr. Sweeney had not denied subscribing to Mr. C.'s view, I supposed he agreed with him, as they both be- long to one church. When he quoted from " Ballou on the Atonement," I stated distinctly I was not bound to subscribe to what he or any other man wrote or uttered, and did not assent to what Mr. B. seemed to mean in the quotation. If Mr. Sweeney had as frankly stated he did not subscribe to Mr. Campbell's view of human nature I should have dropped the subject. But he did not, and has not yet done that, but rather defends Mr. Campbell's views, says I misrepresent them, and wants to know why I do not produce the book I quote from. I have the book with me, and have named the pages where the quotations can be found. But Mr. C. is not the only one in his church who believes in infant deprav- ity. It seems to be the general sentiment of the church. The Apostolic Times, of Lexington, Ky., edited by five of the leading ministers of the denomination, adopts the same view of human nature. In an editorial, I find the following : " When Adam sinned, his sin corrupted his nature, his whole nature. This all concede. By his na- ture we mean his flesh and his spirit^ and we allow that these two terms exhaust his nature ; for had God annihilat- ed his flesh and extinguished his spirit, there would have been none of the man left. Now all we inherit from Adam, we inherit from him since the coiTuption of his nature set in. How much do we inherit? We inherit a body certainly. Do we inherit also a spirit ? " According to this we inherit a corrupt body and corrupt spirit from Adam — our " whole nature " is corrupt. Now, they all contend that children cannot be regenerated in this 152 Oral Discussion. world, and so if they are saved in eternity, they must be regenerated in eternity. If this is so, then one-third of mankind are saved who " leave this world sinful," leave it with a " sinful nature," as Mr, Campbell says, and a " corrupt spirit," as these five leading men say. They must be regenerated somewhere, for " sinful natures," " coiTupt spirits," do not enter heaven. Please enlighten us here. "Will any be saved who leave this world sinful.'*'* The gentleman tells us frankly that he don't know. That is honest. Why, then, does the man deny the truth of my proposition, which affirms that those who die sinful will finally be saved.? He candidly admits, that he does not know but that persons dying sinful will be saved. He asserts, that God has not revealed that any will be saved who die sinful. He also tell us on what conditions we can be saved from sin, and one of them is baptism. All who are immersed are pardoned, and all who are not immersed are not pardoned. Tho'se, then, who die unimmersed die in sin, and he does not know what becomes of them — does not know whether they are saved or damned — and nearly all mankind die without immersion. About all of the gentleman's the- ology is packed into three words — / donH know. When Methodists, Presbyterians, or Catholics, die — when any of any denomination, or of no denomination, die without immersion, he has to say, / doiit know whether they have gone to heaven or hell, to God or the devil. And this dreadful uncertainty, this awful suspense, he calls — ■ what does he call it.'' He has not as much faith as a grain of mustard seed. He does not know but they are all saved; he does not know but they are all damned. He stands between belief and unbelief. Universal Salvation. 153 My friend asks several questions about the fate of cer- tain sectarian "crafts" and their crews, and I will give him the information wanted in the words of the apostle Paul : " According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise master-builder, I have laid the founda- tion, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other founda- tion can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man's work shall be made manifest : for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire ; and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire, i Cor. iii. 10-15. The gentleman thinks it is "wretchedly licentious," to assert that salvation can be easier effected after leaving the corruptions of earth, and entering the spirit-land. Pagans and Jews doubtless, thought it was " wretchedly licentious " for the apostles to teach that it would be easier for them to be better men and women in the Christian church, than in Judaism or Paganism ! How *' wretchedly licentious" the great apostle wrote, " But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry^ by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant^ which was established upon better protnises " ! Heb. viii. 6. Giving them " a moi'e excellent ministiy," " a better covenant," and "better promises," was just as "Ucentious" in the estimation of the Jews, as the Gospel promise, that the time would come when " they shall be all taught of God," (John vi. 45), is, in Mr. 1 54 Oral Discussion. Sweeney's estimation. How "wretchedly licentious" parents are, when, finding that their children are learning more evil than good, they transfer them to a better school where it is easier to train them in wisdom's ways! How " wretchedly licentious " our " School Boards " are, to put books in our schools that the pupils may easier acquire knowledge! How " wretchedly licentious " parents are, when, finding that their neighborhood is demoralizing their family, they move to a more virtuous locality, that their children may be more easily trained to virtuous habits ! If it is " wretch- edly licentious " to teach, that the good Father above will transfer men to a world where the surroundings and influences are more divine and potent than those of earth, then it is equally as " licentious " to improve our places and circumstances in this world with a view to amendment. But the gentleman can see nothing " wretchedly licen- tious" in putting youths and maidens, all the hard- ened criminals from earth, old and young, and fiends from the pit, into hell, where they will be compelled to live together, night and day, age in and age out. He can see nothing but -purity^ love and wisdom in such an arrangement. In my judgment, all the immoralities of earth — all its vices, from the first to the last, are but a ^;'<9/ compared to the "wretched licentiousness" of such a disposition of mankind. And then, to cap the climax, it is said that the God of heaven is the builder and owner of that infernal place, and will keep it running forever. No decent man will rent his property for rum holes, gambling dens, or places of prostitution, and yet our Heavenly Father is charged with keeping up an institution where every crime known on earth,or in hell, Universal Salvation. 155 by men, fiends or devils, will be legalized — legalized by Him who is so pure that even heaven is imperfect in his sight. Talk about " wretchedly licentious " doc- trines! All other abominations are pale as death com- pared to this. The gentleman talks about dispensations. When youths and maidens, old and young, little sinners and big sinners, shall all be shut up in hell together, where it shall no longer be their duty or privilege to obey God — so the gentleman says — then a new dispensation will commence. Yes, it will be a new dispensation — a dis- pensation in which there will be no God, no Christ, no angels, no saints. They will all be dead or transformed into fiends. "Wretched licentiousness" will be rampant in hell and heaven, for such an infernal cesspit would corrupt the whole universe. The Mosaic dispensation has closed; the Christian dispensation will end, but the dispensation of Love, Mercy, Justice, Purity, Forgiveness, will end only when God ends. The Mosaic and Christian dispensations are only two seconds of the Dispensation of God. The dis- pensation of Love and Mercy, of Life and Immortality, are eternal and universal. Only a few words on the gentleman's last on Revela tion. If "at hand" means not at hand, if "quickly" means «t»/ quickly, if "let" means 5//a//, if "still" means endless, then there is to be the dispensation of "filthi- ness " he believes in ; but if the Lord means exactly what he says, then said dispensation is only the dream of some midnight reveler. He makes an awful blunder about the date of Revelation. Dr. Adam Clarke, and many other critics, place it before the destruction of the Jewish state, and from chapter eleven we learn that the temple was standing when the book was written. 156 Oral Discussion. Next comes his comments on the glorious Promise to the fathers. "But now," says he, "I have two questions for the gentleman, i. Is that salvation conditional or unconditional?" I answer, directly, part of it is condi- tional, and part unconditional. " 2. Is man, or is he not, free to comply with the conditions as he may choose?" Of course he is. I will now notice his com- ments. He admits the Promise is universal — that all nations, all families, all kindreds, mean all mankind. Veiy good. Now I have a question to ask, will there be any in eternity, any who " leave this world sinful," who did not belong to some nation, some family, were not of some kindred? Will he answer? Of course he will reply, that they all sustained those relations. Well, then, the promise is, that they shall all be blessed — blessed in Christ — blessed by being raised from the dead. The devil is welcome to all he can get, that belong to no nation, no family, and are not a kindred. But the gentleman says, my proposition includes those "who leave this world." Of course it does, and all "who leave this world" did belong to some nation, some fam- ily, etc. He admits that the promise includes the resur- rection, but says, some will be raised to condemnation — he means endless damnation. Now, would that be a BLESSING? Will he answer? I repeav^vrll he answer? /If irwould not be a blessing none will be raised in that I condition, for all who belong to a nation, family, etc., \are to be blessed by being raised from the DEADi" Being blessed by being raised from the dead is uncondi- tional, but our condition in that blessed world into which the blessed resurrection will introduce us, will be modi- fied by the way this life is spent. But it will be a blessed world to all, a blessed resurrection to all. Universal Salvation. 157 XVI. The same promise of "the restitution of all things," is again spoken of thus, " All nations whom thou hast made shall come and worship before thee, O Lord, and shall glorify thy name," Ps. Ixxxvi. 9. All nations whom God has made, do not surely mean some of them. And when it is said, they shall come and worship before God, it cannot mean that multitudes will be driven fro?n him down to eternal destruction. Long since men and women began to go and worship before God and glorify his name. The company was then small, but it has been increasing ever since. They have been falling in from the east and the west, from the north and the south, from the valley and the mountain, from the prairie and the forest, from the city and the country, from the isle and the continent; and they will continue to fall in till finally all nations xuho7?i God has niade will join the heaven-bound throng, and go and worship him and glorify his name. In the words of the immortal Mil- ton — "The nations all whom thou hast made Shall come, and all shall frame To bow them low before thee, Lord, And glorify thy name." Each must go for himself. I cannot go for you, you cannot for me, and heaven does nothing for us we should do ourselves. All have a work to do, now and forever. God works, and we must work. " Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." Phil. ii. 12, 13. He is now working in all souls, that they may work to do his will and good pleas- ure, and he will continue to work till all "come and worship before him and glorify his name." 158 Oral Discussion. " How long, dear Savior, O how long Shill this bright hour delay ? Fly swiftly round, ye wheels of time, And bring the welcome day." XVII. All will finally partake of the heavenly feast and live. "In this mountain shall the Lord of hosts make unto all people a feast of fat things, of wine on the lees well refined. And he will destroy in this moun- tain the face of the covering cast over all people^ and the veil that is spread over all nations. He will swal- low up death in victory. And the Lord God will wipe away the tears from off' all faces ; and the rebuke of his people shall be taken away from off' all the earth. For the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it. * * * For in this mountain shall the hand of the Lord rest, and Moab shall be trodden down for the dunghill, * * * and the fortress of the high fort of the walls shall he bring down, lay low, and bring to the ground, even to the dust." Isa. xxv. 6-13. In this important passage universal destruction^! and universal salvation are clearly taught. The "covering" and the "veil" are to be destroyed from all people., "death swallowed up in victory," and "tears wiped away from off' all faces." Error and sin, death and tears, then, are to be abolished, destroyed. Clearly, the prophet teaches the entire, universal destruction of evils. The same is taught by other terms in the passage. Moab typifies sin and wrong. It is to be destroyed, brought "down," "laid low," "even to the dust." And in first Corinthians, fifteenth chapter, where the apostle is writ- ing of "the end" of Chrisfs reign, he conveys the same truth when he says, " Then cometh the end, when Christ shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Universal Salvation. 159 Father, when he shall have put down all rule^ and authority^ and foiver. For he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy shall he destroyed — death." "Rule," "authority," "power," "death," "enemies," mean the same as "Moab," "veil," "covering," "tears," and "death," in Isaiah's prophecy. They are all to be destroyed. That both passages refer to the same consummation there cannot be a reasonable doubt, for in that same chapter in Corinthians the apostle cites the passage in Isaiah I have just quoted, and says it shall then, at the resurrection, be fulfilled. "Then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, ' Death is swallowed tip in victory^ " John the Baptist referred to the same destruction of evil, when he pointed to the Savior and said, " Behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." And Jesus to the same, when he said, '•'•Every plant which my Heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted up." And the prophet Daniel, when speaking of the work of the coming Messiah, said, he shall '•'•Finish the trans- gressiofz, make an end of sin." Certainly all sin, suffer- ing and death are to be annihilated. But the salvation of mankind is also taught by Isaiah. The feast is made for all people. And all people will partake of it, for the veil and covering are to be removed from all eyes and faces, all will see the truth, and rejoice in the truth, death give way to life immortal, and tears of son-ow and suffering be known no more, forever. Yes, this glorious passage clearly teaches the universal destruction of evil, and the universal salvation of man. XVIII. My friend wants to know where men go to -v when they leave this world. I will answer in Bible j language, and that is my eighteenth argumetit. " Thert J i6o Oral Discussion. shall the dust return to the earth as it was ; and the SPIRIT SHALL RETURN UNTO GOD WHO GAVE IT." Eccl. xii. 7- Jesus, who came from God, also answers the question. "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, WILL DRAW ALL MEN TO ME." John xii. 33. The great apostle, who had a view of the third heaven, is competent to answer that question. " For of him, and through him, and to him are all things." Rom xi. 36. The gentleman's important question is answered by three \\'itnesses, and is it not complete.'' XIX. " Look unto me and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is none else," How many will look unto God, and be saved? Some or ■part ? My friend says part. Now see what the Lord says. The next verse reads thus: "I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteous- ness, and shall not return. That unto me every knee SHALL BOW, EVERY TONGUE SHALL SWEAR. Surely One shall say, In the Lord have I righteousness and strength; even to him shall men come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed. In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory." Isa. xlv. 32-35. ^^ have, then, the oath of the Al- mighty that all shall look unto him and be saved. The " seed of Israel shall be justified ; " " all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed " of their sins, and go and bow before the Lord, and every tongue will swear that " In the Lord have I righteousness and strength^ Sub- lime woi'ds. Blessed be God for them, and let all the world say, Amen. XX. My brother wants to be enlightened concerning the resurrection. Surely he needs enlightenment. He desires to understand i Cor. xv. It is a splendid chap- Universal Salvation. i6i ter, and I will point out some of its beauties. " As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." Here are three truths — i. All died in Adam; 2. All shall be made alive; 3. All shall be made alive in Christ. These are universal truths — all die, all shall live again — all shall be in Christ. There is no immor- tal resurrection out of Christy for he is the resurrection and the life. As sure as all now have the Adam- nature, all then will have the Christ-nature. The scale is even — even so — as much on one side as the other. He then explains what he means by the heavenly nature. " So also is the resurrection of the dead" — all the dead. " It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory ; it is sown in weakness, it is raised i}t power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body." All sow in weakness, coiTuption, dishonor, that is, all die in Adam. All shall be raised in poxver, in incorruption^ g^o^y-, that is, all shall be made alive in Christ. But not all equally glorious. Some like the great sun, some like the little stars, the apostle speaks of in that chapter. All will be " in Christ," but some^babes in Christ, others perfect men in"(^rist. This will result from men being free agents, and salvation in part conditional. "But every man in his own order." Mark, every man. He still writes of every man. " Christ the^rst fruits; afterwards they that are Christ's at his coming." He speaks of no other order, and he says, every jnan shall be in one of them. Christ was the first, and the bal- ance of every man in the second. When all who die in Adam shall be in Christ, they will be Christ's saved, redeemed, blessed. "As in Adam all die" includes the same as "all nations," "all families," "all kindreds."- 14 / 1 62 Oral Disctisaion. ■ All are to be blessed by being raised in Christ, and that is the Gospel. "Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father ; w^hen he shall have put down all rule^ and all authority, and all power^ For he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet. And the last enemy shall be destroyed — death." ' Here he writes about putting down, destroying the e7ze- 7nies, and he names them. i. All rule; 2. All author- ity; 3. All power; 4. Death. Mark you, man is not in the catalogue of destruction ; he is in the catalogue of life in Christ — all will be made alive in Christ. Here is universal destruction, and universal salvation. All rule, power, authority, inimical to man's welfare, and God's glory, shall be abolished, and "every man" made alive in Christ. Death is the last enemy, and even that is to be destroyed. All the enemies referred to there, will share tlie fate of death — be a^inihilated. And if any of those enemies means men, they will be annihila- ted, and Annihilationism is true — not endless misery. True, the Bible calls wicked men enemies; but Christ loves them, and God loves them, and Jesus came to save them — not to torment them eternally — and he will con- vert all such enemies into his friends ; hence we are told to love our enemies, that we may imitate God. The apostle continues, "For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." This is the consummation, the end. And it will be a glorious consummation, a glori- Universal Salvation. 163 ous end. Husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, parents and children, will not be divided — some sent to heaven, and some sent to hell — but all nations, families, kindreds, all people, all who die in Adam, will be blessed in Christ, and God all in all. \Time expired. [mr. Sweeney's sixth reply.] My opponent seems still disposed to spend a large share of his time trying to impress you that the teaching of my brethren involves the damnation of infants. He stops not at misrepresenting the great and honored dead, but in his last most grossly misrepi-esents the editors of the Apostolic Times. The extract he read from that paper does not teach what he said. It says we inherit a corrupt body from Adam, but does not say we inherit a corrupt spirit from him. When, therefore, the gentleman says, "according to this" — meaning the the extract he read from tlie Times — "we inherit a corrupt body and a corrupt spirit from Adam," he sim- ply misrepresents the Times' editors. I do not believe that one of those editors entertains such a sentiment. I know some of them do not. He misunderstands them, and misrepresents them, as he does Mr. Campbell on the same subject, and as he does the scriptures gener- ally in this discussion. Indeed it seems to be a weakness with him, to quote an author, or his opponent, and then misstate the import of the quotation. What relief it would afford the gentleman if he could only succeed in bringing down infants and justified persons to the level of unpardoned and unrepentant sinners! It would mitigate the enormity of his affirmation, and that is 164 Oral Discussion, what he feels it necessaiy to do in the judgment of all who have read and who believe the Bible. But this he cannot do. Infants have not gone astray, and christians are "made nigh by the blood of Christ." One may cavil about the weaknesses and imperfections christians have, I know, and try to blot out the line between them and aliens; but it cannot be done. That line stands out to the view of the believer in the Bible as boldly as the doctrine of remission of sins by the blood of Chi-isL " Therefore if any man be in Christ he is a new creature, old things are passed away, behold all things are become new; and all things are of God who hath reconciled us unto hiinself, by Jesus Christ." "Who hath deHvered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son; in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins." " If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." " I write unto you, little children, because your sins are for- given you for his name's sake." " Ye are complete in him." These scriptures show the justified state of the christian. Now, remember that " all the promises of God are yea and amen in Christ," and that consequently he who is "without Christ" is "without hope in the world," and the difference between the state of the christian and that of the alien will appeal'. Death, sim- ply, can never bring the two together, morally. I have no doubt but that the gentleman much prefers talking about "immersion" to talking about the reconcili- ation and salvation of such as live and die " enemies of the cross of Christ; whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame ; " but I Universal Salvation. 165 cannot now accommodate him to a debate on that ques- tion. What great trouble he has about my uncertainty as to the future of Methodists, Presbyterians, and those of other denominations ! He thinks all my theology is "packed in, I don't know." Well, if he can only relieve my fears for all but the honest among the Methodists, Presbyterians, etc., I will close the debate with him. Next, my friend reads about five verses from the third chapter of first Corinthians — for what purpose, who can tell.'' I suppose it was for the sake of these words: "If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved." Only men's works are to be burned — all men will be saved. This, I suppose, is his conclusion. But let us look at this passage, as it is brought into the debate. Paul says he had "laid the foundation;" and that that foundation " is Jesus Christ;" and he warns every man to " take heed how he buildeth thereupon." He likens what may be built thereupon to "gold, silver, precious stones; wood, hay, stubble." The material may be good, better, best; or bad, worse, worst. But what is the material.'' I answer, men and women. Peter says: "To whom [Christ, the founda- tion] coming, as unto a living stone, * * * ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, etc." 1 Pet. ii. 4, 5. Paul testifies to the same effect: '•'• Te are built upon the foundation of the apostles and pro- phets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone." Eph. ii. 19, 20. A good man may bring bad material into this building — may bring bad people into the church. But "the fire shall try eveiy man's work [material] of what sort it is," and "if any man's work [material] shall be burned, he shall suflTer loss [of the material he has builded on the foundation], but he himself shall be 1 66 Oral Discussion. saved." And as the gentleman makes "shall be saved" refer to the future — final salvation — he thereby refers "shall be burned" to the future, and makes it final, too, and as it turns out that "work" refers to men and w^omen, instead of sins, as he would have it, the passage is fatal to his proposition. It is the wrong witness for him ! The gentleman tries to illustrate into our faith his *' wretchedly licentious" doctrine, that one may postpone conversion till he gets into heaven. As "parents, finding that their neighborhood is demoralizing their family, move to a virtuous locality that their children may be more easily trained to virtuous habits," so our Heavenly Father, when he finds that the sinner's neighborhood is demoralizing hiin moi"e and more, moves him to heaven., where his conversion and training will not only be possible but infinitely more easily accomplished, than in this " demoralizing neighborhood"! And of course, as the sinner is taken to heaven before he is converted, he is taken by sheer physical force ! And this is modern Universalism ! And, now, will the learned gentleman be kind enough to tell us what is going to become of the " demoralizing neighborhood " when God takes the sinner to heaven to evangelize him ? Then the affirmant gives "hell," "the pit," "that infernal place," another blowing up ! I think that must be one of his most matured themes. He never talks so glibly as when he is talking of hell. But he need not trouble himself about that matter, unless he thinks he is about to fail to prove his proposition. For if he suc- ceeds he will empty all the hells of earth, or of any other locality, of all their men and devils, into heaven, and so make an end of all hells. And, by the way, all those *'rum holes, gambling dens, or places of prostitution," Universal Salvation. 167 of which he speaks in unmeasured terms of bitterness, and which doubtless are outcroppings of hell, if he is rights are sending men and women to heaven with al- most infinitely greater dispatch than are all the churches. As they shorten human life, they dispatch the work of emptying all the hells into heaven ! ! It remains, therefore, for Mr. Manford to tell us why he should not look upon "rum holes, gambling dens, and places of prostitution" as means of grace, hurrying men out of bad and de- moralizing neighborhoods into heaven, where they may be reconciled to God and saved ! — means by which God "moves" the sinner "to a more virtuous locality"! One word as to the book of Revelations. The " temple " spoken of in the eleventh chapter, is not the Jewish temple that stood at Jerusalem. Later and better critics than Dr. Clarke have decided that this book was written several years after the destruction of Jerusalem. But I feel littl? concern about this matter, as I have no argu- ment depending upon its determination one way or the other. The gentleman tells us, that, though the Christian dispensation will end, the dispensation of " Forgiveness will end only when God ends." Surely there is some- thing " oracular in that unadorned gravity and shortness in the expression." Please inform us how forgiveness will be dispensed, when the Christian dispensation has ended .? " The promise to the fathers." We are told that the salvation of the promise is partly conditional and partly not! and that man is free to comply or not to comply with the conditions. How, then, I ask in the name of logic, can any man prove that all will be wholly saved.'' So far as that salvation is conditional, no man can prove 1 68 Oi'al Discussion. all will enjoy It, so long as it is admitted that men are free to comply or not with the conditions. But the gentleman now says, "all are to be blessed by being raised from the dead." This is not in the Bible, It is not true. Some will " come forth to shame and everlast- ing contempt," " to the resurrection of damnation." XVI. " All nations whom thou hast made shall come and worship before thee, O Lord, and shall glorify thy name." There is nothing in this passage that reaches the case in hand. Doubtless the Psalmist I'efers to the Gospel dispensation, wherein the worship of God is not confined to one nation as it was then. Now the Gospel is to be preached to all nations; but that each individual of the nations, to whom the Gospel is preached, does or ever will worship God and be saved, is certainly more than can be proved by this passage. But let it be re- membered that we are not debating about nations, but about those "who leave this world sinful;" about those who belong to no nation. Suppose all nations of earth were to turn and worship God to-morrow, would that prove that those who have long since left this woi'ld sinful are or ever will be saved } I think not. XVII. The gentleman's sevententh argument is drawn from some fragments of the twenty-fifth chapter of the prophecy of Isaiah. The best way to reply to this argument, that I think of just now, is to read a few more verses, beginning just where he left off: " In that day shall this song be sung in the land of Judah : We have a strong city : Salvation will God appoint for walls and bulwarks. Open ye the gates, that the righteous nation that keepcth the truth may enter in. Thou v/ilt keep him in perfect peace whose mind is stayed on thee; because he trusteth in thee." And still a little further Universal Salvation. 169 on we read : " Let favor be shown to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness ; in the land of upright- ness will he deal unjustly, and will not behold the majesty of the Lord. Lord, when thy hand is lifted up, they will not see ; but they shall see, and be ashamed for their envy at the people ; yea^ the fire of thine ene- mies shall devour them''' And this shall be " in that day" when my friend thinks all evil will be destroyed, and all men saved! What a singular witness this, for Universalism ! XVin. The gentleman's eighteenth argument is an attempt to answer the question, "where do men go when they leave this world sinful?" True, he leaves off the word "sinful;" but no one need wonder at that; for to skip the hard words is not a weakness peculiar to any one man. He quotes three passages of scripture, i. " The spirit shall return unto God who gave it." But the passage does not speak particularly of the spirit of him who dies sinful. It does not say the spirit goes to God reconciled and saved. It does not say it goes there to be reconciled and saved. It docs not, therefore, answer his purpose. 2. " And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." Jesus spoke these words, signifying the manner of his death. They neither express nor imply the reconciliation and salvation of every individual, as has been shown a thousand times, and in various ways. Grant that "all men" here means every individual of the race — which cannot be shown, how- ever — and then the questions come up, in what sense will he di*aw all men unto him ? and what for ? The passage fails him. 3. "For of him, and through him, and to him are all things." If this passage proves the salvation of all, it proves that all are novj saved. It is in the 15 170 Oral Discussion. present tense: "Of him, and through him, and to him are all things." Does the gentleman believe that all things are now of God, in the sense of being reconciled and saved ? I presume not. Then the passage does not serve his i:)urpose. XIX. The ninteenth argument is drawn from the prophecy of Isaiah, chapter xlv. 33-3=^. "Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth ; for I am God, and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return. That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. Surely shall one say, In the Lord have I righteousness and strength; even to him shall men come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed. In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory." I. In this language God calls upon all to "look" unto him and " be saved" which shows that salvation is con- ditional. 3. The oath of the Lord, "That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear," is used by the apostle Paul to prove a proposition differing very mate- rially from the proposition the gentleman quotes it to prove. Paul cites this passage to prove that, "We shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ." Rom. xiv. 10, II. Mr. Manford quotes it to prove that "all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved." I think Paul better understood it. Mr. Manford does not claim that the proj^hccy is ful- filled in this world. He applies it, of course, to the future state, in applying it to his proposition, which relates to persons who leave this world sinful. But Paul applies it to "the judgment seat of Christ." Therefore, Universal Salvation. i*ji Paul and Mr. Manforcl both beinj^ correct, the judg- ment is in the future world. So, with this passage the gentleman upsets Universalisra, and helps me to prove the proposition I have agreed to prove when we are done with this ! Much obliged. 3. "All that are incensed against him shall be ashamed." This puts shame in the future world. The gentleman says, they " shall be ashamed of their sins, and go and bow before the Lord," etc. But that is not what the text says; only his comment. The passage teaches that some persons, such as are incensed against the Lord, " shall be ashamed," in the resurrection. As to this " shame," and what shall follow, let us allow the prophet to interpret himself. Turn back to the twenty- sixth chapter of this same book, to a passage the gentle- man himself applied to the future world, while on his seventeenth argument, and read : " They |"the wicked] shall see, and shall be ashamed for their envy at the people; yea^ the fire of thine enemies shall devour them^ And to this agree the words of Daniel — " And at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame., everlasting con- tempt." Daniel xii. i, 2. And to these agree the words of the Savior: "The hour is coming, in which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life ; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." John v. 28, 29. XX. " As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive; but every man in his own order; Christ the first fruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming." i Cor. xv. 22, 23. ^ t*j2 Oral Discussion. I. This passage, it is generally conceded, teaches a universal resuirection of the dead. By Adam death prevails universally ; that is, what we call natural death — all men go down to the grave; "even so in Christ shall all he made alive;" all shall be raised from the dead. The resurrection spoken of is not moral, but a resuiTection of the body from the grave. It is a resurrection of which Christ was the "first fruits;" and it will hardly be contended that his was a moi^al resurrection. Besides, the apostle says it is a resur- rection of the body of which he speaks : " It is sown a natural [animal] body^ it is raised a spiritual body." Verse 44. 2. The phrases, "in Adam" and "in Christ," do not, as my friend seems to think, indicate 77ioral states., but agencies. As to moral state, christians do not die " in Adam," but "in Christ;" "Blessed are they that die in the Lord." As to moral state, or condition, sinners will not be "in Christ" at the resurrection. What is there between death and the resurrection, with the Universalist view of the resurrection especially, to put one in Christ who died out of him "i Can the worthy gentleman tell t He believes a man's resurrection takes place the moment he dies, and what is there in dying., pray, to change one's moral state .^ Here is where I own I "need enlightenment." 3. "But every man in his own order." "Every man" means all men, as the gentleman said; but "every" is distributive; and in this passage it is distri- butive of men; "every jna7t in his own order." The gentleman has two orders, it is true, but he has one order for Christ, and one order for- all mankind. But it must be observed that the apostle distributes men into differ- Universal Salvation. 173 ent orders — every man in his own order." By the expression, "they that are Christ's" the apostle implies that in the resurrection there will be some who are not Christ's, and the two classes comprise the different orders. Then in the resurrection, there will be such as are Christ's, and such as are not Christ's. In other words, " the just and the unjust." In still other words, " they that have done good," and " they that have done evil." 4. Beginning at the thirty-fifth verse, the apostle speaks descriptively of the resurrection of them '•'•that are Chrisfs.^' This should be particularly observed. In the forty-first verse it is not the apostle's intention to illustrate different degrees of glory in the future world; but the difference between the body we now have, and " the body that shall be : " " one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars ; for star differeth from star in gloiy ; so also is the resurrection of the dead^ it [the body] is sown in coiTuption, it is raised in incorruption," etc. As star differeth from star — or as the sim differeth from the moon — so the body "that shall be" shall differ from the body that now is, in glory. This is evidently the point the apostle illustrates. 5. "And as we [christians] have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly." This promise can be appropriated by none but christians, whose "conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ; who shall change our vile body^ that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body." [Time expired. 1 74 Oral Discussion. [mr. manford's seventh speech.] Mr. Sweeney calls my affirmative, namely, that all sinners will finally be reconciled to God, an " enormity." That ugly word means an atrocious crime of the deepest die. In his estimation, then, the hope that sin will finally yield to virtue, wrong to right, injustice to justice, evil to good, hate to love, is a monstrous crime, and deserves, I suppose, nothing short of endless damnation. What an "enormity" it is for God to will such a result. What an " enormity " for Christ to live and die to that end. What an "enormity" for the pure and good to pray that all sinners may be converted to God. But the gentleman can see no " enormity " in God's perpetuating sin, wrong, vengeance, wrath, yea, the whole catalogue of crime, eternally. That is all beautiful, divine ! I do not wish, as he intimates, to " blot out the line between christians and aliens," but to convert "aliens" into chris- tians. And is not that the better way.? It is the will of Heaven they should be converted, and it will be his will till all shall be converted. He does not deny, that "he don't know" what becomes of the millions of christians who die without immersion. He "don't know" whether God or the devil has them. He "don't know" whether they are in heaven or hell. All his talk about my believing that " sinners are taken to heaven " was put in to fill up his time. He knew, of course, he v/as bearing false witness against his neighbor. I for- give him. He had to say something. But would it not be better to take all sinners into heaven, and then all hands go to work and make good men and women of them, than to turn them all into an endless hell, for the Universal Salvation. /3 devil eternally to corrupt? Would Christ, who died to save them, object? Would Paul, the heathen apostle, object? Would Whiteficld, Wesley, Howard, Campbell, Sweeney, object? If my good friend here should dis- cover that his wife, children, parents, brothers, sisters, were all there without being immersed, Vv^ould he forth- with move that they be expelled, and that, too, without an efibrt to evangelize them ? Would all his love for them in this world be turned into hatred, in heaven ? He would now, I trust, make most any sacrifice for their good. In heaven would he not be willing to make any ? When he gets to heaven will he strut about in a white robe, and care for nobody but himself? But my friend does not seem to know what heaven is. He evidently thinks it is a substantially built town, with well paved streets, and that its inhabitants amuse themselves with psalm-singing and fast driving. The truth is, heaven is within the soul; and when heaven is there, heaven is all around. But it must be there first of all. I like the good old hymn, " When I am happy in him, December 's as pleasant as May." This inward joy makes December like a Alay morn- ing. On the other hand — " How tedious and tasteless the hours, When Jesus no longer I see, Sweet prospects, sweet birds, and sweet flowers. Have lost all their sweetness to me." This is what the poet means, when he says — •* He that hath no inward beauty, none perceives." 176 Oral Discussion. Another sings — "He that has light within his own clear breast, May sit in the centre, and enjoy bright day ; But he that hides a dark soul and foul thoughts, Benighted walks under the mid-day sun." But there is a spirit-world, and all go to it. It maybe the boundless universe. Jesus tells us, that in it are MANY MANSIONS. The apostle Paul calls them heavens — he was in the third one. How many more there are, he does not say. Jesus says there are many. The con- dition of the soul makes these heavens. The gentleman's talk about the Promises quoted in my last, did not amount to much, for the good reason, that not much can be said against them. He did as well as the best could do. " Let it be remembered," he said, " that we are debating about those who belong to no nation." Will he have the kindness, then, to tell us who we are debating about, for I never heard of one that " belonged to no nation." The promise is, that " all nations of the earth," " all nations whom God has made," " all families of the earth," " all kindreds of the earth," are to be blessed in Christ, and go and " worship before God, and glorify his name." Now, if he can find a man, woman or child, that does not sustain one of these re- lations, I will not attempt to prove his, her or its salvation. Let him address himself to this task. But he says, none of these earthly relations will exist in the other world. How docs he know that.? When a son or a daughter goes to heaven, is the tie severed, for eternity, that con- nected the dear one with the parents? It seems to me, that much of the happiness of heaven will result from w'hole families being there — not a member lost. Yes, the relation of family, kindred, will survive death ; and Universal Salvation. 177 the blessed promise is, that all families, and all KINDREDS shall be blessed in Christ. The "day" spoken of in Isaiah twenty-fifth, at the end of which death is to be abolished, and tears wiped from all faces, is the Gospel day, the day of Christ's reign. It commenced long ago, and will end when God shall be all in all. But during that day Jesus was to judge all, as well as in the end bless all. When the prophet says, that "the fire of thine enemies shall devour them," he is not writing of the etid of that day, but of what would transpire before the end. Let that be remembered. The gentleman seems to be oblivious to that important distinction. That glorious Promise, which Paul says will be consummated in the resurrection, my friend left untouched. I showed in my last, that all spirits, all men, all things, are heavenward bound. Let Mr. Sweeney show, that most of them will be driven from heaven into eternal night — if he can. He does not deny, that the passages I quoted teach that all go to God, " To him are all things" reads one of them, that is, all things are tending to God. But he seems to think that the satan of his creed will be at hand; and, as he, several years ago, got up a rebellion in heaven, he will make a raid on the outskirts of para- dise, and run off the biggest half of mankind, after thev return to God. VThe truth is, God is the great central attraction of the iJhiverse. All men came from him, are his children, created in his image, and will finally be drawn back to him, and then God will be all in all. Sublime truth. "^ The oath of God. Mr. Sweeney says, Paul cites this to prove the judgment. The passage mclxxde?, judgment and salvation. During the time of the Savior's reism 178 Oral Discussion. he judges and saves. He does not merely judge; he does not merely save; he does both. But at the end of his reign, of his judgment, every tongue will swear, " In the Lord have I righteousness and strength." This will be the result of his judgment. This work com- menced when Christ came in his kingdom eighteen hundred years ago, this work of judgment and salvation, and it will continue till all are righteous, all are recon- ciled and saved. He says, some will be ashamed in the resurrection. That may be. Good people in this world are sometimes ashamed of what they once did, but that docs not prove they will be turned into hell. Said Paul to his Roman brethren, "What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are ?iotv ashamed?''^ Rom. vi. 21. To be ashamed of sin is a long step heavenward. And if in the resurrection all who were incensed against God will be ashamed, as the gentleman asserts, they surely will not be far from the kingdom. But the prophet does not say any will be ashamed in the resurrection. He simply says, " All that are " — in his day — " incensed shall be ashamed." It is possible for men to reform in this world and be ashamed too, as the Romans were. The gentleman confounds being in a shameful, degraded condition, with being ashamed of our sins. There is immense difference between them, but he does not see it. The resurrection. " As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." i Cor. xv. 33. Mr. S. admits this means the resurrection of all mankind. Very good. All mankind, then, are to be made alive in Christ. This he admits. Let this be remembered. Now, what do the words "in Christ" mean.'* Let the author of them tell us. ^'If any man be in Christ, he Universal Salvation. lyg is a new creature ; old things are passed away ; behold all things are become new." 3 Cor. v. 17. The apostle says, '-'•If any man be in Christ" he is in this condition, and he asserts, that all who die in Adam will be in Christ. Again, "There is therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit." Rom. viii. i. My friend admits, that all mankind will be raised in Christ, and Paul says, " There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ." Paul's explanation of his own words makes the passage grand and glorious. The pure and good are in Christ now. "The men of grace find heaven begun below." But the promise is, that finally all who die in Adam, will be in Christ — pure and good. "Every man in his own order." "Eveiy man" is to be in Christ — so says Paul, so says brother Sweeney. My friend thinks the passage implies, that some will not be Christ's. But I ask, when all mankind will be in Christy will they not be Christ's? Will he answer? But the gentleman tells us, that Paul writes only of the resurrection of the body. All bodies, Mr. S. says, will be raised in Christ. /When that shall be done, he con- tends that all the conaipt, deformed, debased, sinful, damnable spirits in hell will be dragged out of their miserable dens, and put into those bodies that will be raised in Christ ! Christ and the devil, perfect purity and total depravity, will then be united, and behold a marriage of heaven and hell! Such pure bodies and corrupt souls could not exist together one moment. They would fly asunder like fire and water. The truth is, the apostle speaks of the resurrection of the wJiole man^ not of a part; and he is to be raised in the image of the heavenly. "And as we have borne the image of i8o Oral Discussion. the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly." As all who die in Adam are to be blessed in Christ, of course the Corinthians will share in the blessedness. I will now offer some more affirmative arguments. XXI. " For Christ hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the spirit; by which (spirit) he went and preached unto the spirits in prison^ which (spirits) sometimes were disobedient, (as) when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water." i Peter iii. 18-20. "For this cause was the Gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit." i Peter iv. 6. This is plain language. The Gospel was preached to the dead, preached to the SPIRITS IN PRISON, that they might " live according to God in the spirit." Now, wherever spirits are in prison, wherever the dead are, efforts are made for their salvation, let the prison be where it may, let the dead be where they may. If there are spirits in prison beyond the grave, if any are dead there in any sense, the Spirit of Christ has been there to efi'ect their deliverance. But this Mr. Sweeney denies. He asserts, that there is a vast prison beyond the grave in which are countless millions of spirits, countless millions of the dead, and that mercy was never offered to one of them, and never will be. XXII. The evangelical prophet represents God as saying to his Son Jesus, "Thus saith God the Lord, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out Universal Salvation. i8i of it ; he that givcth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein : I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thy hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; to open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison-house. * * * And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not; I will lead them in paths that they have not known : I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them." Isa. xlii. 5-7, 16. Jesus was to open "blind eyes," "bring the blind by a way they knew not," "bring out the prisoners from the prison." Let tlie prison be where it may, Christ is to open it, and liberate its victims. This Mr. S. denies; and earnestly contends, that God has an immense prison-house, in which are locked up nine-tenths of those made in his image, and that he would not save them if he could, and could not if he would. He will have it, that an effort never was made, and never will be made, for their re- demption. XXIIL The same prophet again represents God as saying, "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; be- cause the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the broken- hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound." Isa. Ixi. I. Jesus quoted this jDassage (Luke iv. 18,) and said, "This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears." He had commenced the glorious work which would result in the opening all eyes, in restoring all the dead to life, opening all prisons, breaking all chains, and liberat- 1 82 Oral Discussion, ing all captives; hence he is called "The Savior of THE WORLD." How wcU this all accords with the announcement and song of the angels at the birth of the great Liberator, " And the angel said unto them, Fear not : for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day, in the city of David, a Savior, which is Christ the Lord." "And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying. Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men." Luke ii. lo, ii, 13, 14. His advent was GOOD TIDINGS OF GREAT JOY TO ALL PEOPLE bc- cause he would open all eyes, break all fetters, liberate all souls, and give them freedom, life and salvation. Well might the heavenly host praise God, and ciy, "Glory to God in the highest," and on earth peace, and good will to men." But what mockery all this was, if there was then a vast prison-house crowded with victims, and that same Jesus, whose advent the angels so joyously announced, will consign innumerable mil- lions more to the same wretched place, and never make an effort to redeem one of them. In perfect harmony with this song and statement, Jesus, when on earth, said, that he came to seek and to save the lost. Wherever there is a soul lost it is the business of Jesus to save him, to bring him back to his God, to the home he has abandoned. And will his mission be a grand failure? A prophet asserts, that Jesus " shall see of the travail of his soul, and be satis- fied." Satisfied is the word. Will he be satisfied with the redemption of half he lived and died to save.'' He will, then, be easily satisfied. I cannot think so meanly of my Lord and Master. The woman who lost a piece Universal Salvation. 183 of silver, was not satisfied till the lost was found. The shepherd who lost a sheep was not satisfied till the lost was found, and will the Son of God be satisfied with the redemption of only part of God's offspring? It cannot be that he will. XXIV. "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and ti^embling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." Phil. ii. 9-13. In this important passage we are taught, that God has given Christ a name above every name for specific purposes, and those purposes are: i. That at that great name every knee in heaven^ on the earthy and under the earthy should bow, that is, do Christ reverence; 3. That eveiy tongue ia heaven, on earth, and under the earth, should confess that Jesus is Lord; 3. That this universal reverence and confession would be to the glory of God the Father ; 4. That God is working by his Spirit, in men, that they may do his good pleasure, by accepting of Jesus as the way, the truth, and the life; 5. That we should work out our salvation by acknowledging that great name, and par- taking of his Spirit. I wish it to be distinctly under- stood, that this universal bowing and confession is to be to the GLORY OF GOD. Therefore, it must be voluntary, and from love and reverence. This passage means uni- versal salvation, and nothing else. 184 Oral Discussion. XXV. All will be reconciled to God. " Therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature ; old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the minis- try of reconciliation, to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them ; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us; we pray you, in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." 2 Cor. V. 17-20. From this passage we learn what is meant by being reconciled to God. It means to possess the Spirit of God, to be Christlike, a new creature. God is in Christ reconciling the world to him self. Will God fail, or will the work be done? "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or domin- ions, or principalities, or powers : all things were created by him, and for him : and he is before all things, and by him all things consist, and he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead ; that in all things he might have the pre-emi- nence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell ; and having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled." Col. i. 16-31. Here we are taught — i. That all things, visible and invisible, are for Jesus; 3. That in all things he has the pre-eminence; 3. That it is God's pleasure that in Christ should all fulness dwell; Universal Salvation. 185 4. That it is God's intention, through Jesus, to recon- cile ALL THINGS to himself; 5. This work of reconcih- ation had commenced, and that commencement was the jirst fruit of the universal harvest, the reconciliation of all things. XXVI. Universal life and righteousness. In the fifth chapter of Romans, the great Gentile apostle clearly teaches, that grace, and life, and righteousness, will finally be the boon of Adam's race. Let us carefully note his statements. " Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all sinned." The first man sinned, and he died — died to innocence, purity; died in trespasses and in sins, which is said to be sin's wages. All sin, and all die the same moral death. But he continues, " But not as the oflense, so also is the free gift. For if through the oflense of one, many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many." Adam introduced sin into the world ; and all sin, and all die, for all admit that by "many" the apostle means the mass, the whole, all mankind. But the gi'ace of God, and the gift by gi-ace, through Jesus Christ, does much more abound. Sin curses all, but grace blesses all, and will turn all from iniquity. The next verse : " And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift. For the judgment was by one to condemna- tion, but the free gift is of many offenses unto justifica- tion." Here again it is taught, that the " free gift unto jus- tification " is 7nuch fnore than sin and its results. He continues: "Therefore, as by the offense of one judg- ment came upon all men to condemnation, even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men 16 1 86 Oral Discussion. unto justijication of lifey Mark, the " free gift unto justification of life came upon all men." The con- demnation came to all men, and the free gift to justifi- cation came unto all. Both arc universal, both extend to all men. The apostle sums up all he has said in these words, " For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,, so by the obedience of one shall many BE MADE RIGHTEOUS." Dr. Clarke says, "that the 'many' of the apostle means all mankind^ needs no proof." All MANKIND, then, "shall be made right- eous." The next verse: "Moreover the law entered, that sin might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abotcndy Here he repeats, that the grace of God is to overwhelm, destroy sin, and bless all mankind. The last verse in the chapter: "That as sin hath reigned unto death" — universal death — "even so might grace reign" — universally, as extensively as sin — " through righteousness unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord." Well might Dr. Adam Clarke at the con- clusion of this chapter, exultingly exclaim: "Thus we find, that the salvation from sin here, is as extensive and complete^ as the guilt and contamination of sin. Death is conquered^ hell disappointed^ the devil confou7ided^ and sin TOTALLY DESTROYED." [ ri7ne expired. [mr. Sweeney's seventh reply.] I used the word "enormity" in its strictly literal sense, which is " the transgression of a rule, or deviation from right." What God has revealed as to the matter in controversy is the rule, the right, and the gentleman's affirmation goes beyond anything God has revealed us. Universal Salvation. 1S7 It not only goes beyond, but it also goes contrary to what is revealed in the Bible, and therefore I spoke of the enormity of his affirmation. It is right to desire the salvation of all men, and to labor for it. God so desires, and has done and is doing all he can, consistently with the laws of man's being and happiness, to accomplish the end. He desires not only that man should be happy hereafter but now. He desires the present happiness of men, and all good men should labor and pray for the accomplishment of this end. God, and all godly men, desire a present triumph of good over evil, of justice over injustice, of happiness over misery, of salvation over condemnation. There is nothing enormous about all this. But for any one to lift up his voice and affirm that good, justice, virtue, salvation, heaven, are triumph- ant, and that all men arc good, just, virtuous, and saved, would be false, enormously f:\lse. It is good to visit the sick, minister to their wants, and try to restore them to health ; but what would we say of the man who would go about declaring that all the sick will get well whether they use the proper means of recovery or not? It is good, it is godlike, to try to reform all evil-disposed and wicked persons, as God desires their reformation, and all heaven desires it; but for one to go about telling all the wicked there is no danger of any failing to be reformed and saved would be, to say the very least, unfriendly to the end. For the man who persists in sin there is only danger ahead — no matter how far ahead — and he who preaches to him peace and safety in the future — no matter how far in the future — opposes the haith, and is no friend to virtue, or even to the sinner himself. That such an one vicans to oppose the truth, and to be un- friendly to virtue and to the sinner, I, of course, would 1 88 Oral Discussion. not affirm. I can never express the gratitude I feel toward God and a merciful Heaven, that it is my privi- lege to say to any one of my poor fellow creatures whom I may find living in sin, that if he will repent he may live, may be saved. More than this God has never authorized me to say. If my friend has authority to go beyond this, and tell him who is persisting in sin that he is sure of a glorious immortality, of eternal bliss, even though he lives on and finally dies in his sins, I must beg the privilege of expressing my conviction that such authority is not to be found in the Bible. I do not believe that God has authorized any man so to preach. Such preaching, I repeat, Is, in my judgment, most wretchedly licentious, being calculated to do no possible good, but greatly to strengthen the hands of the wicked — promising^ as it does, where God has not promised. And as the gentleman says he does not — and I would not say he does — "wish to blot out the line between christians and aliens, but to convert aliens into christ- ians," I submit for his prayerful consideration that he will succeed better on the Gospel plan than on his. Paul labored " to convert aliens into christians," but he did it by preaching that God " now commands all men every- where to repent^ because he hath appointed a day In the which he will judge the world In righteousness, by that man whom he hath ordained." When and where did Paul put in an hour trying to prove from some Psalm or some chapter In the prophecy of Isaiah, that " all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved " ? To Imagine that apostle so preaching would be a seeming ridicule of his whole ministry. The gentleman will have it that I make " God per- petuate sin, wrong, vengeance, wrath, and the whole Universal Salvation, 189 catalogue of crimes, eternally." Have I said that God will perpetuate sin ? I do not believe God is the author of sin. That is one of the most objectionable doctrines of Universalism. Sin is in the world. This I know. This even my opponent has departed far enough from the Universalist fathers to admit. Sin and "the whole catalogue of cinmes" have been perpetuated here for several thousand years, and yet I have never believed that God perpetuates them. And yet, simply because I cannot agree with the learned gentleman that death and the resurrection will annihilate sin and " the whole cata- logue of crimes," he turns about and accuses me of teach- ing that God will perpetuate them eternally ! But as I do not believe that death, or the resurrection, or both, will regenerate my soul and prepare it for tlie society of Jesus and the angels, I dare not say " he knew he was bearing false witness against his neighbor;" but I will venture to say he does me great injustice. As the gentleman seems much inclined to "forgive" me, I shall ask him to forgive me if he thinks I wrong him v/hen I say his is a very loose theology. ' At one time he seems to be; contending for taking "all sinners into heaven, and then all hands go to work and make good men and women of them;" and then in almost the next breath he has all raised from the dead "in Christ," and hence new creatures. If death, or the resurrection, shall regenerate all, bring all into Christ morally and sioiritually, make all new creatures, there will remain none to be evangelized in heaven — unless we get to heaven before the resurrection ! The gentle- man seems easily pleased as to the how of the matter. He seems neither to care nor to know anything about how all shall be saved. He is certain only of one thing, 190 Oral Discussion. and that is that " all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved"! He talks about there being many things I "don't know." Well, he thinks he knows one thing, and that is about all he pretends to know. He thinks he knows that such as leave this world sinful will be saved; but seems not to know whether "death," or the "resurrection," or "one glimpse of the glory of the upper world," or " all hands " after they get into heaven, will save them ! And then the gentleman turns about and tells us, "heaven is in the soul." Indeed ! Then I suppose we should read, " Our Father who art in the souV^ 1 — "Caught up into the tliird soul" ! — " Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his abundant mercy, hath begotten us again unto a lively hope, by the resur- rection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in the soul for you " ! ! Then when Peter said of Jesus, "whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, etc.," he of course meant "whom the soul must receive, etc." And now how much difference is there between my opponent and an atheist? He has brought "everlasting punishment," *' everlasting life," "hell," and "heaven," all into this world. He continually sports with the notion of there being a "devil," and calls Jesus a "colossal man'^ He docs not believe there are any fallen angels; and I sup- pose if his theory of the reconciliation and salvation of all who leave this world sinful, were in his judgment to require him to do so, he would deny that there are any good angels, apart from men and women, or any God independently of the universe. Well, the gentleman is growing more and more consistent all the time. If all Universal Salvation. 191 the "hell" and "everlasting punishment" of the Bible can be brought into this life and into this world, why not all the " heaven " and " everlasting life"? To this Univcrsalism is pushed. I am quite certain the gentleman is wrong, however, in representing the Savior and ?aul as teaching that there are " tsiany heavens " " in the spirit- tvorld." Jesus said, "in my Father's house there are many rnafisions" — not "heavens." Paul spoke of the "third heaven," it is true, but he did not say that the first and second are "/« the spirit-world." This doctrine of "many heavens" in the spirit-world, made by "the condition of the soul," is not scripture doctrine. Neither is it old fashioned Univcrsalism. It is modern Spiritism. It comes from the spirits that tip and knock tables, and write on slates, in the dark. The gentleman wishes to know "whom we are debat- ing about," if not about " the nations." Well, I submit that our proposition relates to " all who leave this world sinful;" and not to "nations of the earth." The fact that the "promise to the fathers," promises blessing to the nations, kindreds and families of the earth, shows that my friend makes an unwarranted use of it when he uses it to prove the final reconciliation and salvation of all who leave this world sinful. Morever, he has admitted that the blessing of the promise made to the fathers is conditional, and that men inay or may not comply with the conditions, as they choose ; and these admissions pre- clude the possibility of his proving his proposition by the "promise to the fathers." The gentleman, however, seems to think there will be nations in heaven, and that our "family' ties will survive death." If so, there will be polygamy there. Perhaps the gentleman would have given the Sadducees, who came to the Savior with the 192 Oral Discussion. case of the seven brothers who had one wife in this world, another answer than that given by the Savior. How would he meet the difficulty? All "family ties" grow out of the marital relation, and as he thinks they "will survive death," how will he meet the difficult question the Sadducees propounded to the Savior! My friend seems to have understood me to admit that all mankind will be made alive " in Christ," allowing, as he assumes, that "in Christ" indicates moral state^ or condition. This, I did not admit. I think I stated ex- plicitly that I understood the phrases "in Adam" and "in Christ" to indicate agencies^ and not jnoral states. Some critics translate those phrases, " by Adam," and "<5y Christ." What is there, I repeat, in dying, or in the raising of the body from the grave, to renew the soul.'* Will the gentleman say there is one half hour between a man's death and his resurrection? I think not. Certainly not, if he is a sound Universalist. Will he then say that in passing out of the body the soul passes into Christ, and is a new creature, old things being passed away and all things become new? I did not say, as my friend represented me, that Paul tau"-ht that the bodies of wicked men would be raised incorruptible. I think I said as plainly as I could that in that portion of the chapter in which he spoke of the resurrection to incorruptibility, the apostle was speaking of the "resurrection of the just" — of " them that are Christ's." But the gentleman says, "the truth is, the apostle speaks of the resurrection of the whole man^^ Indeed! and is my friend a soul-sleeper? He talks like one. Does the "whole man" go to the grave? Will the worthy gentleman answer affirmatively? I think not. Does he believe the body will ever be raised from Universal Salvation. 193 the grave at all? This is a simple question. I desire an unequivocal ansv^^er. Can I have it? I do not believe the gentleman believes the body w^ill ever be raised at all, and, therefore, I have pressed the question upon him, w/za/f is the resurrection? He repeats the passage — " as we have borne the image of the earthy, w^e shall also bear the image of the heavenly." What image does he understand the apostle to speak of.'' My position here is unequivocal. I say he does not speak of morale but of bodily image, and speaks to and of christians. XXI. " For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the spirit: by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison: which sometime were disobedient, when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water." i Peter iii. 18-20. This passage speaks of "spirits in prison." Does the gentleman admit that there are " spirits in prison" in tlie future world .'' If so, the admission upsets Universalism ! The passage does not say the preaching was done in the spirit-xvorld^ but rather that it was done "in the days of Noah, while the ark was preparing," to persons who were at the time of Peter's writing " spirits in prison." They were "in prison" because they had not obeyed ■when they were preached to in the days of Noah. "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to resen^e the unjust [in prison] unto the day of judgment to be punished." But sup- pose I admit that Jesus went and preached to the spirits in prison when he was put to death, and that there is a 17 194 Oral Discussion. post mortem gospel now preached to the dead — which, of course, cannot be proved — does the truth of my friend's proposition follow ? By no means. Do we know that all the spirits in prison would accept the gospel? Certainly not. If it be granted that the gospel is preached to the dead — to those who heard as well as those who ne\er heard it here — it cannot be proved that they will all accept it. And again, if it be granted that the gospel is preached to those who died without hearing it here, that they may be judged according to men who hear it in the flesh, it does not follow that it will be preached again to those who heard it while in the flesh. There is, therefore, noth- ing in these passages of scripture that joroves that " all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved." I would have you obsci"ve, however, before passing this argument, that neither of the passages quoted says that the gospel is preached to men in the spirit- world. " For this cause U'a5 the gospel preached to them [while they w^ere living] that are [now] dead," says the latter passage. It does not say the gospel is preached to the dead. XXII. The gentleman said "twenty-second," and then read a few verses from the forty-second chapter of the prophecy of Isaiah ! What was there in what he read that sounded like his proposition.^ Jii^t nothing. I need not, therefore, spend my time on his twenty-sec- ond argument, as he calls it. All any of you have to do to satisfy yourselves that his proposition has no sup- port in that chapter, is simply to read the whole chapter. XXIII. The gentleman's twent}'-third argument is a quotation from Isaiah, Ixi. i. I will read the verse, and the one following: "The Spirit of the Lord God is Universal Salvation. 19c upon me ; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath t;ent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim Hbcrty to the captives, and tlie opening of the prison to them that are bound; to prochiim tlie acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn." What is there here that proves that " all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved"? Yes, "Jesus quoted this passage (Luke iv. 18,) and said, ' This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.' " And w^hy does Mr. Manford refer it to the immortal world for its fulfillment.'' He assumes that the work commenced by Jesus will be carried over into the eternal world, and that all who reject and despise his ministry here will certainly receive it there, and be saved. The gentleman seems not to have learned that there is some difference between seeking and recovering a "piece of silver," or a " sheep," and seeking and saving sinners. When the woman found her lost piece of silver she had nothing to do but pick it up and pocket it. And when the shepherd found his lost sheep he had nothing to do but to put forth physical force enough to shoulder it up and cany it home. But is this the way Jesus saves sin- ners.'' Does he propose to carry them to heaven on his shoulder, as the shepherd does his lost sheep.'*! Is that the way my friend thinks those who leave this world sinful will be reconciled, and saved } Surely not. I do not see why all heaven should be eternally dissatis- fied because some men will not be saved.'' I believe that Jesus "shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied " — " satisfied," too, without taking to heaven such as deliberately spurn his love, despise his blood, do despite to the spirit of grace, and die in their sins. 196 Oral Discussion. XXIV, The twenty-fourth argument is drawn from PhiHp. ii. 9-13. "Wherefore God also hath highly- exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name : that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence onl}^, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and ti'einbling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." This passage simply says, that every '•'•'k.nQ.e. should bow" to Jesus, and that "every tongue should confess" that he is the Christ, to the glory of God the Father. But men do not do everything that they should do to the glorv of God the Father, and hence "come short of glorifying God." True, the apostle exhorted the disciples at Philippi to "workout" their " own salvation with fear and trem- bling," and told them that God was working in them to will and to do of his good pleastn-e. But he did not tell them that they were all sure of salvation; that it was impossible for any to fail of it; that there need, therefore, be no fear and trembling about the matter, or even anxious concern. True, he told them that God was w^orking in them both to will and to do of his good pleasure. But he did not say God was working in all men, regardless of their wills, to will and to do of his good pleasure, or that he ever would so work, in this life, or, failing here, in the life to come. This passage is in one respect jDrecisely like all the gentleman has quoted — it contains no support for his proposition. XXV. The gentleman's twenty-fifth argument is Universal Salvation. 197 drawn from 3 Cor. v. 17-20. "Therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministiy of recon- ciliation; to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them ; and hath committed unto us the word of recon- ciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech by us, we pray in Christ's stead : Be ye reconciled to God." Why did the gentle- man quote this passage.? Is there anything in it about those who leave this world sinful.'' I believe that "if any man be in Christ he is a new creature" — of course I do. I believe, also, that God reconciled the first christians to himself by Jesus Christ. And I believe the apostles were " ambassadors for Christ," and that to them was committed the ministry of reconciliation ; " to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself." I believe he is still in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. But what is there here about those who leave this world unreconciled and sinful.'* Many men even in this world, where the word of reconciliation is preached, refuse to "be reconciled to God," thouo-h God beseeches them all their lives. So it may be eter- nally, even if God follows and beseeches the sinner eternally — which he will certainly not do. But the gentleman refers also to Col. i. 16-21. "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether thev be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And 19^ Oral Discussion. he is the head of the body, the church : who is the be- ginning-, the first-born from the dead ; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell ; and, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled." The passage does not say God will absolutely reconcile all things to himself; but, " having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself" — not, of course, whether all things will be re- conciled or not. The passage imports just the same as the one just noticed. But while giving attention to this passage, let us read a little more of it: "And you that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled, in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and un- blamable and unreprovable in his sight; if ye continue itz the faith grounded and settled., and be not i7ioved away from the hope of the Gospel." This part of the passage seems to have some pertinence to our discussion. Does it teach as my friend teaches.'' Does it teach that the final salvation of all men is so certain that there need be no fear, as there is no possibility, of any failing to attain to it.'' I think not. What if men xvill not "continue in the faith grounded and settled".? Will they be presented "holy, and imblamable, and unreprov- able" in the sight of God anyhoiv? XXVI. Romans V. 18-3 1. "Therefore, as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condem- nation, even so by the righteousness of one the free gift Universal Salvation. 199 came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound : that as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord." I believe that as by the ofl'ence of Adam all were condemned to die, so by the righteousness of Christ the free gift came upon all to life. To the extent that the race die by Adam, the race is restored to life by Christ. The condemnation that came upon all by the offence of Adam — be it what it may — is removed by Christ, as unconditionally as it came. To the extent that the offence of one man abounded, to that extent the free gift abounds by Jesus Christ. So that no one will be condemned for the sin of Adam. That, with all its consequences, came upon us without our agency; that, with all its consequences, Christ has removed with- out our agency. But men commit actual transgressions. In this they have some agency, and if ever saved from their own sins they will have some agency in the matter. Grace abounds to the extent of Adam's transgression and its consequences, unconditionally, but it "much more abounds." It will also cover all our actual trans- gressions, if we receive it. Therefore the apostle says, " They -which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one Jesus Christ." But he does not say all ivlll receive the abun- dance of grace. Some, we know, will not. [ Time expired. 200 Oral Disctission. [mr. manford's eighth speech.] In the commencement of my friend's last speech, he said, " It is right to desire the salvation of all men, and to labor for it." How long is it right.'' According to my friend's theology, if a man lives one year it is right for him to " desire the salvation of all men " one year ; and if he goes to heaven at the end of the year, his " desire for the salvation of all men " must instantly cease, for that christian desire will not be tolerated in heaven one moment, and he must glory in the damna- tion of most of mankind. Again he says, "God so desires the salvation of all men." How long } As long as they live in this world Mr. S. thinks, and no longer. If a man lives here one year, God desires his salvation one year, and not a moment longer. As quick as the year is out, into hell he is pitched, and during the length, breadth and depth of eternity, God will not harbor the least desire for his salvation. And this he calls the Gospel. O, Gospel! '•'•what folly is cofnmitted in thy na)nel" " There is nothing enormous about all this," he thinks, What, then, is "enormous".'' He continues, "What would we say of a man, who said, that all the sick will get well whether they use the proper means of recovery or not.?" He here means, that I say all will be saved whether they use means or not, when he knows I do not say so. He then insinuates, that I contend a person can be saved without repentance^ when he knows I do not so contend. Repentance means reformation; and no one can be saved without reformation. He represents me as saying to the corrupt, if you go on in sin, and die in sin, God will save you with an everlasting salvation. Universal Salvation. 201 Here he misrepresents me by omitting one-half I say- on the subject of salvation. I say, no one is saved till he receives the truth, and obeys the truth. I have not said, that "death and the resurrection will annihi- late sin." He supposes I would deny there is a God if I could not otherwise sustain my proposition. He repre- sents me as teaching, that God will take the vilest of the vile right to heaven, when he hnows I do not believe a word of it. He intimates that I say to wicked men, you need not be alarmed because of your sinful life, you are safe, w^hen he hnozvs I do not say so. A considerable portion of the gentleman's last speech was made up of these and other misrepresentations. I speak of these things in sorrow, and hope my friend will mend his ways. He thinks I have a ''very loose theology." Is not this loose talk "i He tells us, that he does not believe God will perpetuate "wrath and vengeance eter- nally." If building an endless hell, and keeping it I'un- ning eternally is not "perpetuating wrath and vengeance eternally," what is it.'' He laughs at the fact, that "the kingdom of heaven is within the soul," when he knows these are the words of Jesus. I did not say, that heaven is only in the soul. Jesus did not say so. I stated sub- stantially what all enlightened christians say on that subject. A truly spiritual man, and a believer, too, in endless punishment, thus writes : "The general idea of salvation is, that it consists in going to a certain place, called heaven. With this place is connected the idea of being perfectly happ\'. This, however, is a veiy loose way of thinking on so moment- ous a subject. It is not the place that makes the inhabi- tants what they are, but it is they that make the place what it is. Heaven is what it is because of the charac- ter of those who dwell there. Any world — any place 202 Oral Discussion. would be a heaven, if filled with perfectly holy beings. Whether a man is saved or not depends on what he is^ not on where he goes. The sinner desires salvation, or complete happiness. He will get it, not by a change of place, not by going out of the body, not by getting into the company of the good, but by getting I'id of his moral malady — by becoming holy." He says, I "do not believe there are fallen angels." If by "fallen angels" he means that angels fell from the city of our God, and became devils, I do not believe a word of it, for I profess to be a christian^ not a heathen. I know Milton tells such a story, and he tells it grandly, but with him it was all ;poetry^ not fact. " Him the Almighty Power Hurl'd headlong flaming from the ethereal skies To bottomless perdition ; there to dwell In adamantine chains and penal fires Who durst defy Omnipotence to arms. Nine times the space that measures day and night To mortal men, he with his horrid crew Lay vanquished, rolling in the fiery gulf." If the gentleman thinks that is all Gospel, I pity him. He complains that I make " sport" of his devil. I love to read Milton's account of him and his doings. It is mag- nificent. It sometimes amuses me, but I think it never makes me cry. Neither am I afraid of Mr. Milton's devil. If my brother believes in him he must quake inside and outside. He stoutly contends that the Gospel promise, that " all nations whom God has made," " all families of the earth," "all kindreds of the earth," shall be "blessed in Christ," shall "come and worship before God and glorify his name," does not mean all families, kindreds, etc., but a small part of them. He gets this important information, I suppose, from the dictionary Universal Salvation. 203 that defines "shall" to mean nothing; "still," eternity; " quickly " and " at hand," ten thousand years. I would like to see his dictionary. It must be a curiosity. Wonder if "D'Israeli's Curiosities of Literature" does not mention it. This Bible language means all mankind, if it means anything. See how carefully the passages are worded. It is not simply all nations, but all nations whom God has made; not all families, but all families of the earth; not all kindreds merely, but all kindreds of the earth. How clear the language is. All nations whom God has made; all fomilies of all nations; all kindreds of all families. This is the sum of it: every individual that ever did live, or ever shall live on the earth, shall be blessed in Christ, come and worship God, and glorify his name. I have requested him to name a person who is not here included. He has not, and cannot, do it. Mr. Campbell cites this Promise, and comments thus on it: " I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee and make thy name great, and thou shalt be a bles- sing. I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee. " In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed. " These promises, when fully developed, contained numerous blessings. They are, however, in all their details, separate and distinct from each other. Abra- ham's fomily alone are personally concerned in the first —ALL FAMILIES OF THE EARTH in the second. Temporal and earthly are the blessings of the former SPIRITUAL and ETERNAL are the blessings of the latter. Paul calls the second, ' The Gospel preached to Abraham,' and 'The covenant confirmed by God in reference to the Messiah, four hundred and thirty years before the giving of the law.' The Jewish kingdom in all its glory was but the development of the first — the Christian kingdom in its present and future bless- 204 Oral Discission. INGS is the consummation of tlie second." Christian Sy stein ^ p. 134. I heartily recommend this passage to the candid atten- tion of my worthy friend. Dr. Adam Clarke para- phrases this Abrahamic promise thus : " In thy posterity', in the Messiah, who shall spring from thee, shall all families of the earth be blessed ; for as he shall taste death for every man, his Gospel shall be preached throughout the world, and innumerable blessings be derived on ALL MANKIND, through his death and intercession." The gi-eat Methodist commentator asserts, that all nations, families and kindreds, mean all mankind — just what I have said. All mankind, then, are to be blessed in Christ. It is true, that all nations, etc., do not always, in the Bible, mean all mankind. Nobody pre- tends they do. Words have various meanings in the Bible as well as in other books, and we must determine their meaning by the subject of discourse, and the con- text. Mr. Campbell and Dr. Clarke, by such means, conclude those words here mean all mankind^ and with- out doubt they are right. The gentleman tells us, that "family ties" will not survive death. This Promise asserts nothing for or against that view. It simply teaches, that all who live on earth shall finally live in heaven. But my brother is alarmed. He thinks, if "family ties survive death, there will be polygamy in heaven." If there was a "rebellion" there once, as he seems to think, there may be "polygamy" there. It is sometimes said, that the fires of hell are kept up to keep heaven in subjection. If that evangelical notion is correct, and the fireman (Jniversal Salvation. 205 should fall asleep, and so the furnace cool off, there Is no knowing what would be done in " heaven." The gen- tleman's fears might be realized. Whether family ties survive death is more than I profess to know; but I must think, that the loves of earth will survive the shock of death, and on the heavenly shore be purified and sanctified. I love, also, to cherish the thought, that every soul is mated when created. These tTJoht souls may not meet on earth, but they will in heaven. "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." The brother wants to take the word iri out of this blessed passage, and put in by. He thinks that little tinkering will help him and his cause. Suppose we let him do so. As we have before seen, the apostle says, "There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ." "To be in Christ is to be a new crea- ture," etc. Now substitute by for in in these verses, and you will see that the meaning of the text is not changed by the alteration. All mankind will be made alive by Christ; and "There is no condemnation to them that arc by Christ," and " To be by Christ is to be a new creature." If we substitute by for /«, the great apostle still teaches, that all mankind will be delivered by Christy redeemed by Christ., saved by Christ. He might as well let the passage stand as it reads. IN CHRIST, then, all will be made alive. The brother wants to know what I mean by the "whole man" that is to be raised and blessed in or by Christ. I mean the man made "in the image of God; I mean the man that comes from God, and will return to him when the body dies. Is that answer " unequivocal enough.^ That is the real man., and Jesus will quicken all made in God's image into spiritual life. I) ^ 2o6 Oral Discussion. The spirits in prison. The gentleman misunderstands me here. I said, this passage teaches, that God's mercy- extends to spirits in prison, let that prison be where it may, in this world or in the world to come. That is what I said, and that is what the passage proves. And that is just what believers in endless woe deny with all their might. God, they say, has a prison full of his own immortal images, and mercy never was offered them in that place, and never will be. A terrible dogma! Fit only for a devil to be the father of. I did not say, that to the dead literally was the Gospel preached. But I did say, that wherever men are dead, effort is made for their salvation. And that is what the passage proves. But that is what believers in endless woe deny. It was to the dead the Gospel was preached, that " they might live according to God in the spirit." The passage I read from Isaiah xlii. teaches the same ; teaches that wherever men are in darkness, in prison, whether in this world or the world to come, God's mercy extends to them for their deliverance. And that the advocates of ceaseless wrath deny. The gentleman did not attempt to show that to be a wrong view of the passage. The same is taught in Isaiah Ixi. Christ was sent to liberate all captives, to open all prisons, to break all chains. This is also denied. The prison of hell, it is said, will never be opened, except to let in prisoners, and let out smoke ; its victims will never be liberated ; its chains will never be broken. All those blessed passages, that speak about preaching to the dead, to the spirits in pi-ison, and of opening all prisons, and of breaking all chains, prove that God's arm is not shortened that he cannot save; and that even the lowest of tlie low are within the pale of Universal Salvation. 207 God's mercy. And I cannot understand why men oppose so violently, so benevolent a view of God's gov- ernment. Pope, perhaps, gives the true reason when he says — " Heaven is built on frldi — Hell on spiie.^^ Besides, there is much tiger blood in human veins, and every drop of it is in favor of endless damnation. My friend refers to Philip, ii. and says, every knee should bow to Jesus. But he does not believe that. The spirits in prison, he contends, will not be alloived to bow to Jesus — will not be allowed to see him — will be shut up in hell, and all mercy shut outside. On the other hand, the passage teaches, that all should bow to Jesus ; it will be their eterjtal- duty to do so. And has God made it the everlasting duty of all to bow to Jesus, and at the same time placed millions where they cannot do so, and he does not intend they shall } All will finally bow to Jesus, and " confess him to be Lord, to the glory OF God the Father." Amen. All should bow to Jesus now^ and all noxv are allowed to. But in the prison of hell, it is said, none can do so, none will be allowed to do so. What a doctrine to be called the Gospel 1 1 All reconciled to God. It was the mission of our Savior to i*econcile mankind to God — not God to mankind — and God is in Christ effecting that work. The Gospel surely teaches, that God, through Jesus, will reconcile all things to himself; that there will be no failure in this matter. Notice Colossians i. 16-3 r, before read. Several purposes of God are there made known. I. It was the purpose of God, that Christ should be in his image. No failure there. 2. That he should be the first-born of every creature. No failure there. 3. That 2oS Oral Discussion. by him all things should be created. No failure. 4. That he should be before all things. No failure. 5. The head of the church. No failure, 6. The "first- born from the dead." No failure. 7. In all things have the pre-eminence. No failure yet. 8. "That it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness DWELL." That will be an awful failure, it is said. 9. " That by him to reconcile all things to himself." That will be another big failure. It will be seen that God has been successful in the preliminaries., but there will be almost a total failure in the result — according to Partialism. All those preliminaries were adopted to secure a certain end — "the reconciliation of all things to God." The means were all carried on successfully, till the issue comes, and then and there is an awful failure. The devil put his/bo/ m, and God's plan is ruined! As Robinson Crusoe's man Friday said, " Why no kill the devil," that does so much mischief .'' All partial schemes of redemption are like perpetual motion machines, they are 2X[ failures. I must believe that all things will be reconciled to God, as the plan was devised by infinite wisdom. The gentleman does not deny, and he doubtless will admit, that "many" in Rom. v. 19, means the mass of mankind, all mankind. Dr. Clarke, Dr. McKnight, in fact, all modern critics, contend for this. I will, then, substitute all mankind for many, and read the passage. ,"For by one man's disobedience all mankind \\Q.xe. made sinners, so by the obedience of one SHALL ALL MANKIND BE MADE RIGHTEOUS." If that does not teach, that all mankind will finally be recon- ciled to God, and saved, it is impossible for that thought to be conveyed in the English language. Universal Salvation. 209 As this is my last speech on the subject we have been discussing these two days, I will briefly refer to some of the arguments and proofs offered to sustain my proposi- tion. I affirm, " that all who leave this world sinful will finally be reconciled to God, and saved" — saved from the imperfections of this mortal state— reconciled to God, to truth, to virtue. Alas, all of us, even the best, need' while in this lower world, grace and salvation. The best are not perfect; the purest have moral taints. All have reason to say, in the language of the Episcopal ser- vice, " O Lord, have mercy upon us miserable sinners." But Mr. Sweeney denies that any who leave this world sinners will be saved. He, however, admits that most of mankind depart this life unregenerated. This world was, at least, four thousand years old when Christ was born,' and corruption during those ages generally prevailed! " Most of mankind lived and died in sin and depravity. They did not believe in the true God, did not worship the true God, did not obey the true God. They lived and died in this condition ; and if, as my friend asserts, not a soul can be regenerated in eternity, nearly all of earth's inhabitants for the first four thousand years, are lost— lost forever. He may say, they did not have much light, and so not much was required of them. But that is not the point. They died corrupt, and Mr. S. denies that such can be saved. ^ Ninety-nine one hundredths of mankind, who have died since Christ's advent, have died corrupt. Mr. S. denies, that any who die corrupt can be saved, so that, at least, ninet3'-nine of every hundred who have died since the birth of Jesus, are lost if he is right. If he is correct, heaven will be almost empt}^ and hell crowded ; satan will get nearly all mankind, and the Savior of the iS 2IO Oral Discussion, ivorld (//) only one here and there. This appalling sequence from his negative is enough to show he is wrong, if there is a God in the universe. I have contended that the spirit., v^diich is the real man, is a son of God, and in the image of God, and I am pleased to find, now that I know his notion, that my friend has the same exalted view of man's origin and nature. In his debate with Rev. J. B. Logan, he says : "The worthy gentleman, so far from being able to prove that infants inherit spiritual corruption, or spirit- ual death, from Adam, can scarcely prove they even inherit their spiritual natures from him ! Therefore, before he undertakes to prove that we inherit depravity in our spirits., from Adam, the gentleman would do well to •^xo\Q. \\\'3X\\Q. inherit our spirits ^xo\xi him; and this a work, I predict, he will hardly accomplish. We have ' fathers of our Jlesh' and a ' Father of spirits.' Paul says, ' We have had fathers of our Jlesh which corrected us, and we give thein I'cverence : shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live?' * * * '■All souls are jnine' asth.c?,o\.\\o£ i\\Q father, so also is the soul of the son mine." Page 261. Again he says — " He, Mr. Logan, wants me to tell when and where the infant gets its soul. But that is his business. Let him tell. I said, and I repeat it, that God is the ' Father OF SPIRITS.' Does the gentleman deny this.'' If so, he denies a proposition in Paul's own language! I say the THE SPIRIT COMES FROM GoD, and at death, 'the spirit SHALL RETURN TO GOD WHO GAVE IT.'" Page 276. I was not aware till to-day, that he denies we inherit our spiritual nature froin Adam, and contends it comes directly from God, " the Father of spirits." He is far in advance of Mr, Campbell; and his view, I am pleased to say, does not involve infant depravity and damnation, Universal Salvatio7i. 2 1 1 as Mr. C.'s surely does. The spirit, then, of every man comes directly from God — he is the Father of all spirits. And he quotes Solomon to show, that all spirits come from God the Father, and that all spirits will return to God the Father. The spirit of Adam was from God, therefore he is called "The son of God," (Luke iii. 28,) and hence it is said he was in the "image of God." So all spirits come from God, and are, consequently, " sons of God, in the image of God," and shall return to God. Mr. S. does not mean, neither do I, that all mankind are God's children morally^ or that all are in his moral image, but our spiritual nature^ not character, is the offspring of God, and in the image of God. Thus far, I am happy to say, now I understand him, we agree. Will man ever cease to be a child of God by nature ? Will he ever cease to be in the image of God by 7tature? If my friend says yes, then man will no longer be man, but a brute, for being a child of God, being in the image of God, is what makes a man a man. Destroy that relation, that image, and he would be noth- ing but a brute — not a moral agent, not accountable — not a subject of praise or blame, or of rewards or pun- ishments — and, being a brute, annihilation would be his doom, not endless misery, for the endless misery of a soul implies its immortality, and what is 7iot in God's image is not immortal, and so cannot live to suffer eter- nally. As my friend contends that millions of mankind, after returning to God who created them, will be doomed to suffer endless torments, it will, in his view, be God's children, God's images, that will be thus doomed, and that God is constantly creating spirits knowing that will be their doom. If a man can believe all that, it seems to me he can believe most anything, horrible as it may be. 213 Oral Discussion. Is it not more in harmony with the Love, Wisdom, Mercy, Justice, Pleasure, Desire and Will of God, that he should finally, through divine instrumentalities, purify all souls, and bless them forever? I have showed, that the Nature, Attributes and Government of God give us strong reason to hope, to believe, that this will be the grand result of making man in the image of God, Then God has a Purpose which corresponds with his divine character. " Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he hath purposed in himself : that in the dis- pensation 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." Eph. i. 9, lo. Mr. S. admitted, to use his own words, "when God's purposes alone depend on himself for their performance, they will never fail." That is the exact chai-acter of God's purpose. " Pie hath purposed IN himself." And the Bible says, "What he hath purposed he will perform." He has a purpose in being " the Father of spirits." It is a ^wise and holy purpose, and it will not fail. As this is so, we can emphasize the inspired words, " All thy works shall praise thee." The "great and precious Promises" of the Bible have been considered, and they assure us that "all nations whom God hath made," " all nations, families and kin- dreds of the earth," "shall come and worship before God," " shall be blessed in Christ," that " God may be all in all." Then will be the " end " — the end of sin, suffering and death — when all who die in Adam, will be made alive in Christ, eveiy tongue shall confess that Jesus is Lord, to the glory of God the Father — the Universal Salvation. ' 213 Father of all spirits — and each will say truly, " In the Lord have I righteousness and strength." Then the Savior's work will be accomplished ; the will of God realized in every soul, and all his purposes accom- plished. I will conclude with the words of Baron Humboldt, one of the purest and most intellectual men of the world, and you will see he refutes the calumny that the belief that " death is the passage to a better and higher condition" is immoral in its influence. He found it to be the "ground of inward peace, and of the loftiest endeavors." "The conviction., arising from a firm confidence in Almighty goodness and justice, that death is only THE TERMINATION OF AN IMPERFECT STATE OF BEING, WHOSE PURPOSES CANNOT BE FULLY CARRIED OUT HERE, AND THAT IT IS A PASSAGE TO A BETTER CON- DITION, should be constantly before us, that nothing 'should be able to obscure it, even for a moment; it is THE GROUND WORK OF INWARD PEACE, AND OF THE LOFTIEST ENDEAVORS, and is an INEXHAUSTIBLE SPRING OF COMFORT IN AFFLICTION." [ Time expired. [mr. Sweeney's eighth reply.] I said in my last speech that it is right for us to desire and labor for the salvation of all men, as God so desires, and has offered salvation to all. And now the gentle- man asks, " How long is it right?" Well, I suppose it will be right to so desire and labor as long as there is any hope. True, we may not infallibly know when persons have gone so far from God that it is " impossible ai4 Oral Discussion. to i^estore them to repentance," but God knows. And \vhen he " shall send them strong delusion, that they may believe a lie; that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteous- ness" (3 Thes. ii, II, 12) — when he shall say, "He that is unjust let him be unjust still, and he that is filthy let him 3e 111 thy still," (Rev. xxii. 11) — when he shall say, "Ephraim is, Joined to idols; let him alone" (Hos. iv. 17) — I shall have to put up with it. If Mr. Manford cannot go to heaven without taking all who have pleas- ure in unrighteousness rather than in virtue — without taking the filthy in their filth — without taking Ephraim, idols and all — then I suppose he will have to go along with Ephraim. In this life we are authorized to invite men to come to the light, to the truth, to righteousness, to holiness, to virtue, to Christ, to God, to life, to hope; but of such as " have pleasure in unrighteousness," as love filth and moral pollution, and die in their sins, Christ said, "Whither I go ye cannot come;" and I shall have to go with them wherever they go, or to heaven witJiout them. JVIy friend seems to think heaven cannot be heaven without them, while Jesus seems to have decided that heaven cannot be heaven with them. The gentleman needs to be reconciled. My opponent claims that I misrejDresent him; and, what is still worse, that I do so intentionally — that I do so when I '•''know" better. Will he allow me to admonish him to keep cool.^ I am never well pleased with an opponent that gets unduly excited, or waxes cross. I have not aimed to misrepresent him. Why should I } When he shows me wherein I misrepresent him, I am ready to stand corrected. He says I misrepresent him when I represent him as "saying to the corrupt, ' If you Universal Salvation. 215 go on in sin, and die in sin, God will save you with an everlasting salvation.' " Why, that's his proposition ! Do I misrepresent him when I hold that he teaches the doctrine of the proposition he is trying to prove? Surely not! But, then, he says he does not believe any will be saved without repentance. Very well ; and have I not all along given him credit for that? But he does say that it will never be too late for a sinner to reform — that if one docs not choose to repent now, he can lay the matter over for just as many millions of years as he may choose to revel in sin, and if he ever gets tired of sin, then he can reform and be saved! But what if one should eternally " have pleasure in unrighteousness " ? Then, of course, his proposition will turn out to be false. But he says all will reform. But this is what he does not know, and cannot know. Here is where I called the gentleman's doctrine " wretchedly licentious," and so I look upon it still. Suppose, for illustration, I go into your streets to preach temperance to the poor, un- fortunate man, who is almost habit-bound in drunken- ness, and tell him : " Sir, while it would be every way better for you to reform, and to reform now, nevertheless, if you love your dram and drunken associates better than decent society, you need not be alarn:ied by any silly temperance lecturer, who may, in his blind zeal, tell you that it may be too late, by and by, for you to reform : I say unto you, it will never be too late. You will always be able to reform. Moreover, you will, one day, be absolutely certain to do it — about that you may have no fears." What would you say to such a tem- perance lecture? What would Universalists say to it? Would anybody call that a good temperance lecture — one calculated to prove reformatory of the drunkard? 2i6 Oral Discussion. I appeal to you, fathers and mothers — would you like to have me so talk to your son, were he acquiring the habit of dram drinking, or any other bad habit? I know you would not. You would rightly call such teaching im- moral and licentious. And yet it seems to me that it is UniversaJism, as represented by my worthy friend in this discussion. But, my friends, it is not the Gospel. It is not like the Gospel. It is not akin to the Gospel. " O, Gospel! what folly is committed in thy name!" and I may add, that "folly" is no name for much that is called Gospel. It is true that the "love of God" is revealed in the Gospel; and it is also true that therein " the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness." Rom. i. i8. The gentleman represents me as laughing " at the fact, that the kingdom of heaven is within the soul." He mistakes me. I believe the kingdom of heaven is within the soul of the christian. Of course I do. That is, I believe its principles are. Until these are in the soul of a man, the man is not fit to be in the kingdom. But I believe there is a heaven^ where God is, and where Jesus is, and where angels arc; and where flesh and blood can never go. Nor do I believe that that heaven is in the soul. The love of it may be in the soul — yea, inust be in the soul, or the soul can never be in heaven. Hence, I reject Universalism. The gentleman backed down, in his last speech, from the ground I luiderstood him to assume in the former one, on this point. The gentleman is " a christian, not a heathen;" and, therefore, does not believe all that Milton said about fallen angels and hell. But I have not asked him to believe what Milton said. I would be much better Universal Salvation. 217 satisfied with his faith than I am if it only took in all the Bible says on these questions. But he continually sports with Bible language upon these matters. True he calls it my theology, that he may not appear so skep! tical; but It IS plain scripture language that he ridicules. I can but think of the story of the African servant, who, when his master called him a "black rascal," replied • "Master, I admit all you say, but when Bob calls me black rascal, I call him a liarr Mr. Manford shifts the Bible language that he does not like off on me or Milton, or one Rev. Mr. Zoroaster, with whose theology he seems quite conversant, and then says we are all heathen and false teachers. The gentleman quotes Mr. Campbell and Dr. Clarke on the promise to Abraham: "In thee shall all the flxmihes of the earth be blessed;" and makes them both out Universalists! Well, this is not to be wondered at, after what we have heard before. We have heard him time and again, at least by implication, charge Univer- sahsm upon Jesus and his apostles; and why not charo-e It upon Mr. Campbell and Dr. Clarke? They never more distinctly taught the reverse, than did Jesus and his aposdes. If Jesus and his apostles were Universal- ists, so were Mr. Campbell and Dr. Clarke. On this question they all taught alike. And when you hear Mr. Manford prove Universalism by Campbell and Clarke, then you may know how he proves it by Jesus and the apostles. The process is the same in both cases It is done by garbling their teachings. I notice one thing, however, that is quite significant; and that is tnat the gentleman is not quite satisfied with the lan- guage of the " promise," or any that Mr. Campbell or Dr. Clarke has used; and hence he puts "the sum of 2i8 Oral Discussion. it" in quite diffci'ent words. He states it thus: "Every individual that ever did live, or ever shall live, on the earth, shall be blessed in Christ, come and worship God, and glorify his name." This is much stronger language than he found in the Bible. But what need I further say of the argument from the "promise to the fathers".'* Has he not admitted that the blessing of that promise is conditional., and that one may or not comply with its conditions, as he chooses.^ And with these admissions, how can he prove that all will be saved } It is simply impossible for him to do it. Even Hosea Ballou, one of the greatest lights of the whole Univcrsalist firma- ment, has so decided, as I have shown. The gentleman says, " Whether family ties survive death is more than I profess to know." What a great change has come over him ! In his former speech he did " profess to know " ! And how often has he appealed to persons to reject the doctrine of endless punishment, because, if it be true, there will be broken tamilies in heaven. " Heaven will be made up of remnants of families"! is an exclamation common to Univcrsalist preachers, and one over which they have all taken out their pocket-kerchiefs more frequently than over all the balance of the woes of mankind. And, now the gentle- man does not " profess to know whether family ties will survive death or not " ! He now only cherishes " the thought, that every soul is mated when created;" and though " these twin souls may not meet on earth, they will meet in heaven." I have nothing to say about this, only that the gentleman never got that "thought" from the Bible. It is one of the grand thoughts of the "spirits," and has dissolved a good many "family ties," even on this side of death. \ Universal Salvation. 2IQ " As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." I am sorry I did not get the gentleman's' position, as to the teaching of this passage, earlier in our discussion. But that I did not was certainly no fault of mine. I now understand him to teach that » the whole' man" that is to be raised in Christ, is \h(t spirit of man: in his own words, "the man that comes from God, and Vi'xW return to him when the body dies." " This " the gentleman says, "is the real man, and Jesus will quicken all made in God's image into spiritual life." What the gentleman understands, then, by all being made alive in Christ, or by Christ, is, that all spirits will be quickened "into spiritual life " by Christ. Then I suppose Paul meant in this passage to say, " As in Adam all [spirits] die, even so in Christ shall all [spirits] be made alive"— or quickened into spiritual life! Is my friend ready for this reading? O, no! Why not? Because he does not believe any one dies a spiritual death in Adam. He does not believe we "inherit our spiritual nature from Adam." You know he was "not aware till to-day" that I contend that " the spirit comes from God, and not from Adam." . And in this matter he tells you that I am " far in advance of Mr. Campbell." Indeed, he said, in so many words, "The spirit, then, of every man comes directly from God." This divorces all spirits from Adam. And I have no objection to it. I take back nothing I said in the debate with Mr. Logan. But, it seems to me, my friend is completely and forever undone over the passage under consideration. "As in Adam all die" has no reference to man's spiritual nature, for spirits, in no sense, die in Adam. But my friend con- tends that only spirits are made alive— or " quickened into spiritual life "—In Christ ! Then the passage should 220 Oral Discussion. read, ''As in Adam no7ie die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive " ! ! That is, all w^ill be made alive in Christ in a sense in which none die in Adam ! But this is not the \vorst for my opponent, bad as it is ! He has cut himself off froin this passage entirely. He has denied that -physical death came by Adam. He ridi- culed that notion in his last speech. He contends that physical death was appointed unto all men before Adam sinned, and without any reference to his sin. Then, ac- cording to his teaching, men do not die in Adam in any sense! And, therefore, we must read, " As In Adam all die, [in no sense whatever] even so in Christ [In no sense whatever] shall all be made alive " ! ! The gentle- man must keep cool. It will not do for him to fret, and accuse me of misrepresenting him. I am not to blame for the trouble in which he has involved himself and Universalism over this passage. He did it all himself. I only call your attention to it; and certainly It Is my privilege to do this. Indeed It Is iny business to do it. But I must Insist that It Is high time for him to abandon this passage entirely and forever. I need not say that the gentleman has denied anything like a future general resurrection, as being taught by this passage, for that is already but too plain to all. He makes the resurrection of this passage just what he has made the resurrection of every other passage that teaches a resurrection at all — only a quickening of man's spiritual nature " into spiritual life," When, therefore, any one's spiritual nature is quickened " Into spiritual life," that is all the resurrec- tion there is for him I In his last, the gentleman hardly knows just what his position is, as to " the spirits in prison." He thinks I misunderstood him. I understand him to assume that Universal Salvation. 221 there are spirits in prison in the spirit-world, and that the Gospel is pi'eached to them there. But he seems unwilling to say this now. His position now is, that " God's mercy extends to spirits in prison, let that prison be where it may ; " and this, he says, " is what the pas- sage proves," that he quoted. But the passage proves no such thing. It says nothing about God's mercy extending to spirits in pi'ison in the future world. The passage speaks of " spirits in prison," it is true. And, therefore, I believe there ai^e " spirits in prison," awaiting the Judgment day — " reserved unto the day of Judgment to be punished" — as Peter taught in his second Epistle. But Peter did not say the f reaching was done i?i prison. That was done "in the days of Noah, while the ark was preparing." But he thinks the passage he quoted from Isaiah teaches that "Jesus was sent to liberate all captives, to open all prisons, to break all chains," etc. Where was Jesus sent to do all this } Has my friend found any scripture that tells of Jesus being sent any- where, to seek and to -save, but to this vjorld? I think not. Jesus was sent to this world on a mission of salva- tion; and he sent his apostles "into all the world" to "preach the Gospel to every creature." I know not whence my learned opponent derives his authority for preaching the Gospel to devils, and to "the spirits in prison," who all their lives rejected every message from heaven — who "had pleasure in unrighteousness" rather than in virtue; "whose glory is in their shame;" "whose end is destruction." "All reconciled to God." The gentleman again calls up the passage in Colossians i. i6-3i. Here, he tells us, "several purposes of God are made known." He enumerates nine, I believe ; and shows that I allow that 232 Oral Dlsctission. there is "no failure" as to the first seven, but contend that as to the last two there will be an " awful failure." Well, if you will notice what he calls the first seven purposes in the list, you will discover, that for their accomplishment they all depended alone upon God; while the reconciliation of man depends to some extent upon men, and not alone upon God. If, therefore, the first seven are accomplished — all that depend alone upon God — and the last — that depends somewhat upon men — is not; to whom shall the "failure" — if failure we call it — be attributed.'' Of course to men, who, the great apostle to the Gentiles teaches us, may '•'•fail of the grace of God." And it will be just what my friend calls it — " an awful failure." I would, therefore, exhort all to " Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord ; looking diligently lest any manya// of the grace of God." Heb. xii. 14, 15. Romans fifth, again. " For as by one man's disobedi- ence many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteoais." Now, as I said before, this teaches that what the race lost by Adam, be it much or little — be it nvhat it may — the race will re- cover by Jesus Christ. So that none will have to give account in the great day for Adam's sin, but every one will receive "according to his [own] works." This, too, is what Dr. Clarke and Dr. McKnight taught, as I understand them, notwithstanding the gentleman parades them as against me, on this passage. But why does Mr. Manford quote this passage.'' He should let this go with the 15th of Corinthians, as it teaches just the same. " For since by one man's [tliat is Adam's] dis- obedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one [Christ] shall many be made righteous." But Universal Salvation. 233 how many "were made sinners" by Adam's disobedi- ence? My friend says none. They were all made corrupt and dying -physically., without any reference to "one man's disobedience;" and spiritually, men sustain no relation to Adam. Therefore none are made sinners by Adam, in any sense, according to what Mr. Manford has taught us. Hence we shall have to read this text — " As by one man's disobedience none were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall none [the same none] be inade righteous " ! Aly opponent is very exti'avagant in his statements, at times. I fear, indeed, that his extravagancy of statement will be damaging to his reputation for fairness, if he is not more careful in the future. He says, " ninety-nine of every hundred who have died since the birth of Jesus are lost, if he is right" — that is, if I am right. In al- most the next breath, he says, (after reading an extract from my debate with Mr. Logan) "His view, I am pleased to say, does not involve infant depravity and damnation." And just how often he has said that "o^ze- third of our race die in infancy," I cannot say. Now can these statements be made to tally .^ Hardly, I think. But he proceeds to say, " Heaven will be nearly empty, and hell crowded; Satan will get nearly all mankind, and the Savior of the world only one here and there." This is a song Universalists have been singing all over the country, for several years. The song and chorus are all one, and all infidels join them in the chorus. But they are singing " to buncombe." How is it tioiu ? The churches " are nearly empty," and brothels, and all other cess-pools of hell brought to the surface, "are crowded;" Satan has "nearly all mankind, and the S.ivior of the world only one here and there." And t!iis is the case, 324 Oral Discussion.. too, where the Gospel is preached daily, and, therefore, where there is no reason why it should be so, except that many choose to be vicious rather than virtuous — " have pleasure in unrighteousness." I cannot see how death will empty all the hells of earth into heaven. Let the gentleman sing on. But now, friends, I have given attention to all the gentleman said in his last speech that I felt demanded my attention. This concludes the discussion of the first proposition. You have heard all the gentleman has to say ; and you have heard patiently ; and in hearing what he has had to say, you have heard the very best that can be said for the cause he advocates. If he has failed to, prove his proposition — and I certainly think he has most signally failed — it has not been because he has not brought ability and zeal enough to the work; for he commands as much of both as any man, who advocates his cause, east, west, north, or south. He has failed because his proposition affirms what no man can prove. It affirms that "all who leave this world sinful will finally be I'econciled to God, and saved." But about the reconciliation and salvation of those who leave this world sinful there is not one syllable to be found in the whole revelation God has made to man. Not one ! If there were any scrijoture support for such an affirination mv opponent would have brought it out. He is not the man that would foil for want of adducing scripture, if there were any to be found. On my part, I have kept myself in the negative. I might have brought forward scores of passages of scrip- ture that teach adversely to the gentleman's proposition ; but I have not chosen to do so. I have given him all his time to bring forward his proof, having myself intro- Universal Salvation. 225 duced only such scriptures as I was almost compelled to introduce to explain such as he read, and to answer the questions that he submitted to me. And, as the gentle- man made no resuitic of his line of argument, I will not even call up the scriptures I have introduced, as I have just time for one word of admonition, specially designed for the young of our hearers. Being a young man myself, I feel at liberty to admonish you, dear friends, to count nothing on the chances of reformation in the future world. JVotv, it is safe to turn to God, if you have not, and learn to love and practice virtue and holiness. You will be the happier for it, in this life. All who know you will be influenced for good by it. You will never regret it in time or in eternity. We are all, I verily believe, treading constantly upon chords that will vibrate eternally. The doctrine of Progression, advocated by Humboldt, from whom the gentleman read, in the conclusion of his speech, 7nay^ in some sense, be true; but there is no salvation even in that for one who is going downwa7'd. It is only safe to enter our eternal state of existence going in the right direction — going upward, and God-ward, Then progression may do something for us. But when we enter the future world, should we leave the Gospel, the church, all good people, all holy influences by which we are now surrounded — which he who dies in his sins will do — then what will turn us God-ward .'' My friend has told us that the Gos- pel will follow sinners there. With all possible defer- ence to him, I should want higher authority, even were I disposed to live in sin while I live, and then repent in the future. I should want to be certain, positively cer- tain, that I would meet with no disappointment. For should it turn out with me as with the " Rich Man," 226 Oral Disaisslon. the mistake would be fatal, final. It would be hell enough for it to be said to me, by the father of the faith- ful : " Between us and you there is a great gulf fixed ; so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence." [ Time expired. JUDGMENT — PUNISHMENT. SECOND PROPOSITION. "yl/ the coming of Christy yet future^ the ivorld will be judged^ and the wicked sentejiced to endless punish- ment." Mr. Sweeney affirms; Mr. Manford denies. [mr, Sweeney's first speech.] Gentle?nen Moderators, Ladies and Gentleinen : I answer as affirmant to the proposition just read by the presiding moderator, and am before you to enter upon the work of proving it. The proposition, as you have doubtless observed, is not a single logical affirma- tive, but involves at least four affirmations. It affirms, first. That the coming of Christ is yet future; second. That the judgment of the world is future; third, That the wicked will be punished in the future ; and, fourth. That that punishment will be endless. All these topics are most intimately connected, and may very properly be in- cluded, as they are, in one proposition. Without further preliminary remarks, therefore, I proceed to the work of proof. And, first, I read from Matthew's testimony con- cerning the Savior, twenty-fifth chapter, beginning at the thirty -first verse : " When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and (227) 228 Oral Discussion. 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 separate them one from another, as a 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 king- dom prepared for you from the foundation of the world : " For I was a hungered, 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 vis- ited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. " Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee a hungered, and fed thee } or thirsty, 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 ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. " Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, pre- pared for the devil and his angels: " For I was a hungered, 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 clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. " Then shall they also answer him, saying. Lord, when saw we thee a hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee } " 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. yudgment — Punishment. 229 "And these shall go away into everlasting punish- ment : but the righteous into life eternal." This passage covers all the points in the proposition. It teaches, first, That " the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him ; " second, That " then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory, and before him shall be gathered all nations, and he shall separate them one from another," etc.; third, That the wicked "shall go away" into "punishment;" and, fourth. That it will be " everlasting punishment." It remains now for me to show that all this hficture. I. I proceed, therefore, to show, in the first place, that the coming of the " Son of man in his glory, and all the holy angels with him," is yet future. It is very necessaiy that we should have the point I am aiming to establish very definitely fixed in our minds. It is the coming of " the Son of man in his glpry^ ,and all the holy angels with hifn."" The Savior said once, before his death, " There be some stand- ing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdojn." Matt. xvi. 28. This is past, I grant. In these words the Savior doubtless referred to the establishment of his kingdom in the world. This is made clear by the manner in which Mark and Luke record it. Mark has it thus ; " There be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God co7ne with power." Mark ix. i. And Luke has it thus : " There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdoTn of God" Luke ix. 27. Now, it will be granted, that the kingdom of God was established in the lifetime of some who were present witli the Savior when he uttered these words. 230 Oral Dlscussioti. One of the Evangelists calls the establishing of this kingdom, as foretold by Jesus, "the Son of man coming in his kingdom." But I would have you observe that this is never called the coming of " the Son of man in his glory, and all the holy angels with him." It w^as never intimated that any one who was present with the Savior should live to see him " come in his glory with his holy a?igels." The coming "in his kingdom" was the beginning of that of which his coming " in his glory, and all the holy angels with him," shall be the end. This will appear more fully, however, as I pro- ceed with the argument. Let it be borne in mind that I now have before me the coming of the Son of man " in his glory, with all the holy angels" for it is when he so comes that he will judge the world, and sentence the wicked to everlasting punishment. To show that this coming is future, your attention will now be invited to several passages of scripture. "When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory." Colossians ili. 4. The apostle speaks in this passage of an appearing of Christ " in gloiy," that was future at his writing. He could not have referred to his " coming in his kingdom," or the establishment of the kingdom of God, for that was past, as the apostle had taught in the first chapter of this same epistle. See verse 13, " Who hath de- livered us from the power of darkness, and hath trans- lated us into the kingdoin of his dear Son." This shows that the kingdom had already come, and Paul and those whom he addressed were in it. But the appearing " in glory," of which he speaks, was in the future. Observe these words : " Then [at his appearing] shall ye also appear with him in glory." Have the saints already Judgment — Punishment. 231 been glorified with Christ? If so, when? But let us read other passages on this point. 2 Thes. iii. i : " Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto hi/n." Phillip, iii. 20, 2i : "For our conversation is in heaven; from whence, also, we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ; who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." i John, iii. 2 : " Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be : but we know that, tvhen he shall appear., we shall be like him: for we shall see him as he is." These scriptures teach that, at the coming of Christ, the saints shall be "gathered together" unto him; that their " vile body shall be changed, that it may be fash- ioned like unto his glorious body;" that they " shall see him as he is," and " shall be like him." Has Christ so come, and has all this been fulfilled ? If so, It would be Interesting to know just when. But what we have seen implies what is elsewhere taught, that the dead shall be raised when Christ " shall come in his glory with his mighty angels." " For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God : and the dead in Christ shall rise first : Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words." i Thes. Iv. 16, 17, 1 8. And we learn, also, that christians shall realize the hope of the gospel — which certainly involves the resurrection of the dead — when Jesus shall appear in his gloiy. " For the grace of God that bring- 233 Oral Discussion. eth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and godly, in this present world ; looking for that blessed hope^ and the glorious appear- ijig of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ." Titus ii. II, 12, 13. Will the gentleman say the time is past when, " deny- ing ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the gi'eat God and our Savior Jesus Christ"? Let us read, also, 2 Thes. i. 6-10: ' " Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recom- pense tribulation to them that trouble you ; "And to you, who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels. " In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: " Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; " When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our tes- timony among you was believed) in that day." In this passage we learn that Jesus shall take " ven- geance on them that know not God, and obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ" — that they " shall be punished with eveilasting destruction from the presence of God and the glory of his power" — ^'"when he shall be revealed from heaven ivith his jnighty angels " — " when he shall come to be glorijicd in his saints., and to be admired by all tliat believe in that Judgment — Punishment. 233 day." This connects the coming of the Lord in his glory with his mighty angels, to be glorified in his saints, with the judgment and punishment of the ungodly and disobedient. Is all this past.-* I think not. I wish to call attention now to ist Cor. xv. 22, 23: " For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the first fruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming." This passage my opponent has already quoted in this discussion, and referred to the future for its fulfillment. Well, in this passage, the coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead are connected. But it will doubtless be said, that there is nothing said here about the judgment and punishment of the wicked. But I have already connected the judgment and punishment of the wicked with the coming of Christ, " to be glori- fied in his saints;" and I now propose to show that this passage in the 15th of Corinthians, that the gentleman himself refers to the future, speaks of this same coming. At the 35th verse we read, " But some will say. How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?" This Is the resurrection of the 33d verse, that is to take place " at his coming." Now, observe that the apostle. In his answer to the question — " How are the dead raised up?" says, verses 43, 43 — " It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory." This, then, is the resun-ec- tion to '•'■glory." Observe, also, that it is a resurrection of the " body." " It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body." The resurrection, then, spoken of in this chapter, that my friend has admitted is future, is to take place at the coming of the Lord. "At his 20 234 Oral Discussion. coming," " they that are Christ's" "shall be made alive" " /« glory" Now, let us read again, 2 Thes. i. 7-10: " When the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and the glory of his power — when he shall come to be glorified in his saints." How will he be " glorified in his saints " ? Why, his saints shall be raised from the dead " in glory" "at his coming," as we have just learned in the passage that my opponent admits refers to the future. Thus we connect the resurrection, spoken of in the 15th of Corin- thians, with the coming of Christ in judgment — to take "vengeance on them that know not God, and obey not the gospel of our Loi"d Jesus Christ; who shall be pun- ished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and the glory of his power." This puts the coming of Christ to judge the world, and the punish- ment of the wicked, in ih.Q future, which is all I have aimed to do by this ai'gument. I am not now arguing the question as to the endlessness of punishment. That will receive proper attention in due time. What is meant by the "everlasting punishment" of the wicked, will be much more easily determined when we shall have definitely determined ivhen " these shall go away into everlasting punishment." Having connected the coming of Christ to judge the world with the resurrection of the dead, and the realiza- tion of the " blessed hope " of the saints, I now propose to show that, at his coming, this earth will be dissolved by fire. I read 2 Peter, HI. 3-12: Judgment — Punishment. 235 *' Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scofters, walking after their own lusts, "And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. " For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water; " Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished : " But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. " But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is long-suffering to us- ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. " But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away wnth a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. " Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy con- versation and godliness, "Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat.?" Here we have the "coming of the Lord" connected with " the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men ; " and we learn that, in that day, " the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth, also, and the 236 Oral Discussion. things therein shall be burned up." Is all this past? If so, when did it come to pass? I know of nothing answering to all this that has transpired in the history of our world since these words were written. All these things remain to be fulfilled in the future of our race and world. I know the thought is wonderful and ter- rible. The fiiith of a rationalistic people reels under its tremendous weight, and seeks to explain it away. But the Lord has spoken it, and it is faithful and b'ue. That terrible day will come as a thief in the night. The Lord is not slack in the fulfillment of his promise, as some men count slackness. He wills not that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and live, and therefore the day so terrible, and yet so full of hope to the christian, has not been brought upon the world. But when that day shall come, all debates like this will close, and close forever. No man will ever again, you may be assured, undertake the work of proving that the coming of. the Lord to judge the world is future. When that day passes all will know it, and all debate about it will be closed out forever. " Behold he cometh with clouds, and every eye shall see him, even they who pierced him ; and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him." Rev. i. 7. And here, by the way, my opponent may test the sincerity of his belief, that " all kindreds of the earth" include all mankind. [ Time expired. [mr. manford's first reply.] Gentlefnen Moderators^ Ladies and Gentlemen : Before noticing Mr. Sweeney's arguments in defense of his proposition, I will offer a couple of objections to Judgment — Ptmishment. 237 his notion of a judgment day at the winding up of human affairs. I. It is clearly of heathen origin. No one pretends that Moses taught it; yet it was believed in in the days of Moses. Zoroaster taught it; Pagan mythology taught it; but Moses knew nothing of it; the Law knew noth- ing of it. Moses records the first revelation God made to man, and, in that revelation, the true day of judg- ment is clearly revealed. The words of the Lord were, " In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," (Gen. ii. 17) — not in some day millions of years hence. In my humble opinion, it js as true now as it was six thousand years ago, that in the day we sin we are judged. Sixty centuries have not made that truth a falsehood. True, the Bible speaks of judgments in the future as well as present, for the good reason, that men would live and act in ^e future as well as in the present. Now, and hereafter, sin and its judgment go together. And there is a crisis in a bad man's life when the judgments of heaven fall thicker, and faster, and heavier. He has " been treasuring wrath against the day of wrath," and down comes the storm u2Don him. The tippler, the gambler, the debauchee, suffer the judgments of heaven all their days, but the crisis in their lives comes, and to destruction they speedily go. The same of cities, the same of nations. Vice debases them all the time, but the hai"vest comes, and they are hurled to ruin. The Christian Era, in the Bible, is also called a day -' of judgment. Besides these, I see no judgments spoken / of in the Scriptures. My friend's judgment day clearly belongs to heathenism ; it is no part of the Gospel. Rollin, in his Ancient History, mentions a curious custom of the Egyptians. When a man died, judges passed sentence 238 Oral Discussion. on his life and his dead body; and that is the egg that has hatched the judgment Mr, Sweeney talks about. I will quote from Rollin: " The assembly of the judges met on the other side of the lake, which they crossed in a boat. He who sat at the helm was Charon; and this gave the hint to Orpheus, who had been in Egypt, and after him to other Greeks, to invent the fiction of Charon's boat. As soon as a man was dead, he was brought to his trial. The public accuser was heard. If he proved that the deceased had led a bad life, his memory was condemned, and he was deprived of burial. The people admired the power of the laws, which extended even beyond the grave; and every one, struck with the disgrace inflicted on the dead person, was afraid to reflect dishonor on his own memory and his family. But if the deceased person was not convicted of any crime, he was interred in an honorable manner." Page 55. This custom gave Orpheus and "other Greeks" a "hint," not only to locate "Charon" and his "boat" in the other world, but to locate the "trial," the judgment, there too. They spiritualized the whole of this Egyptian custom. The lake, the boat, old Charon, the judges, and the awards, they located beyond the grave. The favorites of the gods were put in the Elysian fields, and the un- believers in the gods were locked up in black Tartarus. Virgil, a heathen himself, thus writes of the prison of the damned : " At hell's dread mouth a thousand monsters wait ; Grief weeps, and Vengeance bellows at the gate ; Base Want, low Fear, and Famine's lawless rage, And pale Disease, and slow repining Age ; Fierce, formidable Fiends the portals keep, With Pain, Toil, Death, and Death's half-brother, Sleep. jfudgment — Punishment. 239 There Joys, embittered by Remorse, appear, Daughters of Guilt ; here storms destructive War, Mad Discord there her snaky tresses tore; Here, stretched on iron bed, the Furies roar ; And close by Lerna's hissing monster stands Briarius dreadful with a hundred hands ; There stern Geriyon raged ; and all around Fierce Harpies screamed, and direful Goigons frowned." This Egyptian custom, spiritualized by the poets, seems to have been the origin of the modern judgment day, and the modern hell. The truth is, a great deal that passes in our day for Christianity is only paganism reconstructed, repainted, and renamed. II. The judgment day of my friend's creed is entirely unnecessary. Judgments, or courts among men, are necessary for the detection and suppression of crime. But this necessity arises from our ignorance and inability to be in every place at the same time. Could w^e, at all times and places, and without any process of thinking, detect the criminal and the crime, and w^ere the authority necessary to suppress the crime committed, and prevent the injury from spreading, at all times present when the iniquity was done, there would be no necessity for a judgment to be held. But this is not the case with mankind. The crime is committed in the dark. The criminal is often unknown, and must be ferreted out; and his guilt established by the testimony of witnesses. And will any one say this is necessary with Him who knows his works from the beginning to the end ; whose eye pierces through nature, and with one glance com- prehends the whole? Is he under the necessity of in- stituting a formal process.'* Must he make inquiry, who has committed a crime, or how much guilt attaches 240 Oral Discussion. itself to particular individuals? And is he, who is every- where present, unable to suppress crime without this grand assize? Will he require the aid of witnesses? Clearly this great judgment day is utterly useless. It must all be for a grand display. I can assign no other reason. But then it will be like the mountain in the fable : " Parturiunt montes nascitur ridiculus musculus." I will now give iny friend's proof of this future judgnnent day due attention. It seems that, in his estimation, the judgment was to take place when Jesus was to come in power and glory. It also appears, that he supposes this coming is Christ's Third coming. He referred to Matt. xvi. and other places, where Christ's coming in his kingdom is spoken of, and admitted that coming has taken place. That was Christ's Second coming, his First coming being in the flesh, when he lived and died for inan. Now, I will show you, that this final coming in judgment he talks about was his coming in his kingdom, which he ADMITS HAS TAKEN PLACE. Remember, he quoted Matt. xvi. 28, and admitted that the coming spoken of there has transpired. I will read the verse he read, and the one immediately before, and you will see at once that I am correct. " For the Son of inan shall come in the glory of his Father, with his angels ; and then he will reward every man accoi'ding to his works. 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 his kingdom." He said the coming spoken of in the latter part of this passage took place about eighteen hundred years ago, before some whom Christ addressed died. But, it is as clear as daylight that only one coming is spoken of in the whole passage. This being y udgincftt — -PuiiisJiment. 241 so, Christ's coming in glory and in judgment took place long since. The gentleman said, "I will proceed to show that the coming of the Son of man with his angels is yet future," and the very first joassage he read, if he had read it all^ proves, beyond the possibility of a doubt, that coming to be a past event. Let no one for- get, that this coming which he admits to be past, was a coming in glory ^ and in judgment. I might close my speech here, for his whole speech is refuted, and refuted by his own admission, and by his own proof-text ; but I ^ will furnish more evidence, that this coming he so / strangely puts in the future, has taken place. s_ Said Jesus to the seventy when he sent them abroad, " But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye to another; for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of man be come." Matt. x. 23. He was to come so soon they would not have time to visit all of Israel's cities, and yet my friend thinks he has not come! Again said Christ, "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven : and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. * * Verily I say unto you, this generatiox shall not PASS, TILL ALL THESE THINGS BE FULFILLED." Matt. xxlv. 30, 34. Here again is the coming \x\ judgment., in po-jDcr and glory., and Jesus distinctly told his hearers that all these things should take place in that generation. This is the third time our Savior's words refute Elder Sweeney. The passage he read from 2 Thes. i. refers doubtless to the same coming these other jiassages do, and so that is taken out of his hands. He then went to 2 Peter iii., and I will go there too. 21 242 Oral Discussion. The coming referred to there was to occur in the '■'•last days." The gentleman dreams they are the last days of this earth, of time. Only see what a blunder he makes. "Little children, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists; whereby we know it is the last tifne." I John ii. 18. The last time, then, was in John's day, long since. " God, who at sundry times, and in divers mannei's, spake in times past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son." Heb. i. 12. According to Paul, the last days were in his days. And Peter himself tells us to what last days he refers. On the day of Pentecost, Peter, speaking of the wonderful manifestations of the Spirit, said, " This is that which was spoken of by the prophet Joel, And it shall come to pass in the last days" etc. Acts i. 16, 17. These passages decide when the last days were. They were in John's lifetime, in Peter's lifetime, and my friend is wrong in referring them to the end of time. The coining was to take place in the last days, therefore it is a fast event — another evidence that the coming in judgment belongs to the past, not to the future. These evidences are sufficient. They prove beyond all doubt, that the coming of Christ in judgment is not in the future. In every kingdom there is a king, a law, and a judg- ment. Christ's kingdom, set up in the generation in which he lived on earth, has, of course, all these elements. Christ himself is the king, the lawgiver, and the judge, in his kingdom. His reign, his judgment, were to con- tinue from the beginning to the ending of his kingdom. My friend read some passages that connect a coming of Christ with the end of Christ's reign, when he shall Judgment — Punishment. 243 deliver up the kingdom to God the Father, and God be all in all. We find all through the Bible, that when a remarkable event of divine providence was to take place, it is said that the Lord would come. I need not read pas- sages to prove this, for every Bible reader knows it to be a fact. Hence, when the kingdom was set up, Christ is represented as coming; when the kingdom is to be returned to God, it is said Christ will come. Both com- ings are called glorious comings. The coming in his kingdom was glorious, and the coming to deliver up the kingdom will also be glorious. But there is this difference between the two comings. Judgment is connected with his coming in his kingdom, but not with his coming at the end of his reign. The judgment commenced when Christ came in his kingdom. Then he came as a king, lawgiver, and judge. The judgment day then commenced. He is now king, law- giver, and judge. The judgment is now set. But when he comes at the end of his reign, he will not come as judge, but to deliver up the kingdom to God. His reign, his judgeship, and his kingdom, will then end. The judgment, then, commenced when he came in his kingdom, and will continue till the end of his reign, and then it will cease. You see, that the judgment will end when my learned friend thinks it will begin. That is a grave mistake; but brother Sweeney is not the only one that has made that blunder. The passages in Matt. XXV., 2 Thes. i., and i Peter iii,, are figurative representa- tions of the passing away of the old dispensation, and the ushering in of the new dispensation, all of which took place in the generation in which our Lord lived, before some whom he addressed died. And this view of those jDassages is sustained by some of the most 244 Oral Dlscussiofi. learned men of different denominations. I expect to show before I am through with this debate, that this view of those passages corresponds with the figurative language of the Bible. Prophecies generally are given in figurative language, as all know. \Time expired. [mr. Sweeney's second speech.] Without stopping now to pass in review the speecn to which you have just listened — promising, however, to give proper attention to such matters in it as I deem it necessary for me to notice, in due time — I shall proceed with the affirmative argument. I showed in my first speech that, " 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 judge them, separate them, and sentence the wicked to eveidasting punish- ment. Then I think I showed that this coming of the Son of man "In his glory, and all the holy angels with him," is yet future. But as it is of the utmost import- ance that this matter be clearly established in our minds, I shall proceed now to draw another line of argument. II. I shall attempt to prove, in the second place, by scriptures bearing directly upon the subject, that the judgjncnt of the world is yet future. Before adducing the scripture arguments upon which I shall relv, how- ever, I wish to establish a preliminary position. This I do for the purpose of saving time and talk, and help- ing to a better understanding of the matter in hand. And as all will readily agree with me in the position I am about to assume, but my opponent and some of his Judg7ne7it — Punishment. 245 friends, I choose to submit it in the words of a distin- guished UniversaHst author. Rev. I. D. Williamson, in his work entitled, '-'• Endless Misery Examined and Refuted" page 20, says : " It should be remembered that the Jewish Government was a Theocracy. God was to that people nol only a moral Governor, but a civil and political King. He gave to them not merely religious principles, but civil laws, suited to their wants and circumstances. Hence, it is a most pernicious mis- take to confound these temporal laws, which were made for an ignorant and barbarous people, and designed to remain but for a season, with the eternal principles of Gospel grace and truth. As great a mistake as it would be to proclaim a municipal law of one city as a univer- sal law of nations." The position here laid down I accept as correct. True, Dr. Williamson was not treat- ing of the judgment especially when he penned these lines; but that matters not. The position is a correct one, and while I am willing that Universalists shall have all the advantages they can derive from it, I shall avail myself of it in the discussion of this question. "The Jewish Government was a Theocracy." God did give to the Jewish people " not merely religious principles," but "civil laws, suited to their wants and circumstances." And if it be "a most pernicious mistake to confound these temporal laws, which were made for an ignorant and barbarous people, and designed to remain but for a season, with the eternal principles of Gospel grace and truth," it is certainly a no less "pernicious mistake" to confound the temporal judgments of that dispensation with the judgment of the world by Jesus Christ. God is now directly a civil lawgiver to no nation. Hence, he is directly the civil judge of no nation, as he was to the 246 Oral Discussion. Jewish Theocracy. He has ordained civil government in the hands of men, but has made Jesus Christ the giver of "rehgious principles" to all the world, and its "moral governor" and judge. God's judgments there- fore, among the Jewish people, whose civil ruler he was, will not, I trust, be brought forward to disprove a future judgment of the world, by Jesus Christ, the giver of religious principles, and moral governor and judge of all. If my friend will adhere to the position of his brother Williamson, it will save him much time and ti'ouble. But if he will not, I shall have to hold him to it. I am now ready to call attention to a passage of scrip- ture in John v. 22 : "For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son." I cite this passage only for the sake of what it expressly teaches. It teaches that Jesus is the judge of all men. As to the time of his judgment this passage teaches nothing. But that the judgment of the world by Jesus Christ is after death, and hence future, I will now un- dertake to prove by direct and plain scripture testimony. I. Acts xxiv. 24, 25: "And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ. And as he reasoned of righteousness, temper- ance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and an- swered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a con- venient season, I will call for thee." Acts xvii. 30, 31 : "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent: be- cause he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness, by that man whom he hath ordained : whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead." yudgmefit — Punishtnent. 247 2 Tim. iv, 6, 7, 8 : " For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fouglit a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the fiiith; henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me at that day; and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." All this is the language of Paul, the great apostle of the Gentiles. He was commissioned to preach the Gospel some eight years after the Savior had said, " All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth ; " and was therefore a preacher in the Christian dispensation. Indeed, the apostle claimed to have been " translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son." As a preacher of the Gospel, then, in the Christian dispensation, in the kingdom of Christ, Paul, reasoning "concerning the faith in Christ," preached "judgment to come'''' — that God " hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness," by Jesus Christ. The passage from his letter to Timothy shows that Paul did not understand that the day in which the world Is to be judged In righteousness is in this life. This Is the last epistle of his life, and confes- sedly written very near the close of his life, as his lan- guage clearly implies : " I am noiv ready to be offered, [to die, evidently,] and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have Jittished my course, [my earthly career], I have kept the faith ; hence- forth, there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me at that day" At what day.'' Had he not taught, long before, that God " hath appointed a day in the which he will judge the world in righteousness''^ ? No'.v that he is ready to die, he looks forward Into the future for a 248 Oral Discussion. "crown of righteousness" which " the Lord, the right- eous Judge" W// give him '''• at that day" — that day, of course, in which he will judge the world in righteous- ness by Jesus Christ. Paul, then, not only taught judg- ment " /o come" — not only taught that God "hath ap- pointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness" — but he expected that judgment to come after his death, when " the Lord, the righteous Judge," would give him " a crown of righteousness." 3. The dead are to be judged. Therefore the judg- ment will be after death, and, therefore, future. Acts X. 43 : " And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead." This teaches that Jesus is " to be the Judge of the quick and dead" It is sometimes said by those who deny that the judg- ment is after death, that " the dead," in the passage be- fore us, means not the literally dead, but the dead in trespasses and sins — the morally dead. It may be well for me to attend to this little matter as I go along. What dead are to be judged.'' Rev. xx. 13, 13: "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God ; and the books were opened : and another book was opened, which is the book of life : and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, accord- ing to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them : and they were judged every man according to their works." Matt. xi. 31, 33: " Wo unto thee, Chorazin! wo 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 ashes. But I say unto you, it shall be Judgment — Punishmetit. 249 more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judg- ment, than for you." Matt. xii. 41, 43: "The men of Nineveh shall i"ise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preach- ing of Jonas; and behold, a greater than Jonas is here. The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, a greater than Solomon is here." These scriptures tell us plainly enough luhat dead are to be judged — the dead that are in the " sea," in the grave, in " hell," \Jiades^ the spirit world] — all are to come forth and be judged. The men of " Tyre and Sidon " shall be present " at the day of judgment," with the men of the generation to whom Jesus spoke. Then "the ipen of Nineveh shall rise;" also "the queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment," with the gen- eration to whom Jesus spoke. This can never be ful- filled before death. This argument puts the judgment after death, and, therefore, future. 3. It is expressly taught by the apostle Paul that the judgment is after death. Heb. ix. 37 : " And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judg- ment." If Paul did not mean by this language to teach that the judgmeat comes after death, he was certainly very unhappy in his selection of words. Furthermore, if he did not mean to teach that the judgment is after death, then, if he had meant to so teach, what kind of language could he have used .'* In other words, if Paul's language under consideration does not teach that the judgment comes after death, then can language do it? Can a better selection of words be made to teach that the judgment is after death, than that employed by the 250 Oral Discussion. ajDostle in this passage ? I think not. I profess to have a moderately fair command of the English language. I can make myself understood generally by people who give me their attention. But I cannot beat this passage. I believe we shall all be judged after death, but I know of no way of expressing that belief more unequivocally and unmistakably than Paul expressed it in the passage before us. If my learned opponent can so tinker this passage and the others I have cited as to take the doc- trine of a future judgment out of them, then he can, with as much ease and by the same rule, tinker that doc- trine out of anything I ever said, or ever shall say. Having shown, by two lines of argument that I feel quite certain cannot be broken, that the coming of Christ to judge the world is yet future, I am now ready to take another step. III. I propose to show, in the third place, that the punishment of the wicked, to take place, as we are all agreed, at the coming of Christ in judgment, is to be after death, and, therefore, future. We read in 3 Peter, ii. 4-9 : " For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and deli\'ered them into chains of darkness,. to be reserved unto judgment; and spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly; and delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked : (for that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;) the Lord knoweth how to Judgment — Punishment. 251 deliver the godly out of temptations, and to resen^e the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished." Here we learn that "God saved Noah," but brought in "the flood upon the world of die ungodly;" "delivered just Lot," but " condemned " the Sodomites to " an over- throw." From which considerations the apostle con- cludes: "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished^ " The angels that sinned" are "to be reserved unto judgment." Also the wicked antediluvians and Sodomites are '•'• reserved \x\\\.o the day of judgment to be punished." Let us read, also, on this point, Rom. ii. 3, 4, 5 : " And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God.? Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness, and forbearance, and long-suffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance.'' But after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath, and revelation of the righteous judgment of God." This passage teaches the same. Men nxdcy '•'• treasure up" to them- selves " wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the ri^h.te,ovi?, judgment of God." We will now give attention to some of the words of the Savior, bearing directly upon this point. Matt. x. 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." Luke xii. 4, 5 : "And I say unto you, my friends, be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that, have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: fear him, which after he hath killed, hath 253 Oral Discussion. power to cast Into hell; yea, I say unto you, fear him." Here is an exhortation from the Great Teacher to his disciples. He tells them whom not to fear. " Fear not them which kill the body" — "Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do." This means men. Men can "' kill the body," but " after that have no more that they can do." He then tells them whom to fear. " Fear him who, after he hath killed [the body], hath power to cast into hell" — \Gehe7i- na — not hadcs.^ " Fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." These passages I have quoted to show that the pun- ishment connected with the judgment of the world is after death, and hence future. I now call attention to a few passages tliat teach expressly that the condemna- tion and punishment of the wicked come after the resur- rection. Daniel xii. 2 : " And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." John v. 28, 29 : " Marvel not at this : for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resun'ection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." Rev, XX. 13, 14: "And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them : and they were judged every man accord- ing to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." These passages clearly show that the resurrection of the wicked will be to "judgment," "condemnation," " shame " — punishment. Now let us pause one moment and see what we have before us. Mr. Manford and Judgment — Punishment. 253 I agree that the scriptures teach a coming of Christ in judgment to punish the wicked ; I affirm that this com- ing, and judgment, and punishment, are yet future; and that the punishment will be endless, all which he denies. I have shown, in the first place, that when Christ comes to judge the world and punish the wicked, he will " come in his glory, aad all the holy angels with him ; " and this coming " in his glory, and all the holy angels with him," I have shown is intimately and immediately connected with the resurrection of the dead and the glory of the saints, and, therefore, future. Then, secondly, I have shown, by another line of argument, that the "judg- ment" is after death, and hence future. And, thirdly, I have shown that the wicked dead are "reserved" unto punishment; and that they will be raised from the dead to judgment, condemnation, and punishment. And having established thus much, I am ready now, after turning for a few moments to notice the gentleman's attacks upon my lines, to proceed with my proof as to the endlessness of punishment. But my time for the present has expired. [ Time ex- pired. [mr. manford's second reply.] I readily admit, that the special judgments of the Law of Moses were peculiar to the Jews — confined to the Jews. But I fail to see that that fixct helps my friend's cause an iota. It is true, that judgment is now committed to the Son. And the Son tells us how he judges: "The words that I speak unto you, they shall judge you." "AVe are judged by the Gospel. The Jews 254 Oral Discussion. were judged by the Law, and we are judged by the Gospel. The Law judged men in the earth. The Gos- pel judges men in the earth. It is admitted by the learned of all denominations, that the judgments of the Law were all in the earth. Dr. Jahn, Dr. Campbell, Dr. Paley, Bishop Warburton, H. W. Beecher, and hosts of others, assert this. What reason have we to locate the judgment under the Gospel out of the earth.? God judged in the earth by the Law, and he judges in the earth by the Gospel. I pi-oved this last point in my other speech, which I trust my friend will find time to consider. I will now notice his additional evidence of a day of judgment at the end of time. He read Acts xxiv., where it is said Felix trembled because Paul talked to him about a judgment to come. About one year after^ Felix was recalled to Rome for his extortion, loose and violent conduct. His brother Pallas barely saved his life. That judgment was " to come" when the apostle had that conference with the Governor, and it did come ■ in due time. I rather think Felix would not have "trembled" much if Paul had told him he would not be judged for several thousand ye^rs forhis bad conduct. But the judgment Paul spoke of was at hand^ hence that wicked man trembled. He next read Acts xvii., where Paul spoke of the day in which God would judge the world by Jesus Christ. In my last speech I showed when that judgment day commenced. It commenced wheii Christ came in his kingdom ; and Jesus said, that should take place before some whom he addressed would die, in the generation in which he lived. That matter is so plain I need not spend any more time on it. His quotation from 2 Tim. Judgment — Punishment. 255 vi., says nothing' about judgment, and is, therefore, irrele- vant to the subject before us. My friend then read Acts x. 42, in which the apostle said, tliat Christ is the Judge of the quick and the dead. Let us learn from Paul, not from Mr. Sweeney, what he meant by quick and dead. "And you hath he quick- ened who were dead in trespasses and sins ; even when we were dead in sin hath he quickened us." Eph. ii. r, 5. By quick and dead^ then, Paul meant believers and un- believers, saints and sinners. We have seen, that Christ was appointed to judge them, and that judgment, we have seen, commenced long ago. And this is made as clear as daylight by parallel passages. " Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the qitick and the dead" i Peter iv. 5. Dr. Macknight says, that "quick and dead here mean Jeivs and Gentiles." My worthy friend does not understand St. Paul, or St. Peter either. Mark, also, that the apostle said, that in his day Jesus was READY to judge men. But my friend thinks he has not yet commenced! Got ready, in his estimation, several thousand years too soon! How exactly these words of the apostle Paul correspond with those of an- other apostle. " Be patient, therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. For the coming of the Lord draw- eth NIGH. Behold the Judge standeth before the door." James v. 7, 8, 9. When James wrote these words, the judgment was NEAR — the judgment of saints and sinners, quick and dead. But my friend con- \ tends it was NOT near, but thousands of years off. ' Another passage : " I charge thee, therefore, before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the qtiick 1 and dead at his appearing and his kingdom." 2 Tim, / iv. I. This was to take place when Christ would appear 256 Oral Discussion. to set up his kingdom. Now, you know the gentleman admitted, in his first speech to-day, that that appearing and kingdom occurred long since, and he read Matt. xvi. 28 to prove it. I will read it, as it is an important pas- sage — the key to the New Testament doctrine of judg- ment: "Verily, I say unto you, there be some standing here who shall not taste of death till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." This is the same appear- ing and the same kingdom spoken of in 2 Tim. iv. just read ; and Jesus declared it would all take place before some he addressed would die. These passages all relate to the same judgment — the judgment of Christ which commenced eighteen hundred years ago. The gentleman then went to Rev. xx., where the judgment of the dead is spoken of. Does not " dead," in that passage, mean the same as in the other passages I have read.'' And is not the judgment the same.'' The book of Revelation proves it to be the same judgment. In the twenty-second chapter that judgment is thus spoken of: "And the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shov/ unto his servants the things which must SHORTLY be done. Behold I come QUICKLY. Seal not the sayings of the book, for the time is AT HAND. And behold I come QUICKLY; and my re- ward is with me, to give to every man according to his work." This is the judgment of the dead^ by Jesus Christ, the judgment of the quick and dead ; and here we are told by Jesus himself that it was AT HAND when the book of Revelation was given. All those passages about Christ's coming, his coming in his kingdom, his coming in judgment, relate to the setting up of the Gospel king- dom, and the judgment connected therewith. There cannot be a reasonable doubt of this. y udgment — PunisJuncnt. 257 My friend then read Matt, xi., the meaning of which is, that the calamities about to fall on Bethsaida and Chorazin would be more severe than those which form- erly befell Tyre and Sidon. The passage in the next chapter has a similar meaning. This view of those pas- sages is sustained by learned men of other denomina- / tions. The gentleman went to Heb, ix. 37. Let us look at its context. The second verse following reads thus : " For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the veiy image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually, make the comers thereunto perfect." According to the grammatical construction of this passage, the pronoun they refers to the noun " men," in the verse under con- sideration, for its antecedent. There can be no doubt about that. What did they^ the men^ do? Answer. "They offered — sacrifices — year by year, continually." That is, the men appointed to die offered saciufices. Now, all men are not appointed to offer sacrifices. But a particular class of the Hebrews were appointed to offer sacrifices. The Jewish high priests were appointed for that very purpose. It was to them, then, that the apostle refers, and not to mankind generally. What is meant by the high priest being appointed to die ? Observe the context again : " For where the tes- tament is, there must of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead ; otherwise it is of no strength at all while the tes- tator liveth." Verses 16, 17. The Jewish covenant was the first testament, and Moses was its testator. But that testament was in force before Moses died temporally. What kind of a death, then, is meant.'' Read on: 22 258 Oral Discussion. " Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses — its testator — had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool, hyssop, and sprinkled the book and the people, saying. This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined upon you." Killing those animals, then, shedding their blood, by a figure of speech, is called the death of Moses — -the testator of the first testament. The high priests were appointed to offer sacrifices as Moses did, hence it is said they were appointed to die, as Moses the testator of the first testa- ment died. There is allusion here to the annual atonement of the Jews. On that great occasion, the priest, who was the most conspicuous personage, appeared before the assembled congregation — that appearing typified Christ's first coming. The priest then offered sacrifice for the sins of the Jewish nation — that typified the death of Christ for the world. The priest then disappeared, and entered into the " Holiest of all" — that typified Christ's entering into Paradise. In due time the priest reappeared to the people — that typified Christ's resurrection, which was his " second appearing." The priest, at his second appearing before the people, passed Jicdgment on them, which was that their sins were forgiven — that typified the Judgment passed on all who trust in the risen Savior. They behold him the second time — the risen, the glorified Savior, without sin unto salvation. His first appearing, was when he came in the flesh; his second appearing, when he showed himself to the world in his spiritual and glorified form; and all who confide in the risen Redeemer, as the way, the truth, and the life, are blessed Judgment — Punishment. 259 with life and salvation. To them he " appears the second time without sin unto salvation." This, I am well satisfied, is the true meaning of the passage. The gentleman is inconsistent in asserting that Paul, in this passage, means the physical death of man, for he teaches that death is not of divine appointment. His position is, that Adam was made i/mnortal; that God did not intend he should die; did not intend that any of his posterity should die. But Adam sinned, and that made him mortal ; made all mankind mortal : brought death on Adam ; brought death on his race. According to this, death is the penalty of sin — not of divine ap- pointment, but contrary to the divine will. God, rather, appointed that Adam and his race should not die. The gentleman's whole theory of salvation is built on this supposition. If death was actually of divine appoint- ment, his whole theory falls to the ground. By the way, this notion that Adam would not have died if he had not sinned, sets one to thinking. Of course, then, if, before he sinned, he had sunk to the bottom of one of the rivers near his garden, and had stuck in the mud, he might have remained there to the present time without drowning ! Or if a huge rock had fallen on him when taking an evening walk at the out- skirts of the garden, and smashed him as flat as a pancake, he would not have died ! Or if a tiger had torn him to pieces, eaten him, and digested him, he would not have died ! If either, or all of these disasters, had happened to father Adam before .he sinned, he would not have died, if death was the result of sin. I hope my friend will enlighten us right here. He next proceeded to show that the wicked were to be punished when Christ would come. That is not 26o Oral Discussion. doubted. He then assumed, that the punishment is after death, and by that he means, not immediately after death, but after tlie judgmejit at the end of time, for then he thinks Christ will come, and then the punishment begin. Remember, he locates the coming, the judgment, the punishment, not in this world, but in eternity; not now, but at the end of time. But he thinks there is a hell this side of the judgment^ and a pretty hot one, too. The wicked, who died six thousand years ago, have been in it six thousand years; and if the judgment should be delayed six thousand years more, they will be in hell six thousand years longer, making, in all, twelve thousand years. And be there all that time too without being judged I It strikes me rather forcibly that is a hard case. As I have remarked, in my friend's estimation, this hell is a very hot place. The hell in which was the " Rich Man" of the parable, he thinks, is the hell into which all the wicked have been stowed away from the begin- ning, and, if that is in the future world, it is anything but a comfortable place in which to spend ten or twenty thousand years. The Rich Man was " tormented in these flames," and he was so hot that he begged for " a drop of water to cool " his tongue. To torment men thus thousands of yeai'S without judging them, would not be as fair as it would be to hang criminals first and then judge them. These are only some of the beauties of the endless punishment theory. I expect to present more of them ere long. He then read 2 Peter ii. 4-9, to prove that men will be punished when Christ comes at the end of time. But he strangely overlooked the important fact, that there is not a word said in the passage about Christ's coming; not a word about the resurrection; judgment — Punishment. 261 not a word about the end of time; not a word about the future state. He assumed \i all refers to scenes be- yond the resurrection morn; and, on that baseless assump- tion., he builds his future endless hell ! Some imgodly persons were reserved unto the day — or a day, according to the Greek — of judgment to be punished. But was that judgment to be defended thousands of years, and thev in " these flames " all the time without being judged.-* So asserts my friend. But Peter did not think the judgment was so far off. Speaking of those same ungodly persons, he said they were bringing " upon themselves swift destruction," "whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not." My brother thinks their judgment has lingered about two thousand years, and may linger two thousand longer. But the apostle said, most two thousand years ago, that the judgment LINGERETH NOT; that a SWIFT JUDGMENT was coming vipon them. This very chapter, then, that my friend read, affords additional evidence, that the judgment was at hand when the apostles were preaching and writing. The antedeluvians were reserved till the ark was built; the Sodomites v\^ere reserved till Lot was safe; the un- godly of which Peter spoke were reserved to a judgment, whicli, in Peter's day, was to come upon them swiftly ; it was not to linger. -^ He then read about God being able to destroy %oxi\ and body in hell, Gehenna. No doubt, God was able to de- stroy men and women in Gehenna., or anywliere else. But does that prove he v/ould do so.^ Besides, if persons should be literally destroyed they would not suffer end- less punishment, and his proposition is false. It seems, that my friend's theology has several hells. One between death and the resurrection. He thinks the 263 Oral Discussion. Rich Man, and all the rest of the wicked, are in that hell. It has been crowded for thousands of years, and still there are ample accommodations, such as they are. That hell and its fires will be kept up till the resurrection, and then it will be evacuated, and its inhabitants, after being judged, will be stowed away in another hell. And he quotes Rev. xx. to prove such abominations. Before this discussion closes I expect to present still more evi- dence that the " lake of fire," in that chapter, does not relate to the immortal world. I have already proved, that the judgment of that book long since took place. He read two other passages, to which I intend to give due consideration. As my time is about out, I will kindly tell my friend, that he should not assume that all those passages he reads refer to the future world. He had better read a less number, and try to p7'ove they sustain his proposition. [ Time expired. [mr. Sweeney's third speech.] I shall devote this speech to the gentleman's two replies, that as yet remain unnoticed. Let us turn first and ex- amine Matt. xvi. 37, 38: "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father, with his angels; and then he shall reward eveiy man according to his work?. Verily I say imto you, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." The coming of the Son of man, spoken of in the fii'st of these verses, is evidently his coming in judgment; and if it can be shown to be past, then I am defeated, the judgment is past, and "every man" has already been rewarded "according to Judgment — Punishment. 263 his works." To prove that this coming is past, my op- ponent assumes that it is the same as the " coming in his kingdom," mentioned in the succeeding verse, which was to take place before some then standing by should " taste of death." He says, " It is as clear as daylight that only one coming is spoken of in the whole passage." Not to my mind. On the contrary, I am quite certain that there are two events spoken of in the whole passage; the one to be the end of what the other was to be the beginning. If the Savior meant, in the twenty-eighth . verse, to repeat what he had said in the twenty-seventh, for the sake of teaching the proximity of the event, why did he not use the same language descriptive of it.^" Why did he so change his phraseology? In the first he says, "the Son of man shall come [how?] in the glory of his Father^ with his angels ; and then shall he reward every man according to his works." In the second place he speaks of an event entii'ely different, one that should transpire before some who were standing by should taste of death. And how does he describe it? "The Son of man coming [how? "In the glory of his Father, with his angels, to reward every man accord- ing to his works"? No. How., then, will some live to see him coming?] in his kingdom" Some who heard him were not to taste of death till they should see him entering upon his reign, at the end of which reign he would "come in the glory of his Father, with his angels, to reward every man according to his works." I illus- trate the whole passage in this way: I say to this people. Next Sunday I shall preach in Chicago; and then to give some assurance of the fact, I add, Verily I say unto you. To-morrow morning you shall see me get on the car at your depot. When you see the beginning you may 264 Oral Discussion. the more confidently look for the end. Under what cir- cumstances did Jesus speak of coming to this world in the glory of the great God, and commanding all the holy angels, to judge all men, and pass upon them a sentence that should fix their everlasting destinies? Let us consider this matter one moment. He was born in the lowest depths of obscurity, and in the most abject poverty. His earliest wails were heard by none, perhaps, but his mother, Joseph, and the beasts of the stall. He was brought up in obscurity. He never went to school a day in his life. His few friends were, like himself, poor and powerless. He was, therefore, so far as any man could see, destitute of every element of power. The world frowned upon him, and scoffed at his claims. His divinity was not yet known, as that remained to be " demonstrated by the resurrection from the dead." Standing thus, poor, friendless, powerless, so far as men could see, amid the scoffs, scowls, scorn, sneers and jeers of all who had place and power, he says: " The Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father, with his an^-els, and then shall he I'cxvard every 77ian according to his works." What an astounding claim! Who was ready to admit it.? What was there to be seen that would indicate its truthfulness.'* Then, very properly, he proceeds to let them know that even some of them should live to see some evidence of the final fulfillment of the astounding announcement he had made : " 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 his kingdom." But he did not say any of them should live till he should " come in the glory of his Father, with his angels, to reward every man according to his works." He did not teach them that they were Judgment — Punishment. 265 to expect their reward in this life. On the contrary, he had ah'eady said, " Thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just." See Luke xiv. 14. Hence the dying Paul said, " There is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me at that day" — the resurrection. " Coming in his kingdom," here, does not mean a Hteral and personal coming, and may not be, and is not, called the " second coming of Christ." Mark and Luke both call it the coming of the kingdom of God, neither of them calling it, in any sense, the coming of Christ. Then the gentleman refers us to Matt. x. 23: "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily 1 say unto you, ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of man be come," Let it be observed, however, that the Savior did not tell his disciples that they should not "have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of man be come in his glory., attdall the holy angels ivith hifn, to reward every man according to his -works." Next the gentleman garbled a passage in Matt. xxiv. To Matthew xxiv. I shall go with him: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days, shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her lio-ht, and the stars shall foil from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven : and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the qlouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Now learn a parable of the fig- 266 Oral Discussion. tree; when his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh : so Hkewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say vuito you, this genera- tion shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." I. What means the "tribulation of those days".^ Well, we will agree, perhaps, that it means the tribula- tion to be brought upon the Jewish people. It began with the destruction of their city and temple, and their dispersion; but has it ended yet.'' I answer, «o. Luke xxi. 23-24: "For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But wo unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations : and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." " These be the days of vengeance " — that is, " the tribulation of those days " — " they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations; and Jerusalem shall be trodden under foot of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles he ful- jilledr Are "the times of the Gentiles fulfilled" yet.? I think not. Is not Jerusalem still " trodden under foot of the Gentiles".'' I think it is. Then is "the tribula- tion of those days" past.? Of course not. Tribulation is still upon that people, and their city is still " trodden under foot of the Gontiles;" but the sign of the com- ing" of the Son of man is to appear " immediately after the tribulation of those days ; " therefore, the sign tliat is to precede the coming of the Son of man is yet future. yudgment — Punishment. 267 2. "This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." My friend assumes that genea^ here rendered " generation," is used in the sense of " a period of thirty years," which is one of its meanings. But such is not its primary meaning. Primarily it means race. Such, doubtless, is its meaning here. " This race" — the Jewish people — "shall not pass" — shall not become extinct, as a people — " till all these things be fulfilled." To this agree former prophecies concerning the matter. Let us read Jeremiah xxx. ii : "Though I make a full end of all nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make siftdl end of thee." God has made a " full end " of all ancient peoples but the Jews, and he has preserved them in their dispersion, and does presen-e them, distinct from all other peoples. Even in our composite nationality the Jew comes here and re- mains here distinctly a Jew — " a proverb," and " an as- tonishment," and a "hissing," and a "by-word." This fulfills what the Savior said — " This generation " — this race — this people — "shall not pass" — shall not become extinct as a people — "till all these things be fulfilled." "All these things "are to be fulfilled upon the Jews; for the Lord said by Moses, almost fifteen hundred years before, speaking of these very tribulations — " And they shall be upon thee for a sign and for a wonder, and upon thy seed forever^ Deut. xxviii. 46. The gentleman tries to break the force of the pas- sage in 2 Peter iii,, by showing that it was to be fulfilled " in the last days," and that John said, " it is the last time." But " the last days," and " the last time," do not mean always specifically the same thing in New Testa- ment usage, any more than in common usage. What is meant by either one of those phrases must be determ- 268 Oral Discussion. ined by its connection. " The last days" may mean the last days of the Jewish dispensation, or the last days of the Christian dispensation, or tlie Cliristian dispensation itself. So of " the last time." The gentleman, how- ever, assumes that these phrases always indicate the close of the Jewish dispensation ; and a mere assumption it is. Now, admitting, as the gentleman assumes, that " last days" and "last time" mean the same, I am ready to defeat him in his position as to their import, by Peter's own use of the phrase " in the last time." Turn to his first epistle, i. 3, 4, 5 : " Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which, according to his abund- ant mercy, hatli begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time.'^ Does " the last time" here mean the last days of the Jewish dispensation.'' Did Peter and his brethren realize their "hope" to which they were " begotten by the resurrection of Jesus Christ," in the last days of the Jewish dispensation.'' Did they then receive the inheritance " incorruptible^ zindejiled, and that fadeth not away"? Was all this "reserved in heaven" for such as were kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, to be re- vealed in the last days of the Jewish dispensation .^ ! Will my friend give up the incorruptible inheritance, the undefiled and unfading inheritance, the " hope " in- spired by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, for the sake of getting by the judgment.^ The fiact is, however, that one must give up the whole Gospel — its hope, the everlasting life, the incorruptibility it promises, J udgment — Punishtuent. 269 and everything else — must have all to have been accom- plished and realized about the time Jerusalem was de- stroyed — or he must give up Universalism. My friend seems determined to hold on to Universalisn-} and escape the judgment and hell, if he loses every promise of the resurrection and heaven ! The gentleman tells us that, " when the kingdom was set up, Christ is represented as coming;" and that, " when the kingdom is to be returned to God, it is said Christ will come;" and he further tells us that both these " comings are called glorious," the only difference between them being that "judgment is connected with his coming in his kingdom, but not with his coming at the end of his reign." But I deny squarely that his coming in his kingdom is anywhere called his "glorious appearing," or his coming "in glory." I deny, also, that "judgment is connected with his coming in his kingdom," in the Bible, in a single instance. It may be so in my opponent's mind, but not in the word of God. Let the gentleman show what he has asserted on this point to be true, if he can. But, of course, he cannot. I have shown that judgment is connected with his com- ing " in glory, and all the holy angels with him," and that his coming " in glory, and all the holy angels with him," is connected with the resurrection of the dead^ and the glory of his saints. His coming in'his kingdom, or entering upon his I'eign, is never called his "glorious appearing," or his coming " in his glory, and all the holy angels with him ; " neither is there any resurrection of the dead connected with it — neither judgment, nor pun- ishment of the wicked, nor glory of the saints. If, as Mr. Manford assumes, and propounds to us so oracularly, "the judgment commenced" when Christ 270 Oral Discussion. entered upon his reig^n — "when his kingdom was set up" — is it not singuhir that the apostles, who were in his kingdom, never speak of hving in the judgment day, but, on the contrary, always refer to it as future, even when dying, as in the case of Paul? True, as the gentleman told us, the Savior taught that men will be judged by his word, but that judgment is, by tlie Savior himself, put in the future : " He that re- jecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him : the word that I have spoken the same shall judge him at the last day" True, Christ will judge men "by the Gospel," as the gentleman told us; but is that a present judgment, as my friend teaches, or is it to be in the future? Paul shall answer: "For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish with- out law, and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law, * * * * {ji the day when God shall judge the seci'ets of men by Jesus Christ according to my Gospel." Rom. ii. 12-16. This puts " the day" when men shall be judged by Jesus Christ, in the future. But did not Paul live and teach in the Gospel day ? Was he not in the kingdom ? He said he was. And so \vere all the apostles ; and yet they all speak of the judgment as future — notwithstanding, that, according to Mr. Manford's position, they were all living in the day of judgment! And how did it happen that they lived and died witliout making the discovery? ! Per- haps Mr. Manford can tell us. I desire his attention to this jDoint. He says, when the apostles in the Acts and in their Epistles refer to "the day of judgment" as future, they refer to the coming kingdom of Christ, whereas the kingdom had already come and they were in it. This fact completely upsets his position as to the y udgment — Punishmejtt. 27 1 day of judgment. He will have to fall back upon the old ground, that the destruction of Jerusalem was the day of judgment. The gentleman tells us that, when " Christ's kingdom was established, his judgment began," and that he "judges in that kingdom." This being true, he, of course, only judges citizens of the kingdom — saints! and yet he says the "quick and the dead" of which Christ is ordained to be the judge, are " saints and sin- ners" — that is, citizens of his kingdom and aliens! I notice that my opponent is, after all, much like all other Universalists in his exegesis of scripture. All that does not suit him \% figurative I It is hard to catch him who so treats the word of God. Any one can maintain almost any position if allowed that liberty. The judgment to come that Paul reasoned of before Felix was, that about " one year after " Felix was to be " recalled to Rome for his extortion " ! That caps the climax! Paul was speaking, by request, "concerning the faith in Christ," and he made the astounding an- nouncement, fraught with such thrilling interest to man- kind in all ages to come, that Felix was going to lose his office!! When Paul said at Athens, "God has appointed a day in which he 'will judge the world in righteousness," he referred, the gentleman tells us, to the time when " Christ would come in his kingdom." But Christ had already come in his kingdom, and Paul was in it. Still Paul spoke of the day of judgment as future. And he looked forward to that day when he was ready to die — " There is," said he, " laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge^ [and this is the passage my friend dismissed as having no judgment in 2^3 Oral Discussion. it !] shall give me at that day" At '■johat day ? Why, of course, "that day in which he xvill judge the world in righteousness." "That day" was a day to which Paul looked foi'waixl when he had " finished his course." And that day in which Paul expected to receive from the righteous Judge a crown of righteousness after his death, he connected with the coming of Christ, too; for he adds to what I have quoted — "And not to me only [will the Lord, the righteous Judge, give a crown of righteousness at that day], but unto all them, also, that love his appearing" So here we have the " appearing" of Christ, and " that day " in which " he will judge the world in righteousness," all pointed forward to as future, by an apostle who had lived and laboi'ed in the king- dom, and was " now ready" to die, having finished his course. This is perfectly conclusive, as to the coming of Christ and the judgment of the world. I feel like saying I have here an argument that can never be met. The gentleman quotes i Peter iv. 5 : "Who shall give account to him who is ready to judge the quick and the dead" — giving almost frightful emphasis to the word "ready." Why did he not let the word "shall" have a shai"e of the emphasis? — "who shall give account to him," etc. Of course, Christ was " ready to judge the quick and dead," for he had already been " ordained to be the judge of the quick and dead." But Peter did not say he was then .judging the quick and dead, as he should have said, if my friend is right in saying that "his judgment began when his kingdom was set up;" for his kingdom was already set up, and Peter was in it. So this passage turns out terribly against my friend's position. Then we have James summoned, who says, "the yudgme/it — Punishtnent. 273 coming of the Lord draweth nigh." So it did, and it has been drawing nearer ever since. But James did not speak of the setting up of the kingdom, for that had been set up several years before. Next, the gentleman quotes Paul in 3 Tim. iv. i : " Who shall judge the quick and dead at his appearing and his kingdom." This cannot mean at his appearing- to set up his kingdom, for that was past. The kingdom had been set up, and Paul was in it. Christ " shall judge the quick and dead at his appearing [and the tri- umph of] his kingdom "—when all enemies shall be destroyed, and the kingdom delivered up to God the Father. My opponent thinks the passage in Revelation that speaks of the resurrection, and the judgment following it, is quite figurative, and has been fulfilled long since! He thinks it was all fulfilled long ago, because that book was a revelation of things " which," it was said, " must shortly be done" — » must shortly come to pass" — which were " at hand," etc. And so all Universalists contend, at times. But it is a fact somewhat damaging to their consistency in this position, that when it serves their cause they quote the language of this same book and give it a future application — an application to the im- mortal world! Mr. Manford has done so, as I can and will show if my statement is questioned ! Of course it had "slipped his mind" just at that time that this book revealed only things that were ''shortly to come to pass" —which were "at hand"— and, therefore, long since fulfilled ! If my friend can quote the language of this book, and apply it beyond the resurrection of the dead, why may not I contend that it speaks of the resurrection and the judgment that is to follow.? The fixct is, some ( 274 Oral Discussion. things spoken of in this book have been fulfilled long since; some not so long since; while some are yet to be fulfilled, and among the last are the resurrection of the dead, and the judgment. Another fact is, that, this book was certainly written after the setting up of the kingdom, and hence after the coming of Christ " in his kingdom ;" and, therefore, the coming of Christ therein spoken of, as in the future when the book was written, was his final coming, and not his coming in his king- dom. That the kingdom had come when John wrote this book is simply certain, for he says, in the first chapter, when beginning to write, that he was " in the kingdom" of Jesus Christ, at the same time that he was " in the isle of Patmos." What the gentleman said about those passages I cited, wherein the Savior specified and named certain persons who should '•'•rise tip in the judgment" with the people he addressed, I shall pass, with one word. He simply assumed that the Savior meant nothing ! On the passage in Heb. ix. 27, the gentleman labored so hard, that he made a pretty heavy draught upon my sympathies. I. He tells us that the pronoun "they" in the first verse of the following chapter " refers to the noun men in the verse under consideration ; " and that as " they offered sacrifices year by year continually," they were " the Jewish high priests." Hence he concludes that it was "appointed unto the Jewish high priests once to die." I deny that "they" of the tenth chapter i"efers to " men" of the ninth, as its antecedent. The antecedent to the pronoun they is imderstood in the very verse in which it occurs; and there is, therefore, no necessity of going on such a journey backward to find one for it. Again: Judgment — PunisJiment. 275 if Mr. Manford's position were coiTect, Paul would have said, " It xvas appointed unto men [that is, the Jewish high priests] once to die," etc. But when he says, "It is appointed unto men once to die," he shows that he speaks of an appointment still in force. 2. What was the death that the high priests died .? The learned gentleman tells us it was "killing those ani- mals, shedding their blood." But that was a sacerdotal function that was repeated often — a duty that the priests did "yeaf by year" — whereas the text in controversy says, " It is appointed unto men once to die " — not often — not " year by year continually." What did the high priests do that they did not repeat often.'' Can the gentleman tell us.'' All that he said about Moses and the high priests dying typically is without any foundation in the Bible. It is extemporized by Universalists to evade the force of the passage under consideration. Neither Moses nor the priests did anything that was called dying typically. Calves, and goats, and lambs, died, and their blood was typical of the blood of the Lamb of God. The gentleman might better say those calves and goats were the gejztlemen to whom it was appointed to die typically ! 3. "After this the judgment." We are told that when " the high priest disappeared, and entered into the 'Holiest of all,'" and then reappeared, "before the people, he passed judgment upon them." Where did the gentleman learn all this ? Is there anything in the Bible about it.? Not ofie syllable. The Bible is just as silent about the priests passing judgment upon the people, when they returned from the Holiest of all, as it is about their dyittg^ and about their dying it is as silent as is the nic^ht of the grave. 276 07-al Discussion. The gentleman's dissertation upon the typical aspects of the Jewish priesthood was " clear as mud." He told us that the priest's going into the Holiest of all " typified Christ's entering paradise;" that the reappearance of the high priest "typified Christ's resurrection^ which was his second appearing^ Indeed ! Here the gentleman has made a perfect "smash up" of his theology. Did not the resuiTection of Christ take place before any of the apostolic preaching was done, which is recorded in the book of Acts, and before any of the apostolic epistles were written ? Did not the apostles in their sermons, in the Acts, and in their epistles to the churches, often speak of a future coming of Christ and a future judg- ment.'* And has not the gentleman taken the position all along that these references made by the apostles to a future coming of Christ in judgment were to his com- ing in his kingdom, then soon to take place ? But now he puts his coming in his kingdom and in judgment before all apostolic preaching and writing! This is a terrible blunder! and one I was hardly expecting "the hero of a hundred battles" to make. Now, I say that the entering of the high priest into the " Holiest of all " t\'pified not Christ's entering into paradise after his crucifixion, " but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us, * * * and unto them that look for him shall [not did., at his resurrection] he appear the second time without sin [oftering] unto salvation." Heb. ix. 24-2S. His second coming will be his glorious appearing, because " he shall come in his ^lory" from heaven., and because his saints shall be "raised in glory," and shall "appear with him in glory." He "shall come to be glorified in his saints." The gentleman says, if I understand him correctly, that yudgment — Punishment. 277 when he rose from the dead — which he now makes his second coming — "he showed himself to the world in his spiritual and glorified formy This I squarely deny. Jesus was not glorified till he ascended to heaven. Christ died once. He entered into heaven once. He made one offering for sin. Because "it is apj^ointed unto men once to die ; but after this the [one] judgment." Such is the simple teaching of the passage under con- sideration. Mr. Alanford tells you, however, that I do not believe that it is appointed unto men once to die a physical death; and that I am therefore inconsistent in making the use I do of this passage. He told you all about what I do and what I do not believe about Adam, and sin, and death. Of course, I am very much obliged! But if you wish to know exactly what I think about those matters, perhaps you might better apply to 7ne. Whether it was divinely appointed unto men once to die before " sin entered into the world, and death by sin" or not, it certainly was afterward. " Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return," and "cursed is the earth for thy sake," divinely appointed death unto all flesh. And doubtless this is the very appointment the Apostle refers to in the passage in question. The gentleman tries to make out the Bible somewhat absui'd, because it teaches that wicked men are unhappy and tormented before the day of judgment. But there is nothing absurd about it. Wicked men, in this world, are unhappy, miserable, and often imprisoned, " resei*ved unto judgment," for a long time before they are sen- tenced to the punishment that the law prescribes as the penalty for their offenses. We are told that there are "several hells" in my the- 278 Oral Discussion, ology. The gentleman knows, I presume, that there are three different words in the Greek Testament trans- lated into the English word hell, in the common version of the Bible; and is it possible that he means to trijle with the English scholar on this matter? I hope not. When I tell you that I rely merely upon the English word "hell" to prove my proposition, then many of the sharp and funny things the gentleman gets oft' — so ten-i- bly at the expense of the gi^avity one should bring to the discussion of this subject — will seem to have a slight semblance of pertinency to the discussion. But now all can see, who wish to, that they serve no worthy pur- pose w^hatever. The gentleman has his sport not at what I say, but at what is found in the word of God. In one of the passages of scripture I quoted, the phrase, '•''the day of judgment," occurs, and Mr. Manford tells us it is "a day, according to the Gi'eek." That's a little amusing. Will he be kind enough to tell us what the Greek for "a day" is? The gentleman seems to think the Savior was only tiying to make-believe — in fact, was only trifling a little with his disciples — when he told them to fear him who was able to destroy both soul and body in hell {gehen?ia)^ knowing that it was certain he would never do it. That, I presume to say, was hardly satisfactory to his friends — I hope not even to himself. Besides, he thinks if men "should be literally destroyed they could not suffer endless punishment." I suppose he means by this to assume that to "destroy" means to extinguish, to annihi- late. But the word destroy, when used in connection with persons, never once has such meaning in all its scripture usage. If he thinks it does, let him undertake to show the fact, and I will^bc with him. yudgincni — Pu n ish me fit. 279 The gentleman "kindly tells" me that I would better read fewer passages of scripture, and spend more time trying to prove that they sustain my position. But I feel so confident that the scriptures I advance teach just what I wish to establish, that the worthy gentleman's "kindly" admonition is lost upon me. But, by way of returning his kindness, I beg permission to suggest to my opponent, that if Jesus and the apostles had taught Universalism, then Universalists would not be laid under the unpleasant necessity of spending so much of their time trying to prove that their quotations teach Uni- versalism. [ Time expired. [mr. manford's third reply.] Before replying to Mr. Sweeney's last speech, I will offer additional testimony, that God's judgments are in the earth. According to the Old Testament, God judges mankind in this world. In proving this, I shall not refer you to the special judgments that came on the Jews, but to the general providence of God. Adam, the first man, sinned, and he was judged and punished. The Judge of all the earth revealed to him, that in the day HE SINNED HE SHOULD SURELY DIE. Not a WOrd about a judgment at the end of time, not a word about an endless hell, endless punishment, or endless death. These are all the inventions of men. Adam was judged in the day he sinned, was punished in the day he sinned. He died to innocence, to purity; died in trespasses and sins. The law that condemned Adam is still in force, hence St. Paul tells us, that " death passed on all men, for that all have sinned." Rom. v. 12. Adam 2So Oral Discussion. sinned, and he suffered the penalty — moral death. All men sin, and all men suffer the penalty — moral death. As Adam suffered it on the day he sinned, all men suffer it on the day they sin. Here is proof from the Old Testament, and the New Testament, that God judges in the earth. Listen to the apostle James to the same effect : " Blessed is the man that endureth temptation ; for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life." Mark, he shall receive the crown, when he is tried. Virtue, then, is now rexuarded. The saint is now crowned. He continues, " then, when lust hath conceived, it bring- eth forth sin ; and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." James i. 12, 15. Here we are taught, that when the sinful deed is finished, is committed, then we suffer the penalty — death. Do not suffer the whole of it immediately, but it begins then. James and Paul only repeat what the Lord revealed to the first man. This same truth runs through the Bible. I will read still more from the Old Testament: " But the Lord shall endure forever; he has prepared his throne for judg- ment. And he shall judge the world in righteousness ; he shall minister judgment to the people in upright- ness. * * The Lord is known by the judgment which he executeth." Ps. ix. 7, 8, 16. God is 7iow on the throne of judgment, he now executeth judgment — not will do it millions of ages hence. Again, " yus- tice and judgment are the habitation of thy throne." Ps. Ixxxix. 14. Justice and judgment are not held in abeyance till the end of time, but God now deals justly with the sons of men ; he 7iow judges them. David also says, " The judgments of the Lord are true; " " I will praise thee, because of thy x\^\iQ.o\\% judgments ;''^ "thy judgments are right;" "upright are thy judgments;" yudgjnent — Punishment. 28 1 "his judgments are in all the earth;" " I saw tinder the sun the place of judgment." All these scriptures, and hundreds more of the same miport, teach that God judges the world now. This language is all in the present tense. We have seen, that during the New Testament dis- pensation, God judges the world by the Gospel of Christ — by the new light it has infused into our minds and our morals. Mr. Sweeney puts the judgment off to the end of time. I have proved, though, that it pertains to the reign of Christ, and commenced when his reign began. His reign is on earth, and hence his judgment is on earth. How well this corresponds with the Old Testa- ment predictions of the Messiah's reign and judgment. I will read some of them : " I saw in the night vision, 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. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, tliat all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be de- stroyed." Dan. vii. 13, 14. This is the same coming of "the Son of man" so often spoken of in the New Testament, and which the Son of man himself said should take place before some of his heai^ers would die. Daniel said he would come " with the clouds of heaven ; " and Christ said the same. And when he should come, according to the prophet and the Savior, there would be " given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom." The same is spoken of by Isaiah : " For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given : and the govertiment shall be upon his shoulders. * * Of the increase of 24 283 Oral Discussion. his govermncnt and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom^ to order it, and to establish it with, j udg ment and Justice^ Isa. ix. 6, 7- This is the same government, kingdom, and judgment of Christ, which the New Testament informs us commenced eighteen hundred years ago, and which my friend so strangely locates at the end of time. " Out of Zion shall go forth the law — the law or Gospel of Christ — and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And he — Christ — shall judge among the nations, and rebuke many people." Now observe, that the result of Christ's judgment was to be salvation — not ruin to countless millions in hell. "And they shall beat their swords into plow-shares, and their spears into pruning- hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. * * The Lord shall be exalted in that DAY." Isa. ii. 3, 4, 17. This is the day of judgment my friend locates at the end of the world; but the prophet locates it on the earth. The same prophet further writes, " Behold a king shall reign in rigiiteousness, and princes shall rule in JUDGMENT. * * Then judgment shall dwell in the wilderness." Isa. xxxii. i, 16. " Behold my sei"vant, whom I uphold ; mine elect, in whom my soul delight- eth; I will put my spirit upon him; and he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he hath set judgment in the EARTH." Isa. xlii. I, 4. This is the same judgment that Mr. Sweeney, against the whole Bible and common sense, locates at the end of all things. Another prophet, speaking of this same judgment of Christ, says: "Be- hold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign V Judgment — Punishment. 283 and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice IN THE EARTH." Jer. xxiii. 5. It will be observed, that the prophets in predicting the coming of Christ, call him the " Son of man," a King, a Judge. They say he would Reign, — have a Government, a Kingdom. They all assert, that he would exercise justice and judgment during his reign. And they are unanimous in declaring that this judgment would be IN THE EARTH. There can be no doubt, that tills is the same kingdom, and the same judgment, that Christ and the apostles so often spoke of. The prophets locate the kingdom and judgment in this world, and the New Testament locates them in this world. " He that hath ears to hear let him hear." I will now notice my friend's last speech, which is a reply to two of mine. The gentleman again read Matt. xvi. 37, 38, and said, if I could show that the coming, in the twenty-seventh verse, is a past event, he was " defeated." He is, then, already defeated, for I have surely proved that. But, to save himself, he laid his hands on that passage, tore it asunder, and threw several thousand years between the fragments, and then declaimed that one fragment means a coming of Christ eighteen hundred years ago^ and the other fragment means a coming, perhaps, tot thousand years hence I If I should so cut up the words of our Savior, my friend would justly be filled with horror. But he did this to save himself from defeat. Men do desperate things sometimes to prevent defeat. This very desperation of his is evidence enough that he feels his cause is ruined. I cannot understand how a sane man can think there are two comings spoken of in that passage. Biblical students generally, of all creeds, con- 284 Oral Discussion. tend, that only one coming is there taught. Dr. Adam Clarke says there is only one, and takes the same view of the passage I have. "This," says he, "was the glorious mediatorial king- dom which Jesus Christ was about to set up, by the destruction of the Jewish nation and polity, and the diffusion of the Gospel through the whole world. * * And the next verse seems to confirm the above explana- tion, as our Lord evidently speaks of the establishment of the Christian church after the day of Pentecost, and its final triumph after the destruction of the Jewish polity." Dr. Clarke, you see, contends there is only one coining spoken of, and that took place long since. Dr. Cappe takes the same ground. "The dissolution of Judea (Matt. xvi. 37), Is called the coming of the Son of man in the glory of his Father, with his angels." Critical Rem. The learned Rosenmullcr takes the same view of the passage. "In this passage (vei'se 27), reference Is had to the promulgation of the Gospel through the whole world." Dr. LIghtfoot understands it in like " His coming In this place must be understood of his coming to take vengeance against those enemies of his which would not have him to rule over them. * * The day, the time, is called 'the day of the Lord,' his 'coming in the clouds' in his glory, in his kingdom." These eminent men were all believers In the day of judgment my friend talks about, but they were fully persuaded that this passage does not relate to that event. If those learned commentators are right, my friend nilght as well acknowledge he Is defeated, I do not see that it is necessaiy to notice all the gentleman said yudgment — Punishment. 285 about the passage, for his words only darken counsel. The true meaning is so evident, a school boy can hardly fail to understand it. Christ first states that he would come; and then when he would come — before some he addressed would die. Aly friend said that Jesus, in Matt. X., did not say he would come in the glory of his Father, etc. Neither did he say that he would not. Does not the man know, that all of Christ's comings were "in the glory of his Father".? His coming in the flesh, in his kingdom, and at the end of his kingdom, were all " in the glory of his- Father." Does he not know that.'' No doubt, Matt. x. and xvi. refer to the same coming. This is generally admitted. He then went to Matt, xxiv., where Christ again spoke of coming in " power and glory," and contended that coming has not taken place. He said I "garbled" that chapter. No such a thing. I will present four arguments, showing that chapter was fulfilled long since. I. It was to be fulfilled at the end of the Jewish age, and that took place in the first century. The disciples asked, " What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world ? " Verse 3. The word rendered "world" is aion^ and means age; hence Hammond, Le Clerc, Whitby, Pearce, Doddridge, Macknight, Wake- field, Kenrick, and hosts of other Bible scholars, render it age in this place. The Jews divided the entire dura- tion of time into two ages — the age before the beginning of the Messiah's reign, and the age after. They called them this age and the age to come. When Christ was on earth the frst age was about to end; and it was con- cerning the end of that age the disciples inquired. Through the whole chapter Jesus told them what would 286 Oral Discussion. transpire before the end of that age ; and the coming of Christ was one event that would occur. 2. Jesus in that chapter taught that the end of the age was then near. In verse 6 he said, "for all these things shall come to pass, but the end is not j^et, " or not immediately, as Luke has it. Dr. Barnes, the well known Presbyterian commentator, on this says, "The end of the Jewish economy," that is, the end of the first age. Verse 14. "And this Gospel of the kingdom shall be preached to all the world for a witness to all nations, and then shall the end comL" Dr. Barnes says, this was " the end of the Jewish economy." Observe, the end was to come when the Gospel should be preached to all the world. The New Testament says it was pi'cached in the first century in all the world. " But I say. Have they not heard ? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their woixls unto the ends of the world." Rom. x. 18. "If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the Gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven ; whereof I Paul am made a minister." Col. i. 23. As soon as the Gospel should be preached to all the world, the end was to come, and Paul said a few years after, it had been preached " unto the ends of the world," therefore the end of the age took place long since. Here is another evidence, that Christ's coming in "power and glory" is a joast event, for he was to come at the end of that age. 3. The coming in power and glory was to transpire in that generation. "Verily I say unto you," said Christ, "This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled." Verse 34. The gentleman said, "^ jMcigment — Punishment. 287 generation means race. Turn to the first chapter of this book and see the wisdom the gentleman displayed. '• The book of the generation of Christ" — race of Christ, according to my learned brother. " So all the genera- tions (races) from Abraham to David are fourteen generations (races) ; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations [races) ; and from the cariying into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations {races)." The gentleman exhibits wonderful wisdom in the meaning of words. He must have been consulting that curious dictionary of his again. He ought to know that the primary meaning is not race. I will read Greenfield's definition of the Greek. "A family, generation, descent; an age, race, or generation of men, including, upon the average, a space of thirty years." Instead of race being the primary meaning, it is the fifth meaning, which is always the secondary meaning. Learned critics testify to the same. Dr. Whitby says : "These words — this generation shall not pass away — afibrd a full demonstration that all which Christ had said hitherto, was to be accomplished, not at the conversion of the Jews, not at the final judgment day, but in that very age, or whilst some of that generation of men lived; for the phrase never bears any other SENSE IN THE NeW TeSTAMENT, THAN THE MEN OF THIS AGE." — Com. on Matt. xxiv. 34. That is to the point. Lightfoot agrees with him : "This generation shall not pass, etc. Hence it appears plain enough, that the foregoing verses are not to be iniderstood of the last judgment, but of the destruction of the Jewish state." — Com. on Matt. xxiv. 34. Well, Christ was to come in the generation in which 28S Oral Discussion. he lived — another conclusive evidence that my friend is wrong, and lie had better acknowledge he is defeated^ for there never was a man defeated, if he is not. 4. One more evidence, that coming was soon to take place. Jesus told the disciples in that same chapter that they would live to see him come. " Pray ye," said he to them, " that your flight be not in the winter, * * for THEN shall be great tribulation, * * * immedi- ately after the tribulation of those days, * * * and THEN shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven ; * * they shall see the Son of man coming. * * So likefvise YE," my disciples, "when YE shall SEE all these things, know that it is near, even at the door. Verily I say unto YOU, This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled." You see Christ connects all the events of that chapter, and tells the disciples THEY would SEE them all transpire. I have not time to read the whole chapter, but hope you will do so at the first opportunity. This chapter, then, aflbrds four positive proofs, that the coming in "power and glory" was to transpire soon, when Christ was on earth; and these, connected with his declaration that there were some standing near him who would not die till he should come, make it beyond all doubt, that the coming in glory and power was an event near at hand. Dr. Clarke ajjplies this coming "in power and glory" to events then at hand. " ' Then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven.' The plain meaning of this is, that tlie destruction of Jerusalem will be such a remarkable instance of divine vengeance, such a signal manifesta- tion of Christ's 'power and glory,' that all the Jewish tribes shall mourn, and many will, in consequence of this manifestation of God, be led to acknowledge Christ and his religion." Judgment — Punishment. 289 Rev. A. Campbell is also against Mr. Sweeney. He says: " Some of the disciples not only saw the Son of man enter upon his reign, and the kingdom of God come on the day of Pentecost, and carry its conquest over Judea, Samaria, and to the uttermost parts of the earth, but they SAW the Lord 'come with power' and awful GLORY, and accomplish all his predictions on the deserted and devoted temple, city and people."' — " Ch. Restored^'' p. 174. Nothing can be plainer than, that the coming of Christ "in power and glory," was soon to transpire, when Christ was on earth. This is as clear as crystal from Christ's words, from Paul's words, from John's words, from Peter's words. And Ave have seen that the most eminent Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian and Episcopalian theo- logians take this view of that coming. And Mr. Camp- bell, the most intelligent, learned, and prominent man in my friend's church, endorses the same. My friend stands almost alone. He has said, if I proved that the coming "in power and glory" is past, he was defeated. He certainly is defeated — defeated by inspiration, reason, and common sense — defeated by the learned world — defeated by his own brother Campbell. But perhaps he is like Gen. Taylor's soldiers on a certain occasion — " whipped, but did not know it." The gentleman admitted, that "last days" sometimes mean the last days of the Jewish dispensation. Very well. He also said, we must determine by the connec- tion what time is referred to. Agreed. The passa^-e in 2 Peter iii. determines that Christ was to come in the "last days;" and during those "last days," scoffers, walk- ing after their own lusts, were to say, " Where is the 35 290 Oral Dtsaission. promise of his coming?" Now, if it can be proved, that those "scoffers" were Hving when Peter wrote that epistle, of course the " last days " had come, and Christ was about to appear. Speaking of the scoffers, Peter said, "For this they — the scoffers — willingly ARE ignorant" — not shall be at some future time. The scoffers were living and scoffing when Peter penned the passage. They are called antichrists. " Little children, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that antichrist — or scoffers — shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know it is the last TIME." I John ii, 18. The matter is settled. Christ was to appear in "power and glory" in judgment, in the "last days." In those "last days" scoffers or anti- christs were to appear. And as they were living when Peter and John wrote, the "last days" had come, and Christ was about to appear. Here is another evidence that the gentleman is defeated, whether he knows it or not. The "inheritance" and the "salvation" in i Pe- ter i. are two different things. In the "last days" of the Jewish dispensation, distress and tribulation were to come on the people, as Matt. xxiv. teaches; and the faithful were to be saved from them. The Bible speaks of temporal salvation as well as spiritual, as my friend ought to know. The gentleman denied several things "squarely," to use his word. He might "squarely" deny there is a God, but that would hardly prove there is no God. So he may "squarely" deny all the Nev^ Testament and Old Testament say about Christ's judgment being in the earthy but we shall want something besides his "square" denial. The gentleman tried to make a distinction between Judgment — Punishment. 291 Christ's judging by his zvord and judging personally. It is a useless eftbrt. The Bible says, "Verily there is a God that jUDGETH IN TPiE EARTH, but he judges by the la-ws he has established. So Christ judges in the earth; but it is by the word of truth. That answers all he said on that subject. Again, he said, the judgment was future in Paul's day, and I represent it as having com- menced. It was present and future. It had com- menced, and would continue till the whole world should submit to the rule, reign, government, judgment of Christ. It commenced in Christ's day, but was not fully established till many years after. Rewards and punish- ments are present and future, because men not only live noiv^ but will live in the fziture. The gentleman further said, that the kingdom was set up on the day of Pente- cost, and I represent it as not being set up then. The truth is, it was commenced in the days of Christ, and has been extending farther and farther ever since. It has not yet come to many hearts, and Christ has not yet come to many hearts. But before the Savior's work shall be finished, that kingdom will be set up in every heart, and Christ will come to every heart. It takes only a few words to answer his little objections. Yes, Felix not only " lost his office," but was disgraced at home and abroad, like Arnold and Burr of this land. But that judgment v^^as nothing in Air. Sweeney's estimation. Nothing but a big blazing, roaring, roasting furnace is any judgment in his estimation. He cannot comprehend how a man can " tremble" in view of a temporal judg- ment at his door. That is past his comprehension. He said, " I deny that ' they,' in Hebrews, refers to ' men ' as its antecedent." He may deny it till his hair shall be gray, but all that will not set aside the rules of 293 Oral Discussion. grammar. Any school boy or girl knows " men" is the antecedent of '* they." But then grammar, rhetoric, com- mon sense, must all give way, when my friend makes a "square" denial. As "they" does refer to " men," of course, Paul speaks only of the priests who offered sacrifices. He said, " Moses did not die typically." He died some kind of a death. Says Paul, "For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death OF THE TESTATOR. For a testament is of force after MEN ARE DEAD." Now, Moscs was the testator of the testament while he was living in the flesh. He must, then, have died some kind of a death before he died temporally. That is a plain case. The connection shows what kind of a death it was. Blood was shed on the altar, a sacrifice was inade, and that is called the death of the testator, and that gave the testament "force." It is of no use to deny this. Well, the high priests were appointed to offer the same sacrifice-^to die the same death. They were appointed once to do it — once at the Annual Atonement, and only once on that occasion. But the judgment connected with that typical death my friend does not understand. I will read Moses' instruction to the priests : " And thou shalt make a breast-plate of judgment. * * And Aaron shall bear the names of the children of Israel in the breast- plate oi judgment upon his heart, w^hen he goeth in unto the holy place. * * And thou shalt put in the breast-plate oi judgment the Urim and the Thummlm; and they shall be w^ow Aaron's heart when he goeth before the Lord : and Aaron sliall bear the judgmcfit of the children of Israel upon his heart before the Lord continually." Ex. xxviii. 15, 39, 30. The priest, when he offered sacrifices for the sins of the people, when he Judgment — PunisJunent. 293 went into the " Holiest of all," carried this breast-plate oi judgment on his heart, and when he was through, the judgment was, that an atonement had been made for the worshipers; their sins were forgiven; they were clean from all their sins before the Lord. Lev. xvi. 30. That was typical of the atonement that Christ has made for the sins of the world. Christ's resurrection was his second appearing to the world. Is not that a fact, let it " smash up" whom it may.^ It may "smash up" Mr. Sweeney's isms, but it harms nothing I have said. All the questions he asked right here, only showed he did not know what he was talking about. Christ appeared to the world in the flesh. He appeared to the world after his resurrection several times ; Paul names six different appearings, one of which was to him on the day of his conversion. He also ap- peared to John on Patmos several times. And yet the gentleman tells us, that the second appearing has not yet taken place ! ! He has forgotten that he told us he believed Christ came in his kingdom on the day of Pentecost. Now he thinks, that was no coming at all on that occasion; and that the second coming is away in the distant future! What will he not say next.'' It seems he thinks man was made immortal. That it was in the first place "appointed " that man never should die. But Adam sinned, and then there was another ap- pointment. It was then " appomted" that all men should die because Adam sinned. That one sin of one man damned his race. What kind of justice was that.'' It is the same kind of justice, that would torment millions endlessly for the sins of this brief life. But my friend is not exactly orthodox. In a noted book of his denom- ination, written by a noted man, I find the following : 294 Oral Discussioji. " In the victory that the serpent gained over our first parents he has murdered our race." Scheme of Redemption., page 43. It is the serpent., then, that has appointed the death of all men, and he does his bloody work by murdering them. After the devil murders all men physically., the good Lord vv^ill murder nearly all of them spiritually — so we are taught. The devil, though, does his murderous work quick., but the Lord will be eternally about it — so we are taught. Error to be hated, needs but to be seen. My friend said, "The gentleman tries to make out the Bible somewhat absurd because it teaches that wicked men are punished before the judgment." If he had said Mr. Sweeney instead of " the Bible," he would have told the truth. The Bible does not teach that mil- lions will be in hell ten or twenty thousand years before they will be judged, as my friend does. But he thinks there are parallels to this on earth. " Wicked men," he said, "are often imprisoned before sentenced;" before trial and sentence, he meant. That is so. But nearly all are hailed out till the day of trial. Are most that go to my friend's hell bailed out till the judgment day.'' A very considerable portion who are cojnmitted, are ac- quitted on the day of trial. Does my friend expect that any, after being in hell ten or twenty thousand years, will be acquitted, pronounced innocejtt, at the judgment day.^ It would be sad, indeed, if, at the judgment, it should be found that many innocent persons had been in hell, " tormented in those flames" several thousand years, when they should have been in heaven. Then, if innocent ones are in hell, guilty ones may be in heaven; and, after the judgment, will have to take up their endless abode in the hot regions. Then, if the parable Judgment — Punishment. 295 of the Rich Man refers to this heaven and hell between death and the judgment, the rich man may prove him- self innocent, and so go to heaven ; and Abraham and the poor man may be proved guilty and sentenced to endless wo. It occurs to me, that those innocent ones in hell so long ought to have some redress for jalse im-* prison?)ient. You see it only makes my friend's hells and judgment more hideous to compare them to anything in this world. He asked a question about " a day of judgment." Will he say I am incorrect.^ I intend to give his " hells" considerable ventilating before I am through, and will say no more about them now. [ Time expired. [mr. Sweeney's fourth speech.] The gentleman tells you his opponent is " defeated." He doubtless feels that it is necessary for him to advise you of the fact, lest, otherwise, you should never find it out. He thinks, however, that I am " like Gen. Taylor's soldiers" at the battle of Buena Vista: "They were whipped, but did not know it." I think I am " like Gen. Taylor's soldiers " in another particular. If they were whipped, their enemy never found it out. But all the loud talk and stamping of feet, that the gentleman put in, over what he called my " defeat," was mere bluster, to boost a feeble cause. How am I " defeated" } Why, the gentleman claims to have shown, that the coming of Christ " in the glory of his Father with his angels," Matt, xvi. 37, and his " coming in his kingdom" of the next verse, are one and the same thing. But hoxv did he show 296 Oral Discussion. this ? How did he attempt to show it ? He simply read the opinion of a few uninspired men, agreeing with his view of the passage. " Dr. Clarke," and " Dr." some- body else, " thought " the two events described in the passage were <3«e .' and then followed all that vaporing vOver my " defeat" ! It matters very little with me, if the, gentleman did but know it, what Doctors think in a case so plain as the one in hand. I say the passage speaks of two events, because it tiames two events; and of two different events, because it describes thein differently. The gentleman tells you, that to save myself, I laid my hands upon the passage, " tore it asunder, and threw sev- eral thousand years between the fragments." Desperate work! But I say the passage was "asunder" when I found it. The audience saw it, too, and the gentleman, in his defeat, was }iot exactly like " Gen. Taylor's sol- diers." He found it out. And, therefore, as persons in distress generally do, he called aloud for the Doctors. And the veiy first Doctor he called in was one who is not trusted in his own family ! Doctor Clarke is repudi- ated even by the Methodists! Everybody, however, proves his doctrine by Dr. Clarke. Then, it turns out , that the gentleman claims I am " defeated," simply because certain Doctors did not understand this particular passage as I do. That 's all. And yet all these Doctors, as to the proposition we are debating, are with me ; which shows that, in their judgment, my friend can be allowed all he claims as to this particular passage, and still be defeated as to the main question between us. If, there- fore, the opinion of these Doctors is decisive, as to scrip- ture teaching, my opponent is defeated — defeated, too, at the very bar to which he himself appealed. But I will not allow the gentleman as much as the Doctoi's do. I Judgment — Punishment. 297 say that the coming of Christ " in his glory with his angels " is one thing, and his coming " in his kingdom " is another, and quite a different thing. The latter is past, the former is not. The latter means the same as " the kingdom of God coming with power," and took place in the lifetime of some who saw the Savior. With the latter, the resurrection of the dead is never connected ; neither the judgment of the world nor the glory of the saints. With the former, the resurrection, the judgment, the punishment of the wicked, and the glory of the saints are all connected. Christ entered upon his reign, or came " in his kingdom," in the lifetime of his apos- tles. Hi nee they claimed to be "in the kingdom." But at the same time that they claimed to be in the king- dom — impl .ing, of course, that Christ had come " in his kingdom" — they often spoke of di future coming, which was not his coming in his kingdom. With this future coming they connected the resuirection of the dead, the judgment, the punishment of the wicked, and the glory of the saints. This future coming they, of course, never called his coming in his kingdom, that being past; but they described it as his " glorious appearing," his coming " to be glorified in his saints" — to raise them from the dead " in gloiy" — to change their " vile body " and fashion it " like unto his glorious body." The " hope " of the church is, in scripture teaching, most intimately connected with the " glorious appearing " of the Son of God, If that is past, then the resurrection is past ; the resurrection to glory, honor, and immortality ; and the hope of the Gos- pel was realized (by whom God only knows !) somewhere, I suppose, about the time Jerusalem was destroyed ; an event that I have no idea one in a hundred of the Chris- tians to whom Paul wrote (of the " glorious appearing 298 Oral Discussion. of our Savior Jesus Christ," promising them that when Christ should appear they sliould " appear with liira in glory") ever heard! How many of the Colossians (to wliom Paul said, " when Christ who is our life shall appear then shall ye also appear with him in glory") ever heard of the destruction of Jerusalem ? In what " glory " did they " appear with " Christ at that time ? Will the gentleman tell us, and thereby let us know what the " glory " of Universalism is? Before finally dismissing the passage in Matt. xvi. 2']^ 28, I wish to inake one other remark, which is this: It is not at all uncommon for two events to be recorded in two consecutive sentences, that, chrono- logically, stand thousands of years apart, as in this pas- sage. If this statement is questioned, I will make it good. The gentleman tells us that " all of Christ's comings were in the 'glory of his Father.'" Such a statement serves only confusion, and is utterly without foundation in truth. Some such statement must be made, however, to hide distinctions that inight otherwise be apparent. As I have said, the coming of Christ " in glory," his " glorious appearing," is always connected with the res- urrection of the dead and the judgment. Next, the gentleman went to the 24th of Matthew, and I shall follow him. And now let it be distinctly understood, that the point before us for determination is the coming of Christ " in his glory." The gentleman imdertakes to show that that is past, by what the Savior himself taught in this chapter. He, as is his custom, made a good many loose statements about what is here taught, that I have not time to call up in order; but I have ample time to show that this passage has nothing in it for his cause. jfudgmeit t — Pu nlsh men t. 299 All that the Savior said, as recorded in this chapter, was called out by a threefold question, propounded by his disciples, as recorded verse 3 : " And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him pri- vately, saying. Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming? and of the end of the world ?" That " these things " relate to the destruc- tion of the temple, which the Savior had just foretold, we are agreed. That " thy coming," is the coming in con- troversy, I will grant, though many who agree with me on the main question in controversy, do not. The " end of the world," the gentleman says, means the " end of the Jewish age ;" and many critics, who are with me on the main question in controversy, agree with him. But I have never seen satisfactory proof of it. The primary idea of the word aion^ here rendered " world," is, I think, periodicity. It means a period ; sometimes, perhaps, no more than the Jewish age; sometimes, certainly, the world, as we now use the word world. But what it means in this passage matters not. I mean to show that Christ did not co//ze when Jerusalem was destroyed, and, consequently, if that was the " end of the world," spoken of in the passage, he did not come at the end of the world. The destruction of Jerusalem is never, in scrip- ture, called the " end of the world." Moreover, the destruction of Jerusalem was not the end of the Jewish age. The Jewish age ended before the Christian age began. Paul lived in the Christian age, and hence he said the ends of the ages [the latter end of the Jewish and beginning of the Christian] came upon him and his contemporaries. See i Cor. x. ir. Christ died in the end of the Jewish age. Hence, says Paul : " But now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put 300 Oral Discussion. away sin by the sacrifice of himself." Heb. ix. 26. When Christ died the Jewish dispensation was at an end; when he ascended and gave the Holy Spirit, the Christian age began. However, the matter now in hand is the coming of Christ. Does he teach in this chapter that he would come at the destruction of Jerusalem .'* That's the question. My friend says, yes ; I say, no. Observe, the Savior does not say or intimate that " these things," (the destruction of the temple just fore- told) " the end of the world," (be it what it may) and his "coming," should occur at one and the same time. Here is where my friend indulged that special weakness of his — assumed what is not in the passage. It will be gi'anted, that from the 15th verse of the chapter to the 22d, inclusive, the Savior speaks of " these things" — that is, of the destruction of the city of Jerusa- lem and of the temple. And having described that affair, at the 23d verse he says: " Then [at the destruc- tion of Jerusalem] if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there, believe it 7iotr Why not, if Mr. Manford is right .^ Why not look for him precisely at that time.'' Let the Savior himself answer: " For [this reason] there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that if it were possible they shall deceive the very elect." Verse 24. '•'•False Christs" were to come at the destruction of Jerusalem. Which one of them does my friend claim.'' His Christ came then, he says, and I con- clude therefore that his must have been one of the "false Christs " that were to arise about that time. What was the name of my friend's " colossal man" that came at the destruction of Jerusalem.'' Is it possible that my opponent is one of the " false prophets," whose coming Judg7ne7it — PuJiisJiment. 301 the Savior foretold, and that he is now trying- " to deceive the very elect" ? ! But let us hear further from the Savior : " Behold, I have told you before ; wherefore if they shall say unto you. Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth; Behold, he is in the secret chambers; BELIEVE IT NOT. For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be." Verses 26, 37. This means, that " every eye shall see him" when he comes — that all shall know when he comes. But to make this still clearer, he proceeds to say : " For wheresoever the carcass is, there shall the eagles be gathered together." When Christ shall come, his disciples shall " be gathered together" unto him. And this perfectly harmonizes with other scriptures. Paul said to the Christians at Thessa- lonica : " Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him." And to the Colossians : " When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory." And were these Christians " gath- ered togedier unto " Christ, or did they appear with him in glory, when Jerusalem was destroyed } What few Christians wei'e there were scattered among the hills of Judea. But they were not Thessalonians or Colossians. But let us proceed with the examination of this chap- ter. Beginning at verse 39, we read : " Immediately after the tribulation of those days, shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken : and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven ; and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great 303 Oral Disaissio7i. sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other." Having just taught his disciples not to expect him at the destruction of Jerusalem, he now lets them know that the " sign" of his coming shall appear in heaven " after the tribulation of those days." The " sign" was, of course,"to precede his "coming," but even that was not to appear till '•^ after the tribulation" that was to be brought upon the Jews. This settles the controversy as to whether or not Christ came at the destruction of Jerusalem, and it settles it in the negative; and, therefore, I may say Mr. Manford " js defeated," And he is de- feated not by the opinion of a few Doctors, but by the word of the Lord. I have already given my view of the meaning and extent of the "tribulation" spoken of. Luke calls it the days of vengeance — " These be the days of ven- geance, that all things which are -vrittcii may be ful- filled." Luke xxi. 22. As I showed in a former speech, the prophecies concerning the disjDersion and punishment of the Jews are noijo being fulfilled before our eyes, and the gentleman has not denied it. But let us hear Luke's record further. After describing the overthrow of the city, which was to them only " the beginning of sorrows," the Savior says, "And they shall fell by the edge of the sword ; and shall be led away captive ijtto all ?iations ; and Jerusalem shall be trodden under foot of the Gentiles, imtil the times of the Gentiles be ful- fillcdy Verse 24. The Jews are still dispersed " among all nations." Jerusalem is still " trodden under foot of the Gentiles." "The times of the Gentiles" are not yet " fulfilled." And, therefore, the coming of yudgment — Punis/ujicnl. 303 Christ is yet future, accordiiig to the teaching of this chapter, as it is to occur '•'■after the tribulation of those days." " Then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they [all the tribes of the earth] shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaveii to the other." This means the resurrection of the dead. Let us read, in connection with this, i Thes. iv. X5-18: "For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not go before them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Where- fore, comfort one another with these words." But I am reminded that, at verse thirty-four of the chapter, the Savior said, '•''T\\\?, generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled." As I said before, the word genea^ here I'endered " generation," means race. I did not say it always means race. Had the gentleman observed this it would have saved him the time and trouble of reading passages wherein it does not have this meaning. The question Is, Does the word ever mean race ? It cannot be denied that it sometimes does. All Greek lexicons known to me give it this meaning. Indeed, if we may rely upon the best Greek lexicons, "birth," "descent," "race," " blood," seems to be the primary meaning of the word; while " lifetime," or " the people living at any one time," is a secondary meaning. 304 Oral Disctission. Still, I freely grant that it is often used in the latter sense. In the New Testament it is generally translated '■'■ general io?t" — once nation — that is, in the common version of the Bible. Dr. Campbell and Martin Luther, however, both translated the word race, as I do in this passage. But what is the meaning of the English word generation ? Turn to your English dictionary, and you will find the definition of this word is favorable to my position. The gentleman tells us that, "Jesus told the disciples they should live to see him come" I hardly think my friend himself was satisfied with his effort on this point. In the same way that he proved that the disciples who were then with Jesus lived to see him come, I can prove that Paul lived till the resurrection of the dead, and hence that the resurrection is past. That apostle says, i Thes. iv. 16, 17: "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God : and the dead in Christ shall rise first : then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." " IVe" in this passage, it may be argued, includes at least Paul himself and some of the Thessalonians, and they were to be " alive and remain " unto the resurrection ! But, now, I am reminded that Mr. Manford says this is a figurative passage, and that the resurrection here spoken of did take place in the lifetime of some who lived when this letter was written. So I shall have to try him on a passage that he admits refers yet to the future, i Cor. XV. 51, 53: "Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump : for the Judgment — Punishment. 305 trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incor- ruptible, and we shall be changed." According to this reading, then, and the gentleman's hypercriticism, the immortal resurrection took place while Paul was yet alive! The resurrection is past!! We shall have to put my friend down with " Hymeneus and Philetus, who concerning the truth erred, saying the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the fiiith of some." 3 Tim. ii. 17, 18. If Universalism be true, is there anything in the future.? anything, I mean, of which the Bible treats } What use have we for the Bible, since Jerusalem was destroyed } Here, then, I dismiss the twenty-fourth of Matthew, as a witness in this case, feeling that, though it was called in by my opponent, its testimony is overwhelmingly against him. All the mistakes of Dr. Clarke, and other like critics, cannot break its force. All the gentleman had to say about the "last days" and " last time " disappears in the light of the fact that these phrases sometimes mean the last days of the Jewish dispensation; sometimes the whole Christian dispensa- tion ; and sometimes the last days of the Christian dis- pensation. A little common sense exercised in consider- ing the connection in which the phrase occurs, will carry the reader through all the smoke that can be raised. Now, a few words about the judgment. The gentle- man thinks he has proved that Christ is to "judge in the earth." That, however, does not touch the question at all. I raise no question as to where Christ will judge the world. The question is one of time. When will he do it.? That's the question. All those tremendous hurricanes of emphasis with which my friend came down upon the phrase " in the earth," were lost. 26 3o6 Oral Discussion. It should be borne in mind, also, in the investigation of this subject, that the word judgment is not always used in the same sense, either in the Bible or elsewhere. It sometimes means, " Wisdom and prudence, enabling a person to discern right and wrong, good and evil." For judgment, in this sense., Christ came into the world the first time; and for judgment, in this sense, the Gos- pel is now preached to the nations. But this is not the sense in which the word is used in our conti'oversy. As illustrative of the distinction I here make, I will read two passages of scripture — both words of the Savior. John ix. 39: "And Jesus said. For judgment I am come into this world ; that they which see not might see, and that they which see, might be made blind." John xii. 47 : " And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not : for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world." Now, I submit, that, if judgment is used in the same sense in both these passages, then they ai"e contradictory statements — palpably so. But the context shows that the word is not used in the same sense in both passages. In the first, Jesus says, " For judgment I am come into this world, that they ivhlch see not might see." That is, he came to " set judgment in the earth," as my friend read — came to impart judg- ment — " wisdom to discern right and wrong " — to the Gentiles. To this agree the words of the prophet as quoted by my friend, and as quoted by the Savior, Matt. xii. 18: "Behold my servant whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased : I will put my Spirit upon him, and he shall shozv judgment to the Gentiles." But, in the other passage, the Savior evidently uses the word judge in the sense in which it is used in my proposition, and, hence, in our discussion. Judgment — Punishment. 307 And, then he says, " If any man hear my words, and believe not, I [now] judge him not; for 1 came not to judge the world [in the sense of condemning], but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and rcceiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same SHALL judge him AT THE LAST DAY." " For he hath appointed a day in which he w/// judge the world in righteousness." And this is the day of which Paul spoke when he had finished his course, and which he then put beyond death. " There is laid up for me [who ' am now ready to be offered'] a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous JUDGE, 5^a// give me AT THAT DAY." " It is appointed unto men once to die^ but after this the judgment." And this brings me to Hebrews ix. 27, again. The gentleman will have it that " they," in the next chapter, refers back to " men " in the controverted passage, as its antecedent. This I denied — yes, " squarely denied." That's the way I deny things, when I do at all. But he thinks my denial " will not set aside the rules of grammar." Where are the rules of grammar.? I have not heard from them yet. What do they say on the point? Just here it would be eminently proper to bring in some Doctor! Where, now, is "Dr. Clarke".? If the Doctors are all absent, or refuse to answer the call, then let us have " the rules of grammar." Let it be proved that " they," in the tenth chapter of Hebrews, is relativ^e to " men " in the ninth. Proof., now, is what we want; and not swaggering talk. The latter can be entirely dispensed with. The gentleman will have it, without one word of scripture, that Moses died typically, and after him the priests. Well, if Moses' death, and that of the priests 308 Oral Discussion. was typical of Christ's death, of what was the lamb's death typical? But why spend time on a matter so plain? Is there anybody here (Mr. Manford excepted) that rca//y believes that when Paul said, "as it is ap- pointed unto men once to die," he meant the Jewish high priests, and had reference to their shedding the blood of animals under the law ? Why, if such was his meaning, did he not say that ? He could have said that just as easily as what he did say. He knew how to designate the high priests, and how to speak of their taking the blood of animals. But instead of using a word that meant high priests, he used a word that he knew 7neant mankind. Would any of our hearers ever have understood the passage as Mr. Manford does with- out his help in the case? The gentleman had a good deal to say about Adam, and the serpent, and death, and the " Scheme of Redemp- tion^'' to which I paid but little attention, as it was entirely out of the range of this discussion. But he wound up that little episode with a scowl, and an ex- clamation, that "error, to be hated, needs but to be seen"! Then thought I, "Truth, to be hated by vicious men, needs only to be restrictive of vice." The gentleman seems to have a good deal of trouble over a matter not at all under his control, and about which he evidently knows but little — a matter altogether under the control of one fully competent to attend to it. He is afraid somebody will be " in prison, " " reserved unto the day of judgment to be punished," who, at the gi'eat day, ^vill turn out to be innocent! That would be a terrible affair! It would punish my friend's believing and pious soul almost eternally ! I have no trouble about that matter myself, however, for I believe " The Lord yudgment — Punishtnent, 309 KNOWETH HOW to deliver the godly out of temp- tation, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judg- ment to be punished." 3 Peter ii. 9. But, as my friend does not believe this, he is somewhat fearful that the day of judgment will reveal the fact that great injustice has been done to parties. The gentleman manifests the most intense eagerness to get into my " hells." When he laughs over hell, I intend that it shall be seen that he laughs at the word of God. This debate, moreover, is not about " hells." I will now give attention to a few objections that have been thrown in my way. I. My opponent objects to what I have shown to be the scripture teaching, as to the judgment of the world, because it is, as he seems to think, of " heathen origin." But he failed to show anything as to its origin after all. He read from RoUin's Ancient History, to show that Zoroaster, and after him the Greeks, believed in a judg- ment after death ; and what if they did ? The fact that they believed it, does not prove that the doctrine origin- ated with them by any means. The gentleman should have a higher regard for his reputation as a logician than to make such loose statements. But what if Zoroaster, and all the Greeks, did believe in a judgment after death ? Does that fact prove that there certainly will be none? I am glad the gentleman has opposed this objec- tion to my proposition; I think I can make it serve the- cause of truth. He believes that Zoroaster and the Greeks taught a "judgment after death." Mark that. Now I demand the proof. I want it in as strong language as Jesus and the apostles used upon the subject. ^That's all I ask. Can he produce it } I do not believe he can. Let him, now, bring farward a passage from Zoroaster, 3IO Oral Discussion. or any other Persian, or any Pagan Greek, that does, beyond question^ teach a judgment after death; and I promise to produce as strong a one from Jesus or one of his apostles, teaching the same, " But," he \vill say, " the hinguage of Jesus and tlie apostles is figurative." Exactly ! But why did it never occur to him that the language of the Persians and Greeks is figurative, too? Can it be because he has had no evasive purpose to sen^e by such a conception ? I say, that if it cannot be shown that Jesus and the apostles taught a judgment after death, then it cannot be shown that anybody ^\ ox did. 3. It is -objected that such a judgment as I am con- tending for would be " entirely unnecessary." My friend can see no reason why there should be such a judgment unices it should be merely for the purpose of " making a grand display." This is, to use the very mildest lan- guage, a very presumptuous objection. Must we have a reason for everything God does in the government of this universe.?! Let us try to think for a moment of the magnitude of this boundless something we call the universe. Of course, we shall be perfectly bewildered with the ineffable immensity of the thought. Imagina- tion's utmost reach is a thing of nothing. The most robust reason reels to and fro like a drunken mati under the thought of even a few millions of worlds, spinning like so many tops, in space, and yet in such perfect order. And yet so many worlds, turning in pei"petual and blazing splendor about us, are, to the universe, no more than one drop of water is to the mighty ocean. But our reason will hardly allow us to doubt that all worlds, and systems of worlds, and sys- tems of systems of worlds, are peopled by intelligences; and certainly all under the government of the Almighty Judgment — Punishment. 31 1 God. Could my opponent govern the universe?! He blushes at the suggestion ; and becoming modesty says such a blush is in order. Could he govern two millions of God's worlds .'' Could he govern one hundred } Even one .'' Half of one } Could he govern the United States "i Or, one of them? Could he govei'n this little city? Can he govern himself? Can he govern his tongue? And shall mortal man, who, when compared with the universe, seems but a poor little wiggling worm of the dust; who, according to my friend, may almost as well abandon the attempt to govern himself till his " appetites and passions" are dead and buried; who stands to God's universe almost as nothing; shall he dictate to Almighty God a moral philosophy for the government of the uni- verse, and demand of him a reason for everything he does?! For my part, I can think of nothing more su- premely ridiculous. And, indeed, it would be a less mat- ter than it is, if it were only ridiculous. It is worse. By the way, I may as well say, before dismissing this very for- midable objection, that I have never supposed that God has appointed a day in the which to judge the world, for the purpose of ascertaining w^ho are guilty and who are not. The sentencing of the finally impenitent to " ever- lasting punishment," accompanied by the announcement of the reason therefor, may serve a good purpose in the universe, although my friend may not now be able to see it. I see many things in the Bible, as well as in nature, the " reason " of which lies a little too deep for me. If " the day of judgment" is the only reality my opponent has ever come across, the reason of which he could not see, he has either gone blind through the world, or has been infinitely more far-seeing than most of his fellow crea- tures. 312 Oral Discussion. Having shown, as I think, pretty clearly, that the coming of Christ "in his glory, and with his angels," to raise the dead and judge the world, is future; and that consequently the judgment of the world is to be after death, and, therefore, future ; and that the wicked will be punished after death ; I am now ready to advance to the fourth and last point in my affirmation. IV. The punishment of the wicked will be endless. "These shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal." Matt. xxv. 46. " Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power." 2 Thes. i. 9. The former of these passages is the lan- guage of the Savior; the latter that of Paul. It will not be denied that the word here rendered "everlasting" is used as descriptive of the duration of the punishment of the wicked. Neither will it be denied, I presume to say, that it is the word from which the word "eternal" is generally translated. Now, upon these passages I have to submit as follows : I. The woi'd here rendered everlasting does express endless duration. I do not say it always does. I freely admit that there are many instances of its occurrence in which it does not express so much. This admission I make, because it is just, and to save time and unnecessary talk. The word "endless" occurs, I believe, only twice in the New Testament, and comes from two dif- ferent Greek words. In one instance it does not mean literally eternal, or endless. In the other it may. So that if the word endless were used as descriptive of the punishment of the wicked, it would make my case no stronger. I have no doubt but that, were that word used in the passages I have quoted instead of the one yudgment — Punishment. 313 that Is used, and the one that is, never so used, Univer- saHsts would make just as much capital of tlie fact as tliey now make of tlie fact that everlasting is so used and endless never. I am certain they could do it. The one word is just as strong as the other. Indeed they are used as equivalents by Paul. In Heb. vii. 16, 17, he says that Christ is made a priest " after the power of an endless life," and his proof of the fact is, that it is writ- ten of him, "Thou art a priest ybrct;ejr;" and "forever" is from the word rendered "eternal," and "everlasting." If, therefore, the word rendered " everlasting " is not competent to express endless duration, there is no Greek word that is. 2. The word rendered " everlasting," In the passages cited, always covers the whole of the period to which it is applied. In these passages it is applied to the state into which men go after death. Now you may see clearly, if you have not seen before, why I have been at such pains to show, that the judgment from which the wicked ai'e to " go away Into everlasting punishment" is after death. Here, I have "everlasting" applied to the after-death period of man's existence. Paul says, "The things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal." 2 Cor. Iv. 18. " The things that are seen " are things of this short life ; but " the things that are not seen," are things of the future state. The punishment of the wicked in the future state is to be eternal. 3. In the former of the two passages with which I started out we have an antithesis. The punishment of the wicked is described by the same word of duration that describes the future life of the righteous. After death, and from the judgment, the wicked " shall go 27 3H Oral Discussion. away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal." "Eternal" is from the same word rendered "everlasting." My friend knows the nature of the antithesis. Its arms arc equal. When, therefore, the life into which the righteous shall go, after deaths shall end, then, and not till then, will the punishment into which the wicked shall go, after death, end. If the one is endless, the other is ; if the one is not, the other is not. 4. The sentence will be pronounced upon both the righteous and the wicked at the same time — and after death, as we have seen. They will enter their respective future destinies at the same time. The duration of those destinies is described by the same word. A iid this is to take -place at the end of the Christian dispensation. In proof of this statement I call up a passage about which we have already had much to say in this discussion. 1 Cor. XV. 22-25. "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive * * * at his co?ning. [vv-ith this coming to raise the dead I have connected the judgment.] Then cometh the e7id, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and power. For he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet." We have seen how the " ene- mies of the cross of Christ" are to be put under his feet — "These shall go away into everlasting punishment." " The enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is de- struction," (Philip, iii. 18, 19,) are to " be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Loi-d, and from the glory of his pov^'-er, when he shall come to be glorified in his saints." 2 Thes. i. 9, 10. And " THEN COMETH THE END." The Gospel will Judgment — Punishment. 315 never more be preached. Christ will no longer be " mediator between God and men." God will then say what he never yet has said : " He that is filthy, let him he filthy still" I know this is a fearful thought ! And yet we ought to consider well the question, " What shall the end be of them that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.?" \Time expired. [mr. manford's fourth replv.] It seems that my worthy friend entertains to-day supreme contempt for the judgment of learned and intel- lectual men — for that of A. Campbell, Drs. Barnes, Doddridge, Macknight, Whitby, Hammond, Lightfoot, Clarke, and others, all fellow believers with him in endless punishment. It almost throws him into spasms for me to name one of them. The reason is obvious. They are all against his crude notions, and favor the interpre- tations I give of certain passages. If they sustained him he would not be so disgusted. In his discussion with Mr. Logan, before referred to, he was deeply in love v.'ith tlie "doctors" he now despises. In his first speech in that discussion, he refers to, or reads from, sixty "doctors," and that is only the beginning of his quotations from "doctors." Adam Clarke was then as sound as a nut, but now he is of no account whatever. He has to-day made the discovery, that the " Methodists repudiate " him, which every intelligent Methodist knows is not so. The truth is, in that discussion on water baptism, he thought those " doctors" favored his views on certain points, and so they were all then grand, good, glorious, and mighty men. But he finds them to be 316 Oral Discussion. against him in this discussion, and so they are good for nothing. But he adds, " All these doctors are with me in the /rci^(95//^'(?;« we are discussing." That is so; and that is what makes their testimony against him so valu- able. His own household testifies against his wild speculations, and that is the cause of his disgust when I make this manifest. Our friend will have it, that Christ's coming " in power and glory," and " in his kingdom," are two dif- ferent events, thousands, and perhaps, millions of ages apart. And to make out his case, we have seen how he attempted to rend asunder Matt, xvi., contrary to the judgment of the learned world. But he should remem- ber that what " God has joined let not man put asun- der." He has attempted to violate this command to save his cause. A man ought to think, at least, twice, before he attempts such an unholy work. For further evidence he is wrong, I refer you to Luke xxi. 37-32 : " And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud, with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads : for your redemption draweth nigh. And he spake to them a pai"able : Behold the fig-tree, and all the trees ; when they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS NIGH AT HAND. Verily, I say unto you. This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled." Here, as in Matt, xvi., the coming of the " kingdom of God," and the coming of Christ "in power and glory," are the same. He admitted that the kingdom had come; then the coming "in power and glory" has taken place. Judgment — Punishment. 317 Whea Christ said, " The kingdom of God is nigh at hand," he only rei>eated, in other words, what he said in the other verse, "Tlien shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud, with power and great glory." Both verses refer to one event. In Matt, xxiv., that kingdom and coming are identical, as here : " And they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. * * Now leaiui a parable of the fig-tree; when his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh : so likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that IT is near, even at the door." Now, it here means the same as kingdom in Luke, just read. Barnes understands it so. According to Matt, xxiv., then, the coming "in power and glory" and the coming of "the kingdom" are the same. Now turn to Mark xiii. 26, 39 : " And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors," Here, again, you find, that the coming " in power and glory," and the coming of " the kingdom " are the same, for the word it here means the kingdom spoken of in Luke xxi. Here, then, in four places (Matt. xvi. and xxiv., Mark xiii., Luke xxi), the coming "in power and glory" is the same as the coming of the kingdom. Will he lay unholy hands on all those words of Jesus, and attempt to tear them all asunder to save a fallen case.'' We shall see. It seems to me, that this foicrfold testimony, and all from Christ himself, must convince all candid persons, that the coming " in power and glory" has taken place. The gentleman admits, that the kingdom of Christ has come, and that he came in that kingdom ; and we have seen that coming was " in power and glory." 3i8 Oral Discussion. He told us, that the coming in the flesh, and in the kingdom, were " not in the glory of the Father." Then Christ was mistaken. Said he, " Now is the Son of man glorified^ and God is glorified in him. If God be glori- fied in him, God also shall glorify him in himself, and straightway glorify him. John xiii. 31, 33. Christ's nature, character, life, death, resurrection, and kingdom, were all glorious. It was his Father that made them glorious. He was born; he lived, labored, died, arose, and ascended, in the "glory of his Father." His king- dom is a glorious kingdom, his reign is a glorious reign, and its consummation will be glorious. It seems that the gentleman is willing to divest Jesus of all glory to make out his case, as well as rend his words asunder. But their would not be much glory in the coming my friend talks about. He supposes it will be a coming to blot God's universe out of existence ; a coming to transfer countless millions of God's creation from one hell to another hell; a coming to divide parents and children, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, friends and neighbors, sendlno- some to heaven, and others to eternal torture; a comino^ to make a compromise with the devil — giving him two-thirds of mankind; a coming to perpetuate sin, wrono-, misery, death, and destruction eternally. That is the kind of a coming in glory he advocates. A hymn book thus sings of that "glorious" coming: Behold, that great and awful day Of PARTING soon will come, When sinners must be hurled away, And Christians gathered home. Perhaps the parent sees the child Sink down to endless flames! With shrieks, and howls, and bitter cries. Never to rise again. judgment — Punishment. 319 •' O, father, see my blazing hand ! Mofher, behold your child ! Against you now a witness stands, Amidst the flames confined." The child perhaps the parents view Go HEADLONG DOWN TO HELL, Gone with the rest of Satan's crew, And bid the child farewell. The husband sees his piteous wife. With whom he once did dwell. Depart with groans and bitter cries, "My husband, fare you well." But, O, perhaps the wife may see The man she once did love Sink down to endless misery. While she is crowned above ! That is what the gentleman's glorious coming means. But all of Christ's comings are glorious, hence he will not come for such a horrid purpose. He came in the flesh to save the world ; he came in his kingdom to save the world; and he will come at the end of his reign to present the world saved to God, not to damn nearly all of it. According to my friend's own admission, the " coming in glory" has taken place. He said, that the words, "For then shall be great tribulatiox," (Matt. xxiv. 21,) were fulfilled in the days of the apostles. All spoken of from the 15 th to the 23nd verse relates to those times, he admitted. Bear that in mind while I read the 29th and 30th verses. "IMMEDIATELY after the tribulation of those days, shall the sun be darkened : * * and THEN shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven ; * * and they shall see the 320 Oral Discussion. Son of man coming with power and great glory." You see how conclusive this is. The " tribulation " came on the world in the apostolic age. This he admit- ted. Well, Jesus said, "IMMEDIATELY AFTER the tribulation of those days" "the Son of man shall come." The only resort the gentleman has now, is to go to that old dictionary of his, and show that "immedi- ately " does not mean " immediately," but several thousand years. He admitted that Christ told the disciples that they would see him come in power and glory, but by ye and you^ when he talked to them, he did not mean those he was talking to, but those who may be living on the earth thousands of years hence! Then, when Jesus said, (Matt. xxiv. 2, 4,) "See ye not all these things.^ verily, I say xxxiio yoii^ There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down," and when he further said to the disciples, " Take heed that no man deceive you" — by ye and you he did not mean the disciples but somebody else. When he said, "Verily I say unto you^ that one oi you shall betray me," (Matt. xxvi. 31,) he did not mean those he was addressing at all! When he said, " Drink _y(? all of it," (Matt. xxvi. 27,) he not mean that the disciples should drink a drop of it! When he said, "Go_y<7 and teach all nations, baptizing them," he did not mean that the disciples should teach or baptize a soul ! And then, to sustain such an outrageous perversion, he quoted Paul, " We shall not all sleep." The word we is not you or ye. Webster says, " VVe is used to express men in general," and so Paul used it correctly. But you and ye only mean those addressed. He ran to Webster to bolster up his notion about gen' Judgment — Punishment. 321 eration. I will give his definition ; as you will see, he refutes my friend. "A single succession in natural descent, as the children of the same parents; hence, an age. Thus we say, the third, fourth or tenth generation. Gen. XV. 16. The people of the same period, or living at the same time. 'O faithless and perverse generation? Luke ix." Down further, he gives race as the poetical meaning, and gives the poet Shakspeare for authority. As my friend don't like Clarke, I will give Benson's note on the words "this generation" in Matt, xxiv., and he was also a Methodist commentator : '"This generation,' etc., thereby evidently showing that Christ had been speaking all this while OxNly of the calamities coming on the Jews, and the destruction of Jerusalem." Our consistent friend told us, that Christ did not come ia those days, because he told his disciples, " If any man say unto you, Lo here is Christ, believe it not, for there shall be false christs." He inferred that if Christ was to come at that time, he would not have said that. If he had read two or three verses further he would have found relief Verse 27 : " For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west, so ' shall also the coming of the Son of man be." The plain meaning is this : The flilse christs would be there personally, but the true Christ would not be there per- sonally—he would come as the lightning— ^m povoer and glory. They could see the folse christs personally, but they would not see Christ in person, but manifestations of his power and gloty. Here is another evidence that coming was not a personal coming, but a comino- " in power and glory." 322 Oral Discussion. The gentleman contended, that his judgment day was to take place when Christ would come to judge the nations, and he read this passage : " And before him shall be gathered all nations." Matt. xxv. 31. But, accord- ing to his own criticism on the words " all nations," that was to be only a national judgment, and does not pertain to the immortal world, because there are no na- tions there. You remember what he said yesterday about this passage I quoted, "All nations whom thou hast made shall come and worship before thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name." Ps. Ixxxvi. " Let it be remem- bered," said Mr. Sweeney, " that we are not debating about nations, but about those who belong to no nation." " A blessing," he continued, " promised to a nation may not reach one who has gone into the eternal world." If he believed this yesterday, of course he believes it to-day ; if it was true then, it is true now. Then, accord- ing to his own showing, when Christ promised to come, and judge " all nations," separating them as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats, placing one on his right and the other on his left, awarding life to one, and everlasting punishment to the other, he did not mean judgment or punishment in "the eternal world," for that was to be only a judgment of nations, and a judgment of "a nation may not reach one who HAS gone into the ETERNAL WORLD," tO USC Mr. Sweeney's words. According to his own showing, the coming " in power and glory," the judgment of the nations, and the everlasting punishment, in Matt. xxv. 31-46, all I'elate to this world. The judgment and punishment were national only. I have nothing more to do. This discussion has vir- tually closed. Truth is powerful and must prevail. I Judgment — Punishment. 323 expect my friend will flounder through another day, and I shall generally occupy my allotted time, but he might as well go home on the first train. He contends that all those passages that speak of Christ's coming "in power and glory" to "judge the quick and dead," to "judge the world," and banish some to " everlasting punishment," " everlasting destruction," — I say he contends that all these relate to the same time and //ac5 that the passage in Matt. xxv. 31-46 relates to; and, as that only speaks of a national judgment, he has not a text left to prove his future judgment, and future endless hell. I repeat, he has not one left. If he thinks he has, let him produce it. I do not deem it necessary to say another word about the t}'-pical death of the high priest. The gentleman has only replied by assertions. Let the hearers judge be- tween us. He did not pay much attention, he said, to my reading from " Scheme of Redemption" about the serpent murdering all mankind. He had better heed what I read, for the author of that book is Presi- dent of one of his colleges, and a big man in the church. Perhaps my friend agrees with said President, that the serpent did that big job. Mr. Sweeney has at last reached the subject of " end- less punishment." He has told us several times, during this discussion, that he uses " only Bible terms when talking about punishment." He will hardly pretend, that the phrase "endless punishment " is a " Bible term."^ He knows it is not. The truth is, the terms " endless punishment," " endless woe," " endless suffering," " end- less hell," " endless death," are not in the Bible once from Genesis to Revelation. Let that be remembered It is curious enough, if endless woe is really true, that 324 Oral Discussion. such words do not occur even once within the lids of the good book. The authors of the " Book of Mormon," so called, believed in endle.ss punishment, and they have expressed their faith in clear language, " The wicked," that book says, " are to suffer endless misery," " endless woe," "shall be consigned to a state of endless misery," "go to an endless hell:" and it truly ternis such a place " an awful hell." Pages 181, 196, 217, 218, 386, 376. Not one of these are Bible phrases. My friend gets his dialect from Joe Smith, not from the Christian scriptures. Mahomet, too, was an ardent defender of my friend's theory; and in the Koran he threatens the wicked, as does my friend, in pure orthodox style. He tells them they shall suffer "immortal agony," "endless torments," "be boiled in hell," "be fuel of hell" — of "a raging hell." My friend would have no difficulty in sustaining his proposition if the Koran or the Book of Mormon was his Bible, or Joe Smith or Mahomet his prophet. His brother Smith and brother Mahomet are clear as the mid-day sun on the endless punishment question. They mean endless misery, and they say it. The Bible does not say it, and I have no thought it means it. But who is to suffer endless punishment according to the gentleman's theory } Let us see. He tells us, that all who die without forgiveness, that is, die in their sins, must suffer endless punishment. His theology also is, that all adults, dying without baptism, die unforgiven, die in their sins. As I understand him, and his church, they affirm both of these propositions. The first propo- sition, he boldly defends in this discussion. The second he don't want to say much about on this occasion. To show that he really docs mean there is no salvation Judgment — Punishment. 335 without baptism, I will read from a sermon of his, preached in Chicago, June 4, 1869, and published in the Gospel Echo^ one of his denominational journals : " ' The washing of regeneration ' does, beyond all controversy, mean immersion. Hence, persons are brought into the kingdom of God, and, hence, to salva- tion, by IMMERSION. My friends, suppose I were to convince you that I possess boundless wealth, and were to say, ' He that believes and is immersed shall have $50,000;' would you understand that immersion was made a condition of obtaining the $50,000.-^ I think you would. How long would you stand to listen to him who would attempt to convince you that you could ob- tain the $50,000 about as well without immersion as with it, it being 'a mere outward ordinance'.? Not very long, I think. You would be your own interpreter in that case, there being so many dollars at stake; you would be immersed, pei-haps, ' the same hour of the night;' and you would want to make certain work of it. You could afford to risk no doubtful modes of immer- sion, resting upon fallible church authority; you would want to be immersed beyond a doubt. * * * And while this case stands on record I shall be very slow to believe that the Lord now in ANY WAY gives men assurance that their sins are forgiven till they obey the Gospel as Saul was required to do" — that is, be im- mersed — "and as 'every creature' is i^equired to do." I substitute immersion for baptism in these extracts, and in all that follow, as he and his brethren contend, that the Greek should be thus rendered. Mr. Sweeney does not mean that immersion is the only condition of salvation ; but, if these words of his mean anything, they mean there is no salvation without immersion. In the last sentence I read, speaking of Paul's baptism, Mr. Sweeney says, " While this stands on record I shall be very slow to believe that the Lord now in ANY WAY 326 Oral Disctcssion. gives men assurance that their sins are forgiven till they do just as Paul did" — are immersed in water. His idea is, that Paul's sins could not have been forgiven without immersion, and hence no one's sins can be forgiven without immersion. Rev. B. H. Smith, President of the Christian Univer- sity of Canton, Mo., and a prominent man in Mr. Sweeney's church, goes even farther, if possible, than his brother Sweeney. He promised, when I resided in St. Louis, to write twelve articles in my Magazine^ in defense of the proposition, that water baptism is a con- dition of salvation^ and I was to write twelve in reply. He wrote seven^ and I could not coax him to wi"ite an- other word. I proved, if his proposition was true, that all mankind would be lost in hell eternally, except the little squad who were immersed ; that his creed damned all but his party; unchurched all but his church. He saw it, and felt it, and so, to prevent further exposure, silently retired from the field. One or two of his de- nominational papers published part of the letters, and refused to publish the balance that were written. But, in the Christian Pioneer^ one of Mr. Sweeney's denom- inational papers, Mr. Smith delivers himself as follows: "Immersion is for the remission of sins; then, a per- son's sins ai"e not remitted unless he is immersed. Whosesoever sins are not remitted are retained^ savs Christ. There are but two classes. Now the honest paido-baptist " — that is, the honest Christian who is sprinkled — not immersed — " lives and dies without re- mission, because he is not immersed. If his sins are not remitted, they are retained. If retained down to his death, he dies in his sins. What does Jesus say of those who die in their sins.'' ' Whither I GO ye can- not COME.' John viii. 21." Judgment — Punishment, 327 What is that but sending all to hell, who are not im- mersed? He continues in the same strain : " It will be conceded, that all who are really subjects of this kingdom, at death, will be ultimately saved; but a person must be immersed before he can become A subject of this kingdom. Here is a class, subjects of the kingdom here at death, which the Scriptures cer- tainly 'determine' shall be ultimately saved. Another class " — paido-baptists, those who sprinkle — " are those who are not subjects of this kingdom at death. One class die in the kingdom; another die out of the kingdom. Bro. W. says both classes or conditions of people" — that is, those sprinkled and those immersed — "will be ulti- mately saved. Then God has made provision for the ultimate salvation of one class or condition, and an- other provision for another class or condition; and both classes of people have the same Bible and the same capacity, and the same opportunity ! Again I ask, show me a promise God has ever made to the unimmersed! The Scriptures nowhere 'determine' the ultimate salva- tion of any who never enter the kingdom. There is not the SHADOW of an inference to sustain such a proposi- tion. What will you do with those who have minds and Bibles, including every paido-baptist under heaven .^ Is it not strange that the necessity arises for me to argue this question of honesty and sincerity, with one who claims to be a preacher in the Christian church! — the grandest device the devil ever invented — the old lullaby of sectarianism which we have FOUGHT so long AND HARD. VVas Uzza koticst when he touched the ark } Were those men honest when they offered strange fire upon the altar.? Was Saul honest when he persecuted the saints.'' Is the Bible a standard of right.?" Pi-esident Smith is amazed that " one, who claims to be a preacher in the Christian church," should think for a moment, that a person who honestly and sincerely 328 Oral Discussion. believes differently from him concerning water baptism, can be saved. He evidently thinks such preachers are scarce in his church, and ought to be scarcer. This matter of honesty and sincerity^ he thinks, is " the grand- est device the devil ever invented." I find the same horrible dogma advocated by the editor of the Christian Pioneer., from which paper these extracts are taken. In a number dated June 34, 1869, I read as follows: " Some of our religious neighbors are hon*ified at the consequences, if immersion be for the remission of sins. They reason that if it be true, then all who have not been immersed have not the remission of sins, and must be lost, unless God will save them without remission." Observe, he does not deny that the alleged "conse- quences" are legitimate. He rather admits they are, and tries to apologize for a creed that would disgrace a Nero or a Caligula. Hear him : " The Bible gives us not the privilege to reason as to the CONSEQUENCES if that be accepted. We have no right to paralyze our faith in the word, and stultify our reason, with the questions what will become of the heathen, what will become of all who do not understand the Gospel, and have obeyed something else." * * " No matter what the consequences may be; no mat- ter if thousands of great and learned men did not do so and so; no matter if our parents, however sincere and religious they may have been, did not do so and so; if the Book says so and so, we must do it, or we cannot be saved. If the pious dead did not do these, it will be no excuse for our neglect. When the Lord says that im- mersion is for the reinission of sins, and that it saves us, we have no right to demur. It is at his own peril that any man or woman docs so." In the same paper I find another article, in which the Judgment — Punishment. 329 writer contends that being ignorant of God's will in the matter of immersion^ and other subjects, is NO ex- cuse WHATEVER, let the plea come from pagan or christian land. These are the words : " There is no plea for ignorance of the Will of God." " His Will is de- clared to man, and if he does not do it, the fault is his own." We have seen that President Smith of the Christian University tells us that the plea of " honesty and sincerity" in an error, is '-'■ the grandest device the devil ever invented." When our friend advocates the endless punishment of sinners^ we know what he means. When his brethren advocate it, we know what they mean. The doctrine is, that all who die unimmersed die sinners.^ die in their sins., and, as there is no regeneration beyond the grave, so they contend, they must all suffer endless punishment. I will now attend to his proof of endless punishment. He admitted that everlasting does not always mean end- less. Then how does he know it means endless in the passages he read? May they not be places where it does not mean endless ? Now, he must show it means endless in those passages. Let us see his evidence. 1. He said, " It always covers the whole of the period to which it is applied." That is, if it is applied to one year, it means one year; if it is applied to a lifetime, it means a lifetime. Or, in other words, if everlasting means one hour, or one day, or one year, it means one hour, one day, or one year ! That is his first evidence ! 2. " In these passages it is applied to the state into which men go after death"! Here he assumes just what he ought to prove. It has been proved, over and over again; that the passages do not refer to the future state. They were to be fulfilled when Christ would 28 33^ Oral Discussion. « come in the generation in which he lived. Then the nations were to be judged; and he has told us, time and again, that what is spoken of concerning nations does not relate to the future xvorld. Besides, there is not one ivord in the context of either passage about death, the resurrection, or a future world. Not a word. 3. He said, " The life is called everlasting life, and the punishment is everlasting — one will continue as long as the other." He then assumed — for where proof is wanted he gives only assumption — that this everlasting life is immortality beyond the grave. Now, a man who reads the New Testament ought to know better than that. It is the life of the kingdom of God, of the Gospel kingdom. Hence, Jesus says, "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom." This kingdom was to be established when he would come; and the faithful were to enjoy its blessedness. The blessedness of this kingdom is often called life, everlasting life. John says, "We know that we have passed from death unto life." He then enjoyed that life. Jesus says, " He that believeth on me hath everlasting lifer This is Gospel life — the life of the kingdom of Christ. All Christians are members of this kingdom, and partake of this life. You see, Chi-ist is not speaking about death, the resurrection, or of the future world. He is talking about the establishment of his kingdom on earth, and its blessedness. While one is a member of that kingdom he enjoys the life of that kingdom. If he falls from grace, he no longer partakes of that life, but is morally dead, suffers punishment. But this life with a person may end, and this punishment with a per- ^ son may end. '"^ The gentleman again assumed^ that those passages jfudgmeni— Punishment. 331 relate to the resurrection, to the end of the Christian dispensation, and read from i Cor. xv. In that glorious chapter, the apostle speaks of the coming of Christ, to deliver up the kingdom to God, but there is not a word there about judgmctif or fiinisJvnent. As we have seen, when the kingdom was established^ Christ came in power and glory, as a king, as a judge. The judg- ment, the reign of Christ then began. Then was the beginning of the reign of Christ. The faithful entered that kingdom and partook of its blessedness, its life. The unfiiithful were out of it, and in a condition of moral death — were punished. When Jesus speaks of establishing that kingdom, when he speaks of coming in power and glory in that kingdom, there is not a word about death, the resuri'ection, or the future world. Not a word. But in i Cor. xv., where the apostle speaks of Christ coming at the end of his reign, there is not a word about judgment or funishinent. Yet, according to my friend, then the judgment commenced, then the everlasting punishment commenced. But Paul says not a word about either subject. He speaks about destruc- tion, and tells what will be destroyed — all rule, all au- thority, all power, all death. Those are the enemies that will be destroyed. But if St. Paul believed that heaven, earth and hell would be judged on that occa- sion; and that countless millions of mankind would be doomed to be damned to all eternity, would he not have said something about it.? If he had believed that, would he have said, " As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive " } Would he have said, " The last enemy — death — shall be destroyed".? Would he have said, that " all things shall be subdued to God, that God may be all in all " ? Paul never spoke or wrote a V 333 Oral Discussion. Greek word that is rendered hell in our Bible, but once^ and that is in this chapter, and there he says liell sliall be DESTROYED. At the resurrection, then, all rule^ autJiority^ -power^ deaths and hell^ are to be destroyed. But Mr. Sweeney contends they will all then begin their infernal reign, at least 0}te of his hells will, and reign eternally. It is clear, then, that these two passages do not teach endless punishment. He will have to try again. As I have a few moments more I will tell you where he locates one of his hells, one of the infernal regions he so ardently believes in. In the Chicago Daily Tribune of December 38, 186S, is a sermon of his reported, on Spiritism; and in it he discusses the locality of the hell spoken of in 2 Peter ii. 4. " For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell" etc. He sums up his con- victions of the locality of this place in these words : " / thiiik^ therefore^ that by Tartarus" — die Greek word rendered hell in that place — '•''Peter 7neant the dark ^ regions encompassing earth — our atmosphere — the air." This is definite enough. Hell is " the dark region ENCOMPASSING THE EARTH;" and, that we may know exactly where that " dark region" is located, he says it is "our ATMOSPHERE — THE AIR." We Icnow now exactly where that famous place is situated. It is not in the center of the earth, and the volcanoes its chimneys; it is not in a wild comet, or in the blazing sun; it is the atmosphere all around this earth of ours. Columbus enjoys immortal renown for having discovered this con- tinent; but brother Sweeney beats him — he has dis- covered a world — "the world of v/oe;" and, if it was not already named, I should move that it be called — Sweeney. Judgment — Punishment. 333 We not only know now where hell is located, but we know its length, breadth, and depth. Wise men tell us, that the atmosphere extends forty-five miles from the earth, all around it; and, knowing the dimensions of the earth, we can calculate the square miles of the devil's dominions. If our friend is right, satan has actually blockaded our planet, and every soul that goes to heaven has to run the blockade; and that must be rather dan- gerous business, if the accounts we have of his industry, watchfulness and prowess are reliable. Only think of ^din^ forty-Jive miles right through the very center of that old rascal's kingdom! It must be a perilous adventure. But then the trip must be made by every soul that reaches paradise. The only road from earth to heaven is through hell. But my friend tells us, that the air, hell, is " the dark region encompassing the earth." That is another won- derful discovery the gentleman has made. I have always supposed that the atmosphere was light, save when shaded by the earth or moon. Recently, two men in a balloon went seven miles right up into the air, and it was light up there, and light as far as they could see. But then, Mr. Sweeney says the air is a "dark region," and we must believe it, for do n't he know } Hell is generally supposed to be a very hot place. I once heard a preacher relate, that hell is so hot that if a soul were to be taken out of it, and put into a smelting furnace, red hot, he would freeze to death in five minutes. True, the men just mentioned, who went seven miles into the very heart of hell, although it was August, came near freezing to death, it was so cold up there. But then, they must have mistook their feelings — they must have come near roasting instead of freezing, 334 Oral Discussion. for do n't these preachers know all about the tempera- ture of hell? But there will hardly be any more ballooning after this astounding discovery of our second Columbus, that hell is in the atmosphere. Who will have the courage to venture up there after this ? Who will dare climb a tree, or go to the top of the Chicago or St. Louis court house, after this amazing announcement.'' But our friend has unwittingly told us the truth about his hell^ — it is all air — all GAS. \Ti7ne expired. [mr. Sweeney's fifth speech.] It would seem from the gentleman's remarks in the beginning of his speech just delivered, that he knows no difference between appealing to classic writers and emi- nent scholars to determine the meaning of a tvord^ and appealing to what are called Doctors of divinity to de- termine the teaching of a passage of scripture^ about the meaning of the words of which there is no contro- versy. In my discussion with Mr. Logan I did appeal to classic writers and lexicographers to determine the meaning of a single word, when making an argument purely philological. That I would do again. But was that the purpose for which my friend appealed to Clarke, Barnes, Hammond, etc. .'' I think "every school boy" can see the difference. As to the meaning of one pas- sage — Matt. xvi. 27 — the gentleman finds a few com- mentators who agree with him, and what a w^onderful ado he makes over the little circumstance! He imagines I am thrown into " spasms" ! I am perfectly cool, how- ever. I care little for the opinions he reads, and less Judgment — Punishment. 335 for his raving and blustering over them. I repeat all I said about Dr. Clarke, as a commentator. I say he is not indorsed, as such, even by the Methodists; and I am entirely willing for those who know, to judge be- tween my statement and the gentleman's. I generally know what I am saying when I make such statements. The distinction I have made and maintained, between the coming of the Lord " in his glory, with his mighty angels," and his coming "in his kingdom," gives the worthy gentleman no little trouble ; and I am not sur- prised that it does; for it lays the ax to the root of the tree of Universalism. He refers us to Luke xxi. 27-33, where again both events are referred to, but that pas- sage affords him no support, as I shall now show. It requires but little attention to this passage to see that two different events are spoken of, just as in Matt. xvi. 27, 28. In the 27th verse, we have the " Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory," fore- told, and the disciples are told to " then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draiucth tzigh" Now I say that this was not fulfilled either when Jeru- salem was destroyed, or when the kingdom was "set up." J'F/^a/ " redemption" did the disciples expect at the coming of Christ in his glory ? For what redemption did they wait? Let Paul tell : " For the earnest expecta- tion of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God, * * * for the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we our- selves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, 33^ Oral Discussion. to wit, the redcmptio7t of our body ; for we are saved by hope." Rom. viii. 19-24. The disciples, then, were " saved by hope ; " and that was a hope of " redemp- tion;" and the redemption for which they hoped was of tlieir ^'■body;" and all this they expected when Christ should come to be glorified in his saints — to " change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body." This hope was evidently grounded upon the very language my friend quotes from Luke xxi. 27, 2S. This, then, affords still further proof that the "glorious appearing" of Christ is still future. The " redemption " of the saints, which involves the resurrec- tion of the dead, is connected with that coming; but the " redemption " of the saints is yet future ; and, there- fore, the glorious appearing of Christ is yet future. But Mr. Manford argues — or rather, he says — that " the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory," of the 27th verse, is the same as " the kingdom of God is near," of the 31st. Beyond question, he is wrong in this. Let us see if this cannot be demon- strated. We agree that the kingdom of God was to be set up — in other words, that Christ was to come " in his kingdom " — in the lifetime of the apostles. We agree that the kingdom was then set up. Paul and John both expressly say that they were in that kingdom, and, of course, so were all the other apostles and first disciples. But, in the kingdom as they were, we have seen that they waited for their redemption which they expected when Christ should come in his glory. Therefore he did not come in his glory when he set up his kingdom. But furthei*, John was "in the kingdom," he said, when he wrote the book of Revelation; and, therefore, the kingdom had already been set up — Christ had already Judgment — Punishment. 337 come " in his kingdom" — but in that book John speaks of the very coming described in Luke xxi. 27, as future. Christ had come in his kingdom ; had set up his king- dom ; John was in that kingdom ; and yet he speaks of the very coming that Mr. Manford blends with the set- ting up of the kingdom, as still in the future ! Rev. i. 7: "Behold, he comes amidst the clouds; and every eye shall see, and they who pierced him; and all the tribes of the earth shall wail because of him." The trouble with my o]3ponent is, that he observes no distinctions; but confounds events that are different in character, different in time, and differently described all through the Bible. And when I show this, all he can do is to call for a few "Doctors" that have fallen into the same mistake under which he labors. He has, by his miserably false interpretations of Bible teaching, put the hope of the Gospel, the resurrection of the dead, the glory of the saints, the "redemption of our body," all in the past; and leaves the Gospel about as the old empty shell of an oyster! And then, with an affected air of pious and holy indignation, talks about my " wild speculations " ! Jesus did not come to our world " in glory" when he came first. Neither was he "glorified" while here, save for a few moments upon the mount of transfiguration, and then his disciples could not even look upon his glorified person with natural eyes. Nor, yet, did he come from the grave "in glory." He was glorified when he was " received up into glory." He came first in the flesh — in our nature — he lived in the flesh, and was "put to death in the flesh" — rose in the flesh, and so lived until he took his final leave of his disciples and was " received up into glory." He now lives and reigns 29 53^ Oral Discussion. in glory — in the glory he had with the Father before the world was. He has promised to come personally to our world once more — not as the babe of Bethlehem — not in flesh and blood, to make a sin-offering of himself — but " in the glory of his Father, and all the holy an- gels with him," to raise the dead " in glory," to fashion our vile body like unto his glorious body, to " gather his elect from the four ^vinds; " and then " shall he sit upon the throne of his glory, and before him shall be gathered all nations, and he shall separate them," and sentence them to eternal destinies. But to prove that Jesus was here "in glory" the first time he came, my friend read from John xiii. 31, 32: " Therefore, when he was gone out, Jesus said. Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him. If God be glorified in him, God shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him." These words were most unquestionably spoken in anticipation of his ascension to glory. The next verse shows this : " Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me ; and, as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come, so now I say to you." That Jesus anticipated his ascension to glory when he spoke these words is further manifested by his prayer, recoi'ded in John xvii. This prayer was prayed still later in his life than the words were spoken which the gentleman quoted; and here he prays: "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." Verse 5. This shows that when he was here our Lord ^vas not "in his glory" — not in the glory that he /^a<^ with the Father before he took upon him our nature. And even when he prayed this prayer he did not expect to be Judgment — Punishment. 330 glorified before his ascension, as his words, in the 13th verse, show : " And noxv come I to theer As this is a point of much importance, I will call attention to an- other passage that I consider quite decisive of the issue between us. John vii. 39 : " But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive, for the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Jesus was 7iot yet glorified''' This shows not only that Jesus was not then glorified, but that the Holy Spirit was to be given when he was glorified. Now, we all know that the Spirit was not given until the first pentecost after his ascension. And, in the light of these facts, what be- comes of the gentleman's loose statement, that " all his comings are called comings in glory " .'' It goes to the winds — and scarcely loses its place in his argument, as it all goes together. This upsets one of the gentleman's positions, as to the coming of Christ in judgment, if no more. I say, if no more, because he has taken two positions, at least, on this point. One was, that his resurrection was his coming in judgment. This posi- tion he assumed when whelmed in so much trouble over the passage I cited in Hebrews ix. But since, he seems to think Christ's coming in judgment was impersonal, and occurred when Jerusalem was destroyed ! I submit that if the gentleman has any m,ore positions on this question, so full of trouble for his cause, he ought to let us have them at once — before the "next train" comes along, as he seems to think he can let me " take the next train," and get on himself quite as well as if I were to remain. The gentleman seems to think that Christ's final com- ing cannot be " glorious," if he shall then, as I think, " divide parents and children, husbands and wives, 34© Oral Discussion. brothers and sisters, friends and neighbors, sending some to heaven and others to eternal punishment." But is he sincere in this ? Does he not beUeve that at his second coming, wliich he tliinks is past, Christ did " separate parents and children, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, friends and neighbors, sending some 'away into everlasting punishment,' and others 'into life eternal'"? He certainly does — at least, he says he does. And yet he tells us that was the "glorious appearing" of the Lord! Any kind of coming of the Lord is glorious, with my friend, provided only that it is past ; while any future coming, and judgment, and punishment, are in- glorious, heathenish, and exceedingly devilish ! The gentleman read from some old hymn book — what hymn book I know not — about the parting of parents and children, husbands and wives, and seemed to think there could be no glory anywhere, if such things are to occur in the future. But he thinks Christ has already come in glory, and is now judging in glory; and are not such scenes as he described occurring daily, all around us .'' Husbands and wives are parted, families are broken up, never more to come together as families; and this is often done, too, by the preaching of his brethren and sisters, the Spiritists, who, with him, preach love up, and hell down ! And yet he thinks Christ has already come in glory, and is now sitting upon the throne of his glory judging the world ! "Immediately after the tribulation of those days," comes up again. The gentleman seems not to under- stand me at this point. Did I say " immediately does not mean immediately".'' I said that "the tribulation of those days" meant more, and vastly more, than the destruction of the city "of Jerusalem. Tliat was only Judgment — Punishment. 341 " the beginning of soiTOWS." The Jews are still suffer- ing the " days of vengeance," or " the tribulation of those days;" and, therefore, "immediately after the tribulation of those days" has not yet come. Now, I hope I am understood. I did not '•'• 2i&vi\\\. that Christ told the disciples [then living] that they would [live to] see him come in power and glory." He taught them the opposite in that very chapter — Matt. xxiv. The gentleman should be more cautious. The little quibble over "ye" and "you" is unworthy a ten-year-old school boy. He knows that "'we' is used to express men in general," but does not know, of course, that "ye" and "you" liave a like meaning in scripture. The gentleman professed to read you Webster's defini- tion of " generation," but did not do it. He only garbled it. Read it for yourselves. And, by the way, it would be safe for you to read for yourselves the many other authors he scraps. Mr. Manford seems to think he has proved by me that the judgment of Matt. xxv. 31-46, is "only na- tional," and, therefore, " all in this world." Hence, he thinks " the discussion may as well close." He feels anxious for one of us to leave the city, or for the discus- sion to be otherwise brought to a " close." But he must make up his mind to " flounder " a little longer. Of course, there will be "nations" when Christ comes to judge the world. He will come to this world where " nations" are; " and before him shall be gathered all nations." And, moreover, the dead will be raised and judged too, as I have shown. But the judgment will be a judgment of the people in their individual and not in their national, capacity. To show tliat I am right in 342 Oral Discussion. this, I will read from the thirty-fourth to the fortieth verse : " Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the king- dom prepared for you from the foundation of the world ; for I was an hungered, 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 thirsty, 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 ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." Here we have the basis of what shall be the Lord's decision in that judgment; and it shows, beyond all con- troversy, that it is to be a judgment of persons, and not of nations, as such. The language is like that of the commission. When the Lord said, " Go teach all nations^ baptizing them" etc., he did not mean to have his disciples baptize the nations, as such ; but the indi- viduals of all nations. Baptism is not '•'■ national." Neither is the judgment to be. The gentleman may see, if he wishes to, that I do not rely upon the word "nations" in my argument, as he did in his. He quoted a promise of blessing to " the nations of the earth," and applied it to the dead in the spirit world ; while I show not merely that all nations shall be gathered before him when he comes for judg- ment, but the dead also are to rise and come into judg- ment. yudgment — Punishment. 343 Endlessness of punishment. Here the gentleman showed clearly to us all that he did not know how or where to take hold of the argument. He must take a rest on that. But, meantime, he gave us a little of the old song. " Endless punishment, endless woe, endless suffering, endless hell, endless death, are not in the Bible." And he thinks " it is curious enough if endless woe is really true, that such words do not once occur within the lids of the good book." Well, there is nothing in the Bible about endless bliss, endless joy, endless happiness, endless salvation, endless heaven, or endless anything else promised to man. "Endless life" occurs but once, and then it is neither predicated of man or promised to him. Did it ever occur to the gentleman that all this " is curious enough " t We are told that endless punishment is taught in " the Book of Mormon and the Koran." But, if the same language that the gentleman cites from those books were in the Bible, he would call it " figurative," " hyperboli- cal," or something else, and deny that it really and liter- ally taught endless punishment. Let us suppose endless and not eternal were used as descriptive of the punish- ment of the wicked, what would my friend then say ? He would then tell us, that endless occurs in buj: one other place in the Bible where it can be claimed that it means eternal; that endless is never predicated of God, of heaven, of life, of salvation, and, therefore, it cannot prove eterjtal punishment. He would show us that endless never describes the perpetuity of the Godhead, or heaven, or the future life ; and that as eternal does, it would be the proper word to describe the punishment of the wicked if it were really and literally eternal. And, indeed, he could make a better showing than he can as 344 Oral Discussion. the case now stands. The fact is, any man can misun- derstand the Bible if he wants to. Tlie Bible shares an infelicity that is common to all books. It is written in human language, and can be 7nisunder stood. If the Book of Mormon, or the Koran, were received as of divine authority, and the Bible was not, in this discussion, then I should expect my opponent to figure away the lan- guage of the Book of Mormon and that of the Koran, and stoutly contend that that of the Bible is literal, and does really teach eternal punishment. Then he would not have to shift the Bible teaching off on me, to hide his skepticism, when he wished to raise a howl over the terrible restraints it lays upon vice. Mr. Manford would like to have a debate on baptism. He wants a little sympathy from Pedo-baptists. I have no objection to his having it. He evidently needs sym- pathy from some good quarter. So far, he knows he has drawn upon the sympathies of only such as are not trying to obey God, and do not mean to try in this world; and, therefore, he now angles for a little from another quarter. His miserable perversions and distor- tions of my sermon and the writings of my brethren, from which he read only scraps., convince me that he does not mean fair dealing. I will, therefore, only say in reference to all he said about baptism, that I have never taught that all the unimmersed will suffer ever- lasting punishment, or be condemned in the judgment. I never believed it in my life. Mr. Campbell never taught it; but, on the contrary, expressly disavowed it all his life. My brethren do not teach it. They, with great unanimity, expressly disavow it; and he who reads their writings enough to make any use of them at all in a public way, knows it. It is the man who willfully Judgment — Punishment. 345 persists in disobedience to God that will be condemned when the Savior comes. It is for such that my friend stands in this debate. He is their champion, and whether or not he will eternally have even their sym- pathies remains for eternity to reveal. The gentleman tells us how he vanquished B. H. Smith, once upon a time, in the columns of his maga- zine. But he did not tell us how he once vanquished A. Campbell upon the pages of the same magazine, A. Campbell knowing nothing of the debate till it was nearly over! But as the gentleman drags Bro. Smith into this debate behind the wheels of his triumphal chariot, I shall take the liberty to express my opinion, as Bro. Smith is not here to speak for himself, that Bro. Smith abandoned the controversy referred to, because it was being run so low that he did not like to get down to it. I may be wrong, but that Is my guess. And it may be that it was for the same reason that those " papers pub- lished part of the letters and refused to publish the bal- ance that were written." I have known the like to occur. When I say I admit that everlasting does not always mean endless, I mean to say simply that everlasting is not always used in a strictly literal sense. What I mean by everlasting — or the word rendered everlasting in the passages I have quoted — ■" covering the whole of the period to which it Is applied," I thought the gentleman would readily understand. But it seems, for his special benefit, I shall have to illustrate my meaning. When this word is applied to the rocks, hills, or the Jewish priesthood, it does not simply describe or mark a portion of their existence, but it covers the whole period of their existence; and If, therefore, in such cases it does not 346 Oral Discussion. mean strictly and literally eternal^ it is because the period of the existence of the thing it describes is less than eternity, and not because the word itself is not competent to describe eternity. Will the gentleman say that that word means less than eternity when applied to God? I think not. Well, I say, when it is applied to life it always means eternal. This position cannot be refuted. True, men may, in some sense, be said to have "everlasting life" in this world; but, in such case, ever- lasting describes the life they have, and not the period of time for which they have it. When it is said that the believer " hath- eternal life," it is simply said that the '' life he has is eternal, and not that he will necessarily have it eter?ially. Life eternal, then, is not the life of a limited period, though one, in this world, may enjoy it only for a limited period. If I am correct in this posi- tion — and it remains to be shown that I am not — it follows that when everlasting, or the Greek word it represents, is applied to the after-death state of man's existence, it necessarily covers the whole period of that state of existence; and that, we agree, is literally un- limited — eternal. That is the argument. But you are told, that I have only assumed that the wicked will "go away into everlasting punishment" after death. Whether or not this is true, I am entirely willing for our hearers to decide. I feel most profoundly impressed that If I have not proved that the judgment, from which the wicked are to go away into everlasting punishment, is to be after death, then no man can prove that there is to be atiything after death. The gentleman admits that the going away into ever- lasting punishment and the going away into life eternal were to take place at the same time; but, to evade the Judgment — Punishment. 347 force of my argument from the antithesis of punishment and life, he denies that either was to be endless. He tells us that the life, called eternal, was " the life of the Gospel" — was "life in the kingdom of God;" and that the punishment, called everlasting, was the opposite — was moral death, consequent upon the rejection of the Gospel. Then, according to his teaching, when the kingdom was set up and the Gospel was preached, those ■who received the Gospel went into the kingdom and into life eternal; while those who rejected the Gospel remained out of the kingdom, and consequently re- mained in "everlasting punishment;" and he quotes "we have passed from death unto life" to prove this. This, of course, proves that when John wrote the words quoted, he and his brethren had passed into the king- dom. This fixes the setting up of the kingdom, and hence the coming of Christ in his kingdom, hence the judgment of Matt, xxv., prior to the writing of the epistle of John ! But had Jerusalem been de- stroyed when John wrote his Epistle? Certainly not! And now, as the gentleman has the kingdom set up and the judgment set, and some already gone away from the judgment into everlasting punishment, and others into life eternal, long before Jerusalem was destroyed, I sub- mit that he has no further use for the destruction of that city, than other decent folks. The gentleman must abandon forever the destruction of Jerusalem as the coming of Christ in judgment, and hence as the day of judgment, from which the wicked were to go away into everlasting punishment ; or he will have two com- ings of Christ in his kingdom, two kingdoms set up, two distinct days of judgment for Christ, two everlasting punishments, and two eternal lives! But really, I have 348 Oral Discussion. about concluded that he would not care to have a thou- sand days of judgment, and as many comings of Christ in judgment, and as many everlasting punishments, pro- vided only that he could succeed in crowding them all into \hQ. fasti But again : According to my friend. Christians were in the kingdom in apostolic times, had the life of the kingdom, which, he says, was the "life eternal" of Matt. XXV.; and hence they had passed the judgment spoken of in that chapter. But have I not quoted pas- sage after passage from the Epistles of the Apostles, [who, he says, had already passed his judgment] in which they speak of the coming of Christ in judgment as still future? Ceilainly I have. The passage in 2 Thessalonians, for instance. Was not Paul in the king- dom when he wrote it.'' Was not the kingdom then already set up.'' Had not Christ, accoixling to Mr. Manford, already passed judgment upon Paul.? Had not Paul already gone away into life eternal, if my friend is right when he says it means "the life of the Gospel," "life in the kingdom of God".'' And yet the AjDOstle says in that Epistle : " Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; and to you, who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ : who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; when he shall comQ to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired by all them that believe (because our testimony among you was belie^'ed) in that day." 2 Thes. i. 6-10. And, Judgment — Punishment. 349 moreover, the gentleman admitted that this passage refers to the same time and matter that the one in Matt. xxv. does! If he understands himself, I do not understand him : nor do I beheve his hearers do. It is not enough, however, for me to show up my opponent's " flounderings," inconsistencies, and self-con- tradictions. I must show that he is wrong as to the judgment of Matt, xxv., and the life and punishment that are to follow it. He says that that Judgment came when the kingdom was set up and the Gospel was first preached, and that all who recei\'ed the Gospel, went away into everlasting life — that is, the life of the Gospel — while those who rejected it, rertiained in moral death, which was the everlasting punishment. According to this, the reason why some go away into everlasting punishment and others into eternal life is that some receive the Gospel when it is preached to them, and others do not. Now, I grant that those who receive the Gospel when it is preached to them do pass from death to life, from condemnation to justification; while those who reject it remain in death, in condemnation; but I deny that the Savior refers to this matter in Matt. xxv. What he describes there is to take place when he comes in his glory and all the holy angels with him ; when he shall sit upon the throne of his glory, and all nations shall be gathered before him ; when, as I have shown by other scriptures, the dead shall be raised and shall stand before him. And, then, what is to be the reason why some shall go away into everlasting punishment and others into life eternal > This is an important point to be observed. The righteous are to go into eternal . life, because they shall have done something : " For I was hungry, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye 35^ Oral Discussion. £ ave me drink ; I was a stranger, and ye fook me in ; naked, and ye clothed me; I xvas sick, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me." The righteous will tlien inquire, "Lord, whcit saw we thee" thus, and wlien did we so ? And the King will answer, " Inasmuch as ye have doite it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." The decision of the Judge will then turn upon what men shall have done ■previously to the judgment day. The righteous will go into eternal life, because of what they shall have done; and the wicked into everlasting punishment, because of what they shall have not done. Does this answer to my friend's judgment day } When the Gospel was preached at Pentecost, for instance, were persons invited into the life of the Gospel for what they had before done ? Were persons then sentenced to punishment for what they had not previously done.'' Certainly not. It mattered not what pei'sons had or had not before done, when the Gospel was preached to them, they then alike had the privilege of entering into the kingdom and partaking of the blessings thereof, without reference to their past deeds. Had this not been the case, none could have entered the kingdom. When the Gospel was preached, the life or death, the salvation or condemnation, of men to whom it was preached, depended not upon what they had or had itot done, but upon what they xvould or would not then do. This will not be the case in the judgment of the last day — in the judgment described in Matt. XXV. Then the destinies of men will turn upon what is past. Then they will be judged according to the deeds done in the body. Does any one ask why this will be so.'' I answer, because the Gospel is now preached, and all are called upon to accept the Gospel, Judgment — -Punishment. 35 1 and to come into the kingdom of God's dear Son, and live a life of obedience to its laws — to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, entertain strangers, clothe the naked, visit the sick, and all in the name of the Savior; because God hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness, by Jesus Chi-ist. "At that day " men will receive a crown of righteousness or not, according as they shall have lived, or not, as the Gospel now requires. This accords with the Master's teaching all through the New Testament. Let us read one or two passages : "Then said he also to him that bade him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbors; lest they also bid thee again, and a recompense be made thee. But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind ; and thou shalt be blessed : for they cannot recompense thee : for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just." Luke xiv. I3, 13, 14. Also: "Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil, unto the resurrec- tion of damnation." John v. 38, 29. If, as I have before said, all this is not future, then, my friends, the Bible teaches no future. But it is future, and will all come to pass. Then the kingdom will be delivered up to the Great Father, and he will be all in all. Then the righteous shall " inherit the kingdom " and enjoy it for- ever, as an inheritance. " Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which, according to his abundant mercy, hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 353 Oral Discussion. to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, i"escrved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time." i Peter i. 3, 4, 5. The gentleman told you that Paul never wrote or spoke a Greek word that is rendered hell in our Bible but once, and that is in the 15th of Corinthians, "and there he says hell shall be destroyed^ He also told you in that connection that, " At the resurrection, then, all rule, authority and power, death and hell, are to be de- stroyed." This is just what I have been waiting for him to say. Mark you : All this destroying is to take place '•'•at the resurrection^ I believe every word of it; and I propose to help him to establish the point in your minds. And to do this, let us turn and read it all in one passage of scripture : " And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them : and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. A nd 'whosoever was not found ivr it- ten in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." Rev. XX. 11-15. Here we have an account of the com- plete accomplishment of the whole matter. Here we have the resurrection; and "at the resurrection," as my friend very coiTectly told you, we have "death and hell" Judgment — Punishment. 353 destroyed — the same hell Paul spoke of In the 15th of Corinthians. Here, also, " at the resurrection^'' we have the judgment, and punishment of the wicked ! " Who- soever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire," with " death and hell." All go together, at the same time — '•'•at the resurrection" ! Wonder how the gentleman likes to have my assistance ! " Hell " seems to be his forte, but I think he did not excel in this little episode on " hell." He must try it again. He can better afford to come out second best on any other question than on " hell." His reputation will certainly suffer if he fails even once on the " hell " ques- tion. Failing at eveiy point in this discussion, the gentle- man turns aside to get up a little fun over a sermon I preached in Chicago sometime since, on " Spiritism." Of course, he watches with a jealous eye everything that is said about '•'■Spiritism." That is the degree next to the one he now works in — that is, if he has not already taken that degree } But he tells you I said Tar- tarus meant our atmosphere. Did he show you that I was wrong.? What say the "Doctors," Mr. Manford, on this question .'' Where were the angels that sinned cast down to.^* What is meant, in scripture, by "the prince of the power of the air" .'' and by "wicked spirits in aerial regions } " What were the demons with which the Savior is said to have come in contact so often while in the world } If the gentleman will answer all these questions without doing any violence to scripture teaching, he will have less time to revel in infidel scoffs ings and sportings over Bible teaching. But he thinks it a frightful matter, specially for balloonists, that I bring Tartarus — one "hell" — round about the earth. 30 354 Oral Discussion. But he brings all "hells" upon the earth. And if one hell, brought around the earth, would make hell forty- five miles deep, how deep is hell according to his view ? There are three hells mentioned in scripture, and as he brings them all to the earth, he has hell about one hundred and thirty-five miles deep ! But he proposes to name one hell Sweeney instead of Tartarus^ but what will he name that one over in the 20th of Revelation, wherein "death and one hell" and somebody else are to be destroyed " at the resurrection" ? Shall we call it " the second death " ? or shall we call it Afanford? But, my friends, in all this there is no argument. We have, however, to answer some men according to their folly. Were it not so, I should have passed by all that was said about Tartarus. \Time ex- pired. [mr. manford's fifth reply.] According to the gentleman's own statement, when Jesus said, " and before him shall be gathered all na- tions," he simply meant the nations that were to be on earth when he would come — not one man, woman or child who would live or die before that event. He expressly admitted, that " all nations " in that passage DO NOT MEAN THE DEAD. He read it, however, in the first place to prove that Christ, when he would come, would judge all mankind — all of Adam's race, from the first to the last — the living and the dead. But he has been driven from that position, and now he admits, because he is forced to, that " all nations " do not mean THE DEAD. Truc, he said, the dead will be there, but Judgment — Punishment. 355 he admitted tliat " all nations " do not include them. But" mark you, Christ did not say the dead^NOxiX^ be there — only " all nations." I will read the passage : " 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 na- tions; and he shall separate them one from another as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats." Not a WORD ABOUT THE DEAD BEING THERE. It WaS tO be a judgment of nations, and Mr. Sweeney admitted, that " all nations " do not include the dead. He also admit- ted, that Christ was to come to this world to judge THESE NATIONS. The gentleman is right. No doubt of it. This noted passage, then, does not teach the judgment he is trying to establish — it only teaches a judgment of the nations when Christ would come. Let this be remembered. This passage is the key to all those passages that speak of Christ judging men. When the New Testament says, Chiist would "judge the quick and the dead," that is, believers and unbelievers, as St. Paul explains (Eph. iii. 1-5; Col. ii. 13), or, as Macknight says, "Jews and Gentiles," it means the righteous and the wicked of the NATIONS, or, as Christ called them, the sheep and the goats. When Paul said, "'He hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world" he meant the nations that would be on earth when he would come, would be judged. None of these scriptures relate to a judgment in eternity — none to the judgment of the departed. They all speak of the same judgment Matt. XXV. does — a judgment of nations. The gentleman is left without any evidence of his judgment day. Hia <' house is left unto him desolate." 356 Oral Discussion. Our friend has been pushed to this point. When I cited the gloiuous Promise that, "All nations whom Thou hast made shall come and worship before thee, Lord, and glorify thy name," he said there was no reference to the dead there; and he had not brass enough in his face to say to this congregation, that " all nations" inean mone than " all nations whom Thou hast MADE." Simply "all nations" may mean all nations of a given period, or a given portion of the earth, but " all nations whom Thou hast made" surely mean all man- kind. It can mean nothing less. A prophet speaks of a judgment of the nations : *' Behold the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee. And I will gather ALL NATIONS AGAINST JERUSALEM to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled; and half of the cjty shall go into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city." Zach. xiv. I, 2. This is a judgment of the natio7ts. The time of the judgment is called " the day of the Lord." The Lord would come and execute this judgment. The prophet also speaks of a division of the judged. And this judg- ment was to commence at Jerusalem. Is it not the same day., the same coming of the Lord., the same judg- ment of the nations, spoken of in Matt, xxv? Without doubt, this judgment of the nations Jesus speaks of, is the same of which the prophets so often write. I have given you their testimony in a previous speech, to which 1 refer you. As the judgment was to be of the nations, and on the earth., therefore the separations., and the punishment also, were to be on earth. We all know there is now a Judgment — Punishment. 357 moral separation of mankind. Tiie pure and the right- eons are " in heavenly places in Christ Jesus," while the impure and vicious are debased and degraded. The one are in possession of spii'itual life, while the other class are in a state of death and destruction. But there is not the outrageous and heart-rending divisions of mankind his creed contemplates — shutting up some in hpaven, and shutting up some in an endless hell to be the sport of devils eternally. The gentleman's devil could not divide mankind worse than that. And will the glorified Jesus do as bad as satan could, had he the power.'' Away with such a horrid dogma! It is worse than Atheism. As John Wesley said, " I had rather believe in no God than believe him to be an almighty tyrant." Concerning the word everlasting, he said, " When it is applied to the after-death state of existence it covers the whole period of that existence." But we have spen that, according to our friend's own admission, it is not so " applied " in the passage before us. That speaks of a judgment in this world, a judgment of the nations, and so, according to his own showing, the punishment is in this world — among the nations of the earth. I will read several passages whei^e similar language occurs, and you will see at once that men can suffer on earth what the Bible calls everlasting punishment. " Therefore behold, I, even I, will utterly forget you, and I will forsake you, and the city that I gave you and your fathers, and cast you out of my presence: and I will bring an everlasting reproach upon you, and a per- petual shame, which shall not be forgotten." Jer. xxiii. 39. 40- This "everlasting reproach" and "shame" is thus explained : ♦ 358 Oral Discussion. "Behold, I will send and take all the families of the north, saith the Lord, and Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will bring them against this land, and against the inhabitants thereof, and against all these nations round about, and will utterly destroy them, and make them an astonishment, and a hissing, and perpetual desolations. Moreover I will take from them the voice of mirth, and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride, the sound of the millstones, and the light of the candle. And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. And it shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish the king of Babylon, and that nation, saith the Lord, for their iniquity, and the land of the Chal- deans, and will make it perpetual desolations." Jer. XXV. 9-12. This was a judgment of the nations ; it was temporal ; it was to be endured on earth. Yet it is called " ever- lasting." On earth, then, men can suffer everlasting punishment. Another passage : "Come near, ye nations, to hear; and hearken, ye people; let the earth hear, and all that is therein; the world, and all things that come forth of it. For the indignation of the Lord is upon ALL NATIONS, and his fuiy upon all their armies; he hath utterly de- stroyed them, he hath delivered them to the slaughter. Their slain also shall be cast out, and their stink shall come up out of their carcasses, and the mountains shall be melted with their blood. And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll : and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a fall- ing fig from the fig-tree." Isa. xxxiv. 1-4. Here is a judgment of " all nations " again ; and when it should take place, " all the hosts of heaven shall ytidgment — Punishment. -rxc^ be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll," etc., w^ords much like Matt, xxiv., and 3 Peter iii., which the gentleman refers to the destruction of the universe; but mark, how the next words explain this language : " For my sword shall be bathed in heaven : behold, it shall come down upon IDUMEA, and upon the people of my curse, to judgment. The sword of the Lord is filled with blood ; it is made fat with fatness, and with the blood of lambs and goats, with the fat of the kidneys of rams : for the Lord hath a sacrifice in BOZ- RAH, and a great slaughter in the land of IDUMEA. And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat vrith fatness. For it is the DAY of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompenses for the controversy of Zion. And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night nor day ; the smoke thereof shall go up forever : from generation to generation it shall lie waste: none shall pass through it forever and ever. The corynorant and the <^///f?r« shall possess it; the otf/ also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones of emptiness. They shall call the nobles thereof to the kirigdom, but none shall be there, and all her frinces shall be nothing. And thorns shall come up in her palaces^ nettles and brambles in the fortresses thereof; and it shall be a habitation of dragons^ and a court for o-wls. The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island^ and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the screech-oxvl also shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest. There shall the great owl make her nest, and lay, and hatch, and gather under her shadow; there shall the vultures also be gathered, ever^' one with her mate." 360 Oral Discussion. If the prophet had not said, that all this referred to a judgment in Idumea and Bozrah, and if several of the verses had been left out, what a splendid passage it would be for the gentleman to prove his day of judg- ment by at the end of time ! He would have said, tri- umphantly, here the prophet speaks — i, Of a judgment of ALL nations; 2, Of the destruction of the starry heavens; 3, Of the day of the Lord's vengeance; 4, Of punishment forever; 5, Of unquenchable fire. And he would have wound up by insinuating that I was a skeptic, because I dissented from his notion, as he often does. But the passage tells where this judgment of " all nations" was to be located. It was to be in this world — in Idumea. And the fire that was not to be quenched, and the smoke that ivas to go up forever, relate to tem- poral calamities. The " everlasting punishment," and " everlasting destruction," in the gentleman's proof-texts, also relate to temporal judgments. These passages ex- plain them. The Bible explains itself. Everlasting, then, does not mean endless when applied to punishment. It means endless when applied to God and immortal existence, because God is endless, and an immortal existence is endless. Nothing is endless save what proceeds from God, Sin is the work of man, and so punishment, its result, we bring on ourselves. They are both of the earth, and earthy, and consequently will end. But virture and immortality ai'e of heaven, and ai'e, therefore, endless. The Greek word, kolasis, rendered punishment, in the passage, " These shall go away into everlasting punish- ment," clearly indicates that everlasting does not mean endless when applied to that word. It signifies correc- tion, chastisement. Greenfield defines it, " chastisement, Judgment — Punishment. 361 punishment." Hedricus, in his Greek Lexicon, says, that "The trimming of the luxurious branches of a tree or vine, to improve it and make it fruitful," in the Greek h C3.\\e.(\ kolasis^ or pztnishmcni. Donnegan says, "The act of clipping or pruning — restriction, restraint, reproof, check, chastisement." The learned Grotius says, " The kind of punishment which tends to the improvement of the criminal is what the Greek philosophers called kol- asLS^ or chastisement. Liddell's Lexicon defines it, " Pruning, checking, punishment, chastisement, correc- tion." Max Miller, the most learned thinker of this century, says, that the primary idea of the word is to cleanse^ io purify. These are his words: " Do we want to know what was uppermost in the minds of those who formed the -word for pHnishment, the Latin pcena or punio., to punish, the root ^^^, in Sanscrit, which means to cleanse^ to purify .^ tells us that the Latin derivation was originally formed, not to ex- press mere striking or torture, but cleansing., correcting^ delivering from the stain of sin." The statements and definitions of all these learned authors and lexicographers exactly correspond with the Bible idea of punishment. This would be a correct rendering of the passage before us — These shall go away into everlasting correction, or chastisement. They were to be punished for their correction, improvement, to cleanse them from sin. Punishment is a means to a good end. As this is so, of course punishment is not ENDLESS. It would be a contradiction in terms to say " endless correction," " endless chastisement," hence the word everlasting does not mean endless when applied to punishment. The truth is, divine punishment is reformatory in its / 362 Oral Discussion. tendency, and is one means by which the Lord is re- deeming' humanity. This the Bible clearly teaches. I will read some of its testimony. "And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people." [This judgment of the " nations" is the same judgment of the nations spoken of in Matt. XXV. 33 : "And before him shall be gathered all nations." Now, observe the result of this judgment.] "And they shall beat their swords into plough-shares, and their spears into pruning-hooks : nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." Isa. ii. 4. The judgment is on earth, and the result Is peace and happiness — not eternal strife and wretchedness in hell. " When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood from Jerusalem from the midst tliereof by the spirit of judgment., and by the spirit of burning.^'' Isa. iv. 4. "Judgment" and "burning" were to purify the peo- ple — not damn them and burn them eternally, as Mr. Sweeney asserts. "With my soul have I desired thee in the night; yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early : for when thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabit- ants of the world will learn righteousness." Isa. xxvi. 9. A clear statement that divine punishment leads to righteousness, and consequently is not endless. " From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in them; but wounds, and bruises, and putrlfying sores." Isa. I. 6. Mr. S. would say, " They are clean past redemption, yudgmcnt — Punishment. 363 and the sentence should be passed, Depart into endless torment — Let him that is filthy, be filthy through the ceaseless ages of eternity." " With God all things ARE POSSIBLE," and hence the Lord adds : "And I will turn my hand upon thee, [to torment them eternally?] and purely purge away thy dross, AND TAKE AWAY THY TIN. Zion shall be REDEEMED WITH JUDGMENT." Here we learn what God saves and what he destroys. He saves the sinner^ but destroyes his sins. "On heaven's door these lines inscribed : The sinner saved, but sin is damned. But down our throats this lie is crammed : Sin is saved, the sinner damned." "And the Lord shall smite Egypt: he shall smite and HEAL it: and they shall return even to the Lord, and he shall be entreated of them, and shall heal them." Isa. xix. 22. The Lord, then, smites, wounds, to heal ; kills to make alive, — just what might be expected of our Heavenly Father. *• Pain is to save from pain ; all punishmtnt To make for peace, and death to save from death ; Great Source of Good above, how kind to all ! In 'vengeance kind! Pain, Death, Gehenna, Save." From the mea7iing of the word punishment, then, and from what the Bible says about the object of punishment, it is evident that punishment cannot be endless in dura- tion, and hence everlasting cannot mean endless when applied to it. I will now give the testimony of wise and good men, that everlasting does not mean endless. The well-known 364 Oral Discussion. scholar and author, Dr. Thomas Dick, in one of his let- ters, dated Dundee, Scotland, February 13, 1849, says: "The terms eternal, everlastijtg^ etc., certainly do not of themselves, in most cases, imply duration without end, as many of the objects to which such epithets are applied are acknowledged to be limited in their duration. \Vhen I consider the boundless nature of Eternity, and ■when I consider the limited duration of man, I can hardly bring myself to believe that the sins of a few fleeting years are to be punished throughout a duration that has no end, more especially when it is declared, more than a score of times, that ' the mercy of God endureth forever,' and that ' his tender mercies are over all his works.' If his mercy endureth forever, it appears scarcely consistent with the idea that punishment will be inflicted throughout unlimited duration." Macknight writes, "I must be so candid as to ac- knowledge that the use of the terms forever, eternal, and everlasting, in other passages of Scripture, show that they who understand them in a limited sense, when applied to punishment, put no forced interpretation upon them." Truth of Gospel History, p. 28. According to Macknight, in asserting that everlasting punishment does not mean endless, I put no forced interpretation on the Bible. Olshausen, the great German, tells us, that the "word is ambiguous, and cannot be relied on in the argument for endless punishment." You will find this in his commentary on the sin against the Holy Ghost. Rev. John Foster, the celebrated Baptist divine and scholar, says, " The terms do not necessarily and abso- lutely signify an interminable duration." Schleusner, in his Lexicon of the New Testament, defines the word thus: "Any space of time, whether longer [or shorter, past, present, or future, to be deter- yudgment — Punishment. 365 mined by the person or thing spoken of, and the scope of the subjects; the hfe or age of man; any space in which we measure human life, from birth to death." Nothing can be more evident than that everlasting punishment docs not mean endless punishment. Mr. S. admits, that the term "endless punishment" is not in the Book. He said I had " sung the song that endless woe, endless hell, endless damnation," were not in the good Book. It is time the world was told, that those words are not in the Bible. You see them in the creeds, in the hymn books — in Mr. S.'s hymn book — in all sorts of orthodox books; you hear them in sermons and prayers and exhortations, as the words of God ; and it is time such stuff was branded with a lie all over it. They slander God, and defame heaven. He does nol deny, that the Mormon Bible and Brigham Young teach endless damnation. But he is mean enough to try to class me and my brethren with certain Spiritualists. Brigham Young and the Mormons, generally, with end- less hell in their creed, practice abominations that are a disgrace to our country, a disgrace to this century. What a blessed injluence faith in aft endless hell has ! Our opposing friends offer this argument for endless woe. Dr. Patton, in the Advance, a paper he publishes in Chicago, has lately given it some prominence. " The Pharisees in the days of Christ believed in endless pun- ishment. Jesus did not tell them it was an error. He rather employed the same terms, when speaking of punishment, they did, and must have meant the same." There is no doubt that the Pharisees believed in endless woe. Josephus, a Pharisee himself, says they did ; and that is all the truth there is in the argument. And, by the way, the life and character of the Pharisees are an ^66 Oral Discussion. excellent commentary on the evil influence of faith in eternal woe. Why did not the good doctor make a point there ? It is not correct that Jesus employed the same terms the Pharisees did when speaking of punishment. Jesus applied aionios to punishment ; but the Pharisees applied aidios — two different words. Josephus gives the opinion of the Pharisees in these words : " But the souls of the bad are allotted to an eternal {aidios) jDrison, and pun» ished with eternal {aidios) retribution." Now Christ used ANOTHER WORD TO EXPRESS THE DURATION OF PUNISHMENT. He said, ^^ aionios punishment," '•'•aionios damnation," and Paul said, '•'■aionios destruction," but NEVER, NEVER '•'• aidios punishment," " aidios destruc- tion," '•'•aidios damnation." Josephus often uses the word aionios^ the same word that Christ and his apostles apply to punishment. He writes of the "everlasting {aionios) name," that the patriarchs left behind them; of the " everlasting {aionios) glory" of the Jewish nations and heroes;" of the "everlasting {aionios) reputation of Herod ;" of the " everlasting {aionios) worship " in the temple of Jerusalem ; of the " everlasting {aionios) im- prisonment" of John. This is the same word that Christ and his disciples used when speaking of punish- ment. Josephus did not mean ejidless by it ; neither did they mean endless by it. You see, then, that Christ did NOT apply the word to punishment that Mr. Sweeney does, nor the word the old Pharisees did. That is a remarkable fact, and proves that Jesus did not mean endless punishment, when he spoke of aionios punish- ment. He did not use the word the Pharisees did, and he did not mean what they did. Christ not only condemned the life of the Pharisees, yudginent — Punishment. 367 but he condeftzned their doctrine. Said he to his dis- ciples, " Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees," which was explained to mean " the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees." Matt, xvi. 6, 12. The Sadducees believed that God would annihilate men, and the Pharisees believed he would punish them endlessly^ which is still worse; but Jesus condemned both doctrines, and told his disciples to *' BEWARE " of both. And I would kindly say to friend, "To beware of the doctrine of the Phari- sees" OF ENDLESS PUNISHMENT. What! did Jesus Christ believe and preach that mil- lions, made in the image of God, would be damned by that God whose very name is Love, to all eternity! What! did Jesus Christ believe and preach that millions of the precious souls, for whom he was about to die, would be cursed by his God, cursed by himself, end- lessly! I would sooner expect to see it proved that Franklin taught prodigality ; Washington, tyranny; Howard, cruelty; Newton, ignorance, and Wesley, 7?iaterialism. The brother has tried to prove that Jesus taught end- less punishment, because he spoke of Gehettna., a word translated hell. We all know what that word literally means. It was the name of a valley near Jerusalem, called " The valley of the sons of Hinnom." Gehenna is its name in the Greek language. On the words of our Lord, (Matt. v. 22) "Shall be in danger of hell ^xq" {Gehemia—fire) Dr. Clarke comments thus: " Our Lord here alludes to the valley of the sons of Hinnom. This place was near Jerusalem. It is prob- able Jesus means no more than this: — if a man charge another with apostasy from the Jewish religion, a rebel- 368 Oral Discussion. lion against God, and cannot prove his charge, then he is exposed to that punishment (burning aHve) which the other must liave suftered if the charge had been substan- tiated." Parkhurst, in his Greek Lexicon, says: "A Gehenna of Jire^ in its outward and primary sense, relates to that dreadful doom of being burned alive in the valley of Hinnom." It is said, that the Jews, in the days of Christ, designat- ed their place of endless torment by the word Gehenna. But this is all assumption — there is not a particle of evidence of its truth. No one pretends that the Old Testament uses the word in that sense. Neither Philo nor Josephus, both Jewish writers in the first century, use the word in that sense. We have seen that literally it signified a valley in Judea; \)n\. figuratively it meant the temporal calamity that was to come on the Jewish nation in the generation in which our Lord lived, when Jesus said, " Then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be." Matt. xxiv. 3i. It is used literally in the following passages : ,/ " And the border went up by the valley of the SONS OF Hinnom unto the south side of the Jebusite; the same is Jerusalem : and the border went up to the top of the mountain that lieth before the valley of THE sons of Hinnom westward." Josh. xv. 8. " And Josiah defiled Topheth, which is in the val- ley OF THE children OF HiNNOM." 2 Kings xxiii. lO. "Moreover Ahaz burnt incense in the valley of THE SONS of Hinnom, and burnt his children in the fire, after the abomination of the heathen." 2 Chron. xxviii. 3. "And they have built the high places of Tophet, Judgment — Punishmettt. 369 which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in tlie fire; which I com- manded them not, neither came it into my heart. There- fore, behold, the days come, saith the Lord, tliat it shall no more be called Tophet, nor The valley of the son of Hinnom, but The valley of slaughter : for they shall bury in Tophet, till there be no place." Jer. vii. In these places Gehenna is used literally. In the fol- lowing it is used figuratively : "Thus saith the Lord, Go, and get a potter's earthen bottle, and take of the ancients of the people, and of the ancients of the priests, and go forth unto the valley OF THE SON OF HiNNOM, which is by the entry of the east gate, and proclaim there the words that I shall tell thee; and say, Hear ye the word of the Lord, O kings of Judah, and iithabitants of Jerusalem; thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears shall tingle. Because they have forsaken me, and have esti"anged this place, and have burnt incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents; they have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind; therefore, behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that this place shall no more be called Tophet, nor The valley of the son of Hinnom, but The valley of slaughter. And I will make void the counsel of Judah and Jerusalem in this place; and I will cause them to fall by the sword before their enemies, and by the hands of them that seek their lives; and their carcasses will I give to be meat for the fowls of the heaven, and for the beasts of the earth. And I will make this city desolate, and an hissing; every one that passeth thereby shall be astonished and hiss, because of all the plagues thereof. And I will 32 37° Oral Discussion, cause them to eat the flesh of their sons, and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat every one the flesh of his friend, in the siege and straitness where- with their enemies, and they that seek their lives, shall straiten them. Then shalt thou break the bottle in the sight of the men that go with thee, and shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, Even so will I break this people, and this city, as one breaketh a pot- ter's vessel, that cannot be made whole again ; and they SHALL BURY THEM IN ToPHET, till there be no place to bury. Thus will I do unto this place, saith the Lord, and to the inhabitants thereof, and even make THIS CITY AS Topiiet: and the houses of Jerusalem, and the houses of the kings of Judah, shall be defiled AS THE PLACE OF TopHET, bccausc of all the houses upon whose roofs they have burned incense unto all the hosts of heaven, and have poured out drink ofierings unto other gods. Then came Jeremiah from Tophet, whither the Lord had sent him to prophesy; and he stood in the court of the Lord's house, and said to all the people, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Behold, I will bring upon this city, and upon all her towns, all the evil that I have pronounced against it; because they have hardened their necks, that they might not hear my words." Jer. xix. Christ, when he spoke of Gehenna^ or of the valley of the sons of Hinnom, which is the same thing, at- tached the same sense to it that the prophets did befoi-e him. He either meant that wretched valley near the walls of Jcrualem, or the calamities that were soon to come on his nation ; and there is not a scrap of evidence in the Bible, or out of it, that Jesus meant the endless torment the Pharisees believed in, by the word. My friend has often complained, that I exaggerate the horrors of his hell. He would have you think it is not near so wretched a place as I represent. He has an object in this; he well knows, that when endless damnation is Judgment — Punishment. 371 presented in its true character it staggers belief. Did you ever hear him ; did you ever hear any preacher of endless punishment, tell his hearers, save on an occasion like this, that the hori'ors of an endless hell can be exag- gerated? Do not preachers of that stamp, rather, ex- haust the English language in depicting the v^^retchedness of the damned? Allow me to i-ead from one of Rev. Spurgeon's sermons about the wretchedness of hell, as a full justification of all I have said. It is from his dis- course on the " Resurrection of the Dead : " " There is real fire in hell, as truly as you have now a real body — a fire exactly like that we hav^e on earth in everything except this, that it will not consume, though it will torture you. You have seen the asbestos lying in the fire red hot, but when you take it out it is uncon- sumed. So your body will be prepared by God in such a way that it will burn forever without being consumed. When thou diest thy soul will be tormented alone — that will be hell for it — but at the day of judgment, thy body will join thy soul and then thou wilt have twin hells, thy soul sweating drops of blood, and thy body suftused with agony : the veins becoming a road for the feet of pain to travel on; every nerve a string on which the devil shall forever play his tune of Hell's Unutterable Lament." According to the gentleman's own hymn book, horrible as this is, it is only a dim painting of an endless hell. It sings: " Horrors past imagination Will surprise your trembling heart, When you hear your condemnation, Hence, acursed wretch, depart ! Hence, with satan And his angels have your part." Hell, then, is more than the most active and fertile 372 Oral Discussion. mind can imagine. A few more choice lines from this book: "Then sink into the vast abyss, To ENDLESS RUIN HUBl'd." " There is a death whose pang Outlasts the fleeting breath : O what ETERNAL HORRORS HANG Around the second death." This last verse is deemed so good it is repeated in two different places. Another of his hymns sings : " Rushing in flaming ruin down." Do not again charge me with misrepresenting your hell while you sing such horrid descriptions of it. Ladies and gentlemen, make hell mild a.?, you please; but if it is endless in duration, its horrors are past imagin- ation. A billion of years is only one second of eternity, and so would be only one second of an endless hell. Trjr to count a billion — 1,000,000,000,000 — which is a million times a million. This is quickly spoken; but no man can count it. If Adam had counted 200 in a minute, and had kept counting to the present hour, he would not have counted one billion. Counting 200 a minute, would be 12,000 an hour, 288,000 a day, 105,120,000 a year; and to count a billion would require more than 9,5 1 2 years. What a vast period, then, would be one billion of years! What a vast period for immor- tal souls to suffer! And after one billion, they must suffer another billion, and another, and ANOTHER, and ANOTHER; aye, after suffering a MILLION OF BILLIONS OF TEARS, be no nearer the end of their damnation, than when they commenced ! And all this for the sins of this brief life ! Yes, for not Jtidgment — PunisJitnent. 373 being Immersed in water!! My God, what a creed! I could not believe such a monstrosity if I ivould; and I would not if I could. And this fathomless, boundless eternity of wretchedness for no possible good. If this is all so, well might the damned cry in the language of Dr. Young, 4 believer in endless woe himself: •• Father of Mercies ! why from silent earth Didst thou awake and cune rrn into birth ? Tear me frum quiet, ravish me from night, And make a thankless present of thy light ? Push into being a reverse of thee, And animate a clod with misery ? The beasts are happy ; they come forth and keep Short watch on earth, and then lie down to sleep. ****** But our dire punishment, forever strong. Our constitution, too, forever young. Cursed with returns of vigor still the same, Powerful to bear and satisfy the flame ; Still to be caught, and still to be pursued ; To perish still, and still to be renewed ! And this my Help, my God, at thy decree ; Nature is changed, and hell should succor me ! And canst thou then look down from perfect bliss. And see me plunging in this dark abyss? Calling thee Father, in a sea of fire ? Or pouring blasphemies at thy desire ? With mortal's anguish wilt thou raise thy name ? And by my pangs omnipotence proclaim ? " I repeat, and all this wretchedness for no good to EARTH, HEAVEN Or HELL ; tO GoD, ANGELS, Or SPIRITS ; but only to gratify a fiendish spirit, that even the devil of the gentleman's creed would be ashamed of If the passages in the Bible that our friend quotes, and others quote, to prove endless punishment, do really 374 Oral Discussion, mean endless misery^ no tongue can tell, and no mind can conceive, its horrors. He I'ead these words of our Savior, " Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting FIRE, prepared for the devil and his angels." Now, if this means, what the gentleman says it does mean — that countless millions of mankind are to live endlessly in FIRE with DEVILS, do I exaggerate, can anybody ex- aggerate, the horrors of such a hell .'' When Jesus speaks of "the FIRE that never shall be quenched," of being " CAST into HELL FIRE where the worm dieth not," if he means a "fire" that will burn endlessly, and a " worm " that will eat into the soul eternally, the wretch- edness is indeed '•'• past imagination," as the gentleman's hymn book says. If when John writes of the " bottom- less PIT," of " the LAKE OF FIRE BURNING WITH BRIMSTONE," in which some were to be " tormented day and night, forever and ever," he means to describe the eternal abiding place of billions of our race, then, I repeat, it is awful beyond conception. If this is all so, then Rev. Dr. Joseph Trapp's account of hell is no exaggeration : " Fire^ too, must make thee sensible of hell : With everlasting burnings who can dwell? Tormenting Tophet is ordained long since, E'en for the king, the potentate, the prince. It is prepared : 'Tis roomy, vast, and wide, With store of fuel plenteously supplied : The breath of God makes the full furnace boil ; And, like a stream of brimstone fires the pile. Doomed to live death, and never to expire, In floods, and whirlwinds of tempestuous fire, The damned shall groan ; fire of all kinds and forms — In rain, and hail, in hurricane and storms ; Liquid and solid, livid, red and pale; A flaming mountain here, and there a flaming vale. Judgment — Pitnlshment. 35^5 The liquid fire makes seas ; the solid shores, Arch'd o'er with flames the horrid concave roars. All Hell is Fire — above, beside, below, Fires in hard metallic substance glow, Or spout in cataracts, or in rivers flow. In bubbling eddies rolls the fiery tide. And sulphurous surges on each other ride. The hollow, winding vaults, and dens, and caves, Bellow like furnaces with flaming waves. Pillars of flame in spiral volumes rise, Like fiery snakes, and lick the infernal skies. Sulphur, the eternal fuel, unconsumed. Vomits redounding smoke, thick, unillumed." These passages from Jesus and John, I have read, are plain to me — not at all in the way of my faith in the redemption of humanity. They relate to temporal calamities coming on nations and people. The Bible so explains them. Read the following terrific description of the judgments of old Jerusalem : " But if ye will not hearken unto me to hallow the sabbath day, and not to bear a burden, even entering in at the gates of Jerusalem on the sabbath day; then will I kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched." Jer. xvii. 27. " Moreover the word of the Lord came unto me, say- ing, Son of man, set thy face toward the south, and drop thy word toward the south, and prophesy against the forest of the south field ; and say to the forest of the south, Hear the word of the Lord; Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will kindle a fire in thee, and it shall devour every green tree in thee, and every dry tree : the flaming flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from the south to the north shall be burned therein. And all flesh shall see that I the Lord have kindled it : it shall not be quenched." Eze. xx. 45-48. " And I will pour out mine indignation upon thee, I 37^ Oral Discussion. will blow against thee in the fire of my wrath, and de- liver thee into the hand of brutish men, and skillful to destroy. Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land ; thou shalt be no more remembered : for I the Lord have spoken it." Eze. xxi. 31.32. "And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, the house of Israel is to me become dross: all they are brass, and tin, and ii'on, and lead, in the midst of the furnace; they are even the dross of silver. Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Because ye are all become dross, behold, therefore I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem. 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 in my fury, and I will leave you there, and melt you. Yea, I will gather you, and blow upon you in the fire of my wrath, and je shall be melted in the midst thereof. As 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." Eze. xxii. 17-22. All this is explained to mean the desolation that was to befall the Jews, when in captivity in Babylon, hence the prophet says : "And the whole land shall be desolate, and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. And it shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish the king of Babylon, and that nation, saith the Lord, for their iniquity, and the land of the Chaldeans, and will make it perpetual desolations. And I will bring upon that land all my words which I have pronounced against it, even all that is written in this book, which Jeremiah hath prophesied against all the nations." Jer. XXV. 11-13- All these punishments were for a benevolent purpose, Jicdgment — Punishment. 377 hence the prophet adds, "I will CONSUME THE FILTH OUT OF THEM." Eze. xxii. 15. This reminds me of a passage from Origen, who lived in the third century, and was a believer in the salvation of all men : " The sacred Scriptures," said he, " does, indeed, call ' our God a consuming fire,' (Deut. iv. 34,) and says that ' rivers of fire go before his face,' (Dan. vii. 10,) and that ' he shall come as a refiner's fire, and purify the people,' (Mai. iii. 2.) As, therefore, God is a consuming fire, what is it that is to be consumed by him.? We say it is -wickedness^ and whatever proceeds from it, such as is figuratively called ' wood, hay, and stubble,' (i Cor. iii.) which denote the evil works of 7na7t. Our God is a consuming fire in this sense ; and he shall come as a re- finer's fire to purify rational nature from the alloy of wickedness and other impure matter which has adulter- ated the intellectual gold and silver; consuming what- ever of evil is admixed in all the soul." The gentleman said I garbled his printed sermon, Webster's dictionary, and the productions of his brethren I read from. Now, let him prove it. I demand the PROOF. Here are the books, magazines, and papers I read fronl. Now, sir, prove your charge or take it back. He has charged me several times with misrepresenting A.Campbell; but he has \\q.yqx attempted to prove it. I can prove he has misrepresented Campbell, and will do it if it is denied. The Methodists do not indorse Dr. Clarke! Their Conferences and Book Concerns publish his Works. Is not that a good indorsement? I quote from authors for the same reason he did — to get the meaning of words. He did right^ but I did wrong I My authors condemn his definitions. That is what is the matter. 33 378 Oral Discussion. The gentleman's comments on the following is a curi- osity : "And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud, with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up YOUR heads; for YOUR redemption draweth nigh. And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig-tree, and all the trees; Avhen they now shoot forth, YE see and know of YOUR own selves that summer is now NIGH AT HAND. So likewise YE, when YE see these things come to pass, know YE that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily, I say unto YOU, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled." Luke xxi. 27-32. 1. Notwithstanding Jesus said, all this would take place in the generation in which he lived, nearly two thousand years ago, the gentleman, in defiance of Christ's words, in defiance of the meaning of the terms " this generation," and in defiance of learned authority gen- erally, stands up here and tells you it relates to events far in the future ! 2. Although Christ told the disciples that they SHOULD SEE ALL THESE THINGS COME TO PASS, the gentleman will have it that it was all a hoax — that they would die thousands of years before those things would come to pass ! He will have it, too, that by ye^ you^ your^ he did not mean the persons he was talking to, but somebody that might be on earth thousands of years after 1 1 That caps the climax. If a man should ask me the way to the court-house of this town, and I should reply, " Tou go to this street and that street; you turn to your right, and then to your left, and then you will be there," if some one should understand me, hy you and your^ to mean somebody that might live on earth ten Judgtnent — Punishment. 379 thousand years hence, would you not conclude there was a fool or an msane man somewhere? Let us tiy to exercise some common sense in reading the Bible. 3. Jesus said, " And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads ; for your redemption draweth nigh." The brother thinks, that the redemption which was nigh nearly two thousand years ago has not been realized yet, and Jesus knew when he told them this, that it would not be realized till ^after the disciples had been in heaven several thousand years ! What redemption would be nigh to them in hea- ven ? What evil will the disciples be redeemed from at the resurrection } Mark, they were to be redeemed from some evil. The gentleman's theology tells us, that all go to heaven or hell at death, without being judged. And it must be, the brother thinks, the disciples, through mistake, went to the wrong place at death ; and at the "judgment day" he talks about they will be redeemed. Well, that would be a redemption. They would be likely to "lift up their heads" in view of such a redemp- tion. The "redemption" spoken of in Rom. viii., the gentleman referred to. Christians on earth — not in hell or heaven — are " waiting /or." He had better read that passage again. The truth is, the redemption promised the disciples, was from the " tribulation " spoken of from the fifth to the twenty-second verses, which the gentleman admits came on the people of that age. " Then shall be great tribulations, " etc., said Jesus. The disciples would be delivered., redeemed from them. The gentleman cannot understand how Christ's coin- ing, his kingdom and judgment, could be spoken of as present by the apostles, and yet also referred to as future ^a Oral Discussion. events. There is no difficulty. Jesus, when on eartli, said, "the kingdom is ivithin you" " is come unto you," men " are pressing into it," yet, at the same time, he spoke of it as -a future institution. The disciples did the same. They were " translated into the kingdom." " But ye ARE COME unto Mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem," etc. Heb. xii. 32. At the same time they spoke of that city as yet to come. " And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God." Rev. xxi. 2, 10. This is the explanation : The kingdom of God was es- tablished in the hearts of many during our Lord's personal ministry, but it was to be more and more developed and extended in after years^ hence it is spoken of as coming. It was extended and developed at Pentecost when three thousand were born into it in one day ; it was extended still more in the world when the Gentiles gladly received the Gospel ; and still more when the power of the Jew- ish nation was annihilated, and the Jews could no longer retard its progress. In later ages the kingdom has come to many hearts and many lands, and it will continue to be extended further and further till the kingdoms of this world shall be governed by that spiritual kingdom which is "righteousness, joy and peace in the Holy Spirit." Christ's coming to bless the world with " grace and truth" was a glorious coming, hence the heavenly mes- sengers heralded it, "Glory to God in the highest; on earth peace and good will to men." I know the gentle- man made a desperate effort to show that Jesus did nof yudgment — P?inishment. 38 1 come in the glory of his Father; and, to sustain such a remarkable position, tried to twist some of our Lord's words into a shape to his liking, Christ, though, when he "was on earth was " The man Christ Jesus, "The Son of God," " In the brightness of God's glory, and the express image of his person." Heb. i. 3. Was there no "glory" in all that? "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given : and the government shall be upon his shoulders: and his name shall be called Wonder- ful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his govern- ment and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from hence- forth even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this." Isa. ix. 6, 7- Was there no " glory " in such a character and purpose.'' What folly men will sometimes run into. The gentleman read Rev. xx. 1 1-15. The judgment of that passage is, of course, the same as that of Matt. XXV. 31 — a judgment of the nations. The dead were to be judged. Does he contend that dead persons will be judged.^ Is this literal? Is the " lake of fire" literal? He laughs at the idea that anything is jigurative. If this is not figurative, dead persons will stand and be judged! But if this is figurative, the whole passage may be. Without doubt " the dead " means the " dead in trespasses and in sins." Christ began to judge such long since, as we have seen. After all spoken of in that passage had passed away — some of the judged cast into the " lake" and some into the " holy cit}^," we have this about those in the " city," " And the nations of them that are saved shall walk in 382 Oral Discussion. the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honor into it." Rev. xxi. 24. This city, the gentleman contends, is heaven after the resurrec- tion. If he is right, there will be nations in heaven, and "KINGS OF the earth" there. But he has told us over and over, that there will be no nations in heaven. Now, what will the man do.'' He must either admit there will be nations there, or admit that the judgment of " the dead" is not at the end of time. He must do one or the other. Which will he do.? We will see. No doubt this is the same "holy city," " the new Jerusalem " that Paul said he and his brethren had " COME to." It was manifested in Paul's day, and still more in after times. For the meaning of " lake of fire" I refer to Rev. xvii. 8, 11, and xix. 20, 21. \Time expired. [mr. Sweeney's closing speech.] While the gentleman was laboring so arduously to make 3'ou believe that I rely simply upon the phrase "all nations" to prove a universal judgment, I was reminded of the venerable saying, that, "a drowning man will catch at straws." The phrase " all nations " may include all mankind, and it may not. So the gentleman understands it. But it was amusing to hear him contending that " all nations whom thou hast made " means more than simply " all nations," as if God had "made" more nations than "«// nations"! That was decidedly a rich criticism. The gentleman has admitted that Matt. xxv. and 2 Thes. i. refer to the same matter; and what is meant by Jtidgment — Punishment. 383 " all nations," Matt, xxv., is'explained in 3 Thes. I., where the apostle sjDeaks of " us," [the apostles] " you," [Chris- tians], and of " them that ki»ow not God and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." In i Thes. iv. he uses these phi'ases : "We who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord," and " them that are asleep," or dead. That is, the living and the dead. Then, in i Cor., where, as I have shown, he treats of the same subject, he uses language that all of us admit means all mankind. Then why should the gentleman try to impress you that I rely simply upon the phrase "all nations" (which I had before said does not neces- sarily include every individual) to prove a universal judgment.'' I am sure I cannot tell. Mr. Manford astonishes me by seriously contending that the Savior must have come in his glory in the lifetime of the disciples to whom he directly addressed himself in Matt, xxiv., because he used the pronouns of the second person, "ye" and "you." Let us try this argument. In Acts iii. 22, we have the following language by Peter: " For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you., of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things, whatso- ever he shall say unto you." Now these words quoted from Moses by Peter were addressed directly to the Jews living moi^e than 1400 years before Christ was born. Moses spoke directly to them, using the pro- nouns of the second person, "ye" and "you," just as Jesus did in Matt. xxiv. Now cannot our learned friend here, by his kind of argument, prove that Jesus came the first time in the lifetime of the Jews to whom Moses spoke directly, just as easily as he "demonstrates" that Jesus came in his glory in the lifetime of the dis- 384 Oral Discussion. ciples to whom he directly addressed hunself ? Of course he can. The learned gentleman should remember that Jesus was not simply telling his disciples how to go " to the court-house''^ I He was speaking for all time to come. Moses was the prophet of God, and he so spoke, as we have seen ; and Jesus was that prophet like unto Moses, and in this respect spoke like unto him. The gentleman spent quite a portion of his time tell- ing us ho-do long eternity will be, and what a frightful thought is that of etei'nal punishment! I have no ob- jections to his parading those figures and speaking that piece all over the countiy while he lives. I would only • suggest that if he would wind up every time by telling the people how infinitely important it is for them to obey the Lord — that Jesus is " the author of eternal salvation to them that obey him " — instead of scouting the necessity of being "baptized in water," in my humble judgment he would do more good than he does by trying to "stagger belief," by telling them that I believe that God will '"''gratify a fiendish spirit " by damning them eternally for not being "baptized in water." By the way, while I do not believe that God will damn anybody eternally simply " for not being baptized in water," I do believe that many will be damned eternally for that settled and willful determination not to obey the Lord, which may crop out in a refusal to be " baptized in water" just about as well as anywhere else. I say to you, my friends, in all sincerity and earnestness, I would not, for all the gold and glory this world can give, stand before the judgment seat of Christ in the shoes of him who wittingly trifles with a7ty commandment of God. I know not just luhat the punishment of the wicked will be. I have not said I do. I am not responsible for Judgment — Punishment. 385 what Spurgeon or any one else has said on the subject. A great many fooUsh things have been said on all sub- jects. I believe the Bible. I have studied it prayerfully, and in the fear of God. I believe it teaches that w^hen Jesus shall come to be glorified in his saints, the wricked will be separated from them, and punished with ever- lasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power — not " to gratify a fiendish spirit," as many an enemy of the Bible has said, but because they 'will fzot be saved — will not love virtue for virtue's sake, but " have pleasure in unrighteousness " and " glory in their shame." My friend, of course,,, will never believe as I do upon the subject of this discussion, for in his last speech he said, " I would not if I could." Aye, that is the secret of much unbelief. "I would not if I could." What if my friend had stood in the garden when God made man and gave him control of the world; do you not suppose he would have said, "I would not if I could" believe that tears and sighs and sad wails will freight every breeze that goes wp to heaven for thousands of years? If my good friend had the control of this world I suppose he would have no sin or suffering at all in it. But he does not control it. And if God does not control it to suit him, he will not submit; but will say, " I would not if I could." RECAPITULATION. We agree that Jesus taught, when here, that he would come again ; that he would come to judge the world, and that from that judgment the wicked would be pun- ished, and that their punishment would be what tlie Bible calls everlasting:. In all this we agree. I have 3S6 Oral Discussion. taken the ground that this coming of Christ to judge the world, foretold by himself and often referred to by his inspired apostles, is yet future. This my opponent has stoutly denied, asserting, on the other hand, that it took place when the " kingdom was set up," and that the judgment day is the Gospel day — began when Christ entered upon his reign. At least this has seemed to be his position, at times, though at other times he has argued as stoutly that Christ came at the destruction of Jerusalem, and that that was the day of judgment. I. I have shown that the coming of Christ to judge the world is described as a coming " in his glory, and all the holy angels with him." Matt. xxv. 31. At his com- ing " in his glory, and all the holy angels with him," the dead are to be raised, the world judged, the saints glori- fied, and the wicked punished. I find all this in one passage : "Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recom- pense tribulation to them that trouble you, and to you who are troubled rest with zts, WHEN the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mightv angels, [evidentlv same coming of Matt. xxv.J in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the pres- ence of the Lord and tlie glory of his power, zvhen he shall come to be glorified in his saints." 2 Thes. i. 6-10. The gentleman admits that this passage and that in Matt. xxv. refer to the same judgment and punishment, and thus concedes that the coming of Christ in judg- ment to punish the wicked, is the same as his coming "to be glorified in his saints." And the coming of Christ " to be glorified in his saints" is liis coming to yudgmenf — Punishment. 387 raise the dead. This, I think, I have clearly shown. I will briefly refer again to the scriptures by which I claim to have done so. "When Christ, our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear ivith hitn in glory." Col. iii. 4. This cjjnnot refer to Christ's appearing " in his king- dom," for that was past, and the Colossians were in the kingdom already, as we learn in the first chapter of this Epistle. It cannot refer to what my friend calls Christ's coming at the destruction of Jerusalem, for then the Colossians did ttot " appear with him in glory." It can- not be shown that one single Colossian Christian was ever in Jerusalem. But to prove what is meant by Christ being "glorified in his saints" and his saints appearing "with him in glory," I quoted Philip, iii. 18-21, where, after speaking of the "enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction," the apostle says, "For our conversation is in heaven, yVo;;? whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall change our vile body^ that it may be fashioned like unto h\s glorious body." Here we have the " destruction of the enemies of the cross of Christ " connected with the coming of Christ from heaven to "change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body." This is evidently future. But to prove this to my opponent's satisfaction even, I have shown that this coming is the same as that spoken of in i Cor. xv., which he admits is connected with the " immortal resurrection." Let us again notice the teaching of that chapter: " As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive, but every man in his own order, * ^ at his coming." Verses 23, 23. Then, at verse 25, the apostle speaks of the destruction of the " enemies," just as in the pas- sage in Philippians. And in verses 42, 43, 44, he speaks 388 Oral Discussion. of the change of " our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body," in language substantially the same as that in Philippians. Here it is: "So also is the resurrection of the dead. * * * It is sown in dishonor, [that is, a ' vile body,'] it is raised in glory ^ [that is, ' fashioned like unto his glorious body,'] it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body^ it is raised a spiritual body." Who cannot see that the teaching of these passages is identically the same? This last one is the only one my friend can afford to admit teaches a resurrection of the dead, and I identify its teaching with that of others from the same apostle, and thereby show that it refers to the coming of Christ to raise the dead, judge the world, punish the wicked, and " to be glorified in his saints." So he will have to deny that even the 15th of Corinthians teaches a future resurrection of the dead — which, by the way, he did, while on the former proposition. His resurrec- tion is past I And his final salvation of all mankind is past, too! Let me show this in a few words. You remember, that while on the former question he quoted - — or, rather z;?/5quoted — Peter's language in Acts iii. 21, wherein the apostle speaks of " the times of restitution of all things," etc., and made "restitution of all things," mean the reconciliation and salvation of all men. Now, let us read the whole verse in connection with the pre- ceding one: "And he shall send Jesus Christ, who before was preached unto you; whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the woi'ld began." Here the apostle sj^eaks of Jesus being sent to our world again ; but " the heaven must receive " him, he says, " until the times of restitu- Judgment — Piot/'shmeni. 389 tion of all things" etc. But my friend says the heaven only received him ufztll Jerusalem was destroyed, and that then he was sent again ; and, therefore, " the times of restitution of all things" — and hence Mr. Manford's universal salvation — was fulfilled when Jerusalem was destroyed ! ! So my friend has crowded the coming of Christ, the resurrection, the judgment, the punishment of the wicked, and his universal salvation^ all into the past! Are Universalists ready to accept all this, simply to get by the judgment?! But to show more conclu- sively that the coming of the Lord to be glorified in his saints is future, and to take place at the resurrection, I read i Thes. iv. 13-17: I " But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others who have no hope. * * For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, [Matt, xxiv., ' the word of the Lord' is found,] that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not go before them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God ; and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and so shall we ever be with the Lord." This the gentleman makes Jigierative, notwithstanding it is almost word for word the same as the same apostle's teaching in the 15th of Corinthians, which he makes literal! Let us compare some of the apostle's language in the 15th of Corinthians with this to the Thessalonians. In the 51st and 53d verses of that chapter he says: " Behold, I show you a mystery : we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the 390 Oral Discussion. twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised Incorruptible, and wc shall be changed." Who can read these two passages from these two letters of the same apostle and not conclude that he Is treating of the same subject in both? I am ready to say no candid man can. 11. I have also shown by scriptures bearing directly upon the subject, that the judgment connected with the comings of Christ is to be after death, and, therefore, future. I have time now to recite only a part of my proofs upon this point. I. In the first place I cited several passages from the apostle Paul, putting the judgment of the world by Jesus Christ in the. future, notwithstanding he lived and wrote in the kingdom of Jesus Christ, and, therefore, after Christ had come " in his kingdom." Let me again refer to two of those passages. Acts xvll. 31: "Be- cause he [God] hath appointed a day, In the which he w/// judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained." Here the apostle teaches a judgment of "the xvorW "in righteousness" by Jesus Christ, at an "appointed day" in the. future. Now, to show that this judgment is after death, we read from the last Epistle of the apostle's life some words spoken just before he was "offered." 2 Tim. iv. 6, 7, 8 : "For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand : I have fought the good fight, I have finished my course., [earthly career,] I have kept the faith ; he^tceforth there Is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge., shall give me at that day; and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.'^ This is perfectly conclusive. The apostle, when he had finished his earthly career, looked Judgment — Punishment. 391 forward to " that day" in which " the Lord will judge the world in righteousness." Then he expected to re- ceive a crown of righteousness. Observe, also, that he connects "that day" with the Lord's ^^ appearing." Paul was not looking forward to the Gospel day, for his crown of righteousness; for as respects that, he had finished his course. Nor was he looking forward to the destruction of Jerusalem for liis crown — or if he was, he was certainly disappointed, for he was not present when that little town was disposed of. "That day" in which Paul expected his crown, is evidently the same as that "day" in the which God will judge the world in right- eousness by Jesus Christ. He had already said in this same Epistle to Timothy, chapter i. 12: "For I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day." 2. I have shown that the dead are to be judged, and that the judgment is therefore necessarily after death. Acts X. 43: "And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God, to be the Judge of quick and dead." The gentleman has argued and quoted various "Doctors" to prove that "quick and dead" means "saints and sinners," and I grant that it sometimes does. He has also proved, after his manner of proving things, that it means "Jews and Gentiles." But I have shown luhat fl?caa? are to be in the judgment. Matt. xi. 22: "But I say unto you. It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgfne?zt, than for you." Matt, xii. 41, 43: "The men of Nineveh shall rise in judg- ment with this generation. * * * Xhe queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment witli this gen- 39^ Oral Discussion. eration." Rev. xx. 13, 13: "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it ; and death and hell \Jiades\ delivered up the dead which were in them : and they were judged every man according to their works." If these scriptures do not teach that the dead are to rise and be judged, then lan- guage is not competent to so teach. 3. In the third place I have shown that it is expressly taught in Scripture that the judgment is after death. Heb. ix. 27: "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment." You have heard the extemporized interpretation of this passage, by which Universalists take all the meaning out of it; but you are not satisfied with it, I know. The passage is entirely too plain for its force to be evaded by wit or cavil. III. The wicked, I have shown, are reserved unto the day of judgment to be punished, and are to be pun- ished after death. Rom. ii. <, : " But after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath, and rev^elation of the righteous judgment of God." 2 Peter iii. 7 : "But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fii'e against the day of judg- ment and perdition of ungodly men." 2 Peter, ii. 9 : " The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished." Matt. x. 38: "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 yudgment — Punishment. 393 both soul and body in hell." Luke xii. 4, 5 : "And I say unto you, my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that, have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him; which after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell, yea, I say unto you. Fear him." The word "hell" in the last two passages, the gentleman has correctly told you is from " Gehenna^'' and literally means the " valley of Hinnom." But he admits that our Savior used it in another sense. He does not believe the Savior was, in this language, only admonishing his disciples to " Fear him who, after he hath killed, hath power to cast into the valley of Hinnom " .'' He seems, however, to think that the Sa\ior meant only the punishment that was coming upon the Jewish nation ! Then, I suppose the Savior meant to forewarn his disciples to " Fear him who, after he hath killed" hath power to cast both soul and body into the calamities that were to come upon the Jewish nation"! That is decidedly sublime! The gentleman makes an after-death hell, even of the de- struction of Jerusalem ! True, Gehenna literally means a valley in this world. It is also true that paradise literally means a place in this world. Heaven [from the Greek Ouranos^ literally means " the regions of the air." But paradise in the New Testament does not mean a park, or a garden ; but a place of future rest. Heaven, also, in the New Tes- tament, often means the place of future bliss. So, by Gehenna, in these passages, the Savior evidently means a place of punishment after death. " Fear him, who, AFTER HE HATH KILLED, hath power to cast into Gehenna^ IV. Endlessness of punishment. To prove that the 34 394 Oral Discussion. punishment of the wicked will be endless, I quoted the following scriptures : Matt. xxv. 46, " And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal." 2 Thes. i. 9, " Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and froin the glory of his power." I showed that the word rendered everlasting in these passages does mean endless. The gentleman makes a great ado, be- cause the phrase "endless punishment" does not occur in the Bible. But he paid no attention to the fact that "endless" occurs but once in the New Testament, where it can be claimed that it means literally eternal, and there it is used by Paul as equivalent to the word that is rendered "forever," and "everlasting." Aionios^ the word rendered everlasting in these passages, is the word by which the Greeks ordinarily expressed endless dura- tion, as eveiy Greek scholar knows. Adjuncts of quality were used by the Greeks, which we allow imply endless- ness, because they usually describe such things as are said to be eternal or everlasting. But aionios was the word by which Greek writers expressed endlessness. The gentleman told us that the Pharisees did actually teach the docti^ine of endless punishment, but that they used aidios and not aionios to express endless. This was amusing. Does not every Greek scholar know that aidios and aionios come from the same root precisely.'' They are both from aei., that is defined "ever, always, forever." All the duratioit., therefore, that is in aidios is in aionios., as they both derive their idea of duration from the same adverb aei. Therefore, I claim that in admitting the Pharisees taught endless punishment, the gentleman unwittingly gave up the controversy! But the Savior said, " Beware of the leaven of the Judgment — Punishment. 39^ Pharisees," which, Mr. Manford tells us, was endless punishment; but, fortunately for the truth, the Savior added, "which is hypocrisy." But as the gentleman admits the Pharisees taught the doctrine of endless pun- ishment, did it never occur as strange to him that the Savior, if he was a Universalist, did not repudiate it in a manner something like that in which Mr. Manford now repudiates it.'' He could have done so. We are told that kolasis, the woi'd rendered punishment in Matt. XXV., means "correction;" and tliat therefore "everlasting punishment" only means "everlasting cor- rectio7i " ! Mr. M. thinks that when a sinner rejects the Gospel he then goes away into correction., or training! Well, into what does he go who receives the Gospel } Does he go into the opposite of correction or training.? That into which the wicked will go is contrasted with that into which the righteous will go, according to the Savior; and if Mr. M. proves that the wicked will go into everlasting correction, or training, or progress., he will come pretty near sending the righteous into ever- lasting punishment! Anything to save the wicked! But we may learn what is meant by punishment in Matt. XXV. by consulting 2 Thes. i. — "Who shall he pun- ished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power." This tells what is meant by "punishment" in Matt. xxv. VVe have agreed that both passages refer to the same matter. The gentleman tells us that " all divine punishment is reformatory." How does he know that to be true } He does not know it at all. It is 7iot true. Chastening may "yield the peaceable fruits of righteousness to them that are exercised thereby," provided they as sons are willing "to be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, 396 Oral Discussion. and live." Therefore the Apostle says: '■'■ If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons: for what so?z is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards^ and not sotis." Heb. xii. 7, 8. Some are "bastards, and not sons;" and such are called " the enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is [not correction, for they will not be corrected, but] destruc- tion T This is a sufficient answer to all that was said about punishment being reformatory. I would have all our hearers read all the passages the gentleman cited as bearing upon this point, in their connection, and they will have no trouble in understanding them. He also read you from the Old Testament of certain temporal judgments sent upon different nations in olden times, and claimed that those passages related to the same mat- ter to which Matt. xxv. relates. To see how false and utterly absui-d such a claim is, you have only to read those Scriptures in their connection, and then carefully compare them with Matt. xxv. But my allotted time is out, and I very cheerfully sub- mit the argument. I heartily thank you. Gentlemen Moderators, Ladies, and Gentlemen, for the kindness and uniform courtesy you have extended to us during our discussion, and for the attention you have given to what we have had to say. May God bless you, and give you wisdom to choose the right and the safe way. [ Time expired. yudgment — Punishment. 397 [mr. manford's closing reply.] My friend's varied notions concerning what " all nations " mean reminds one of the sand bars of the Mis- souri river — very changeable — very uncertain. When I read the glorious Promise, that " All nations whom Thou hast made shall come and worship before thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name," that " All nations of the earth, all families of the earth, all kindreds of the earth, shall be blessed in Christ," he boldly and stoutly contended, over and over again, that such language, in the Bible, did not include the dead — only referred to men while in this world. He had to take that position then, or admit that all mankind will finally be blessed in Christ, and worship and glorify God; or, in other woi'ds, " be recon- ciled to God and saved," as my first proposition reads. That is the explanation he gave those passages all through the discussion on the first proposition. But when the second proposition came before us, he wanted to prove that all the dead would be judged, and some sent to heaven and some to an endless hell; and to do that he cited these words, " And before him shall be gathered all nations." He contended then, in direct opposition to what he had said before, that " all nations" mean all mankind from Adam to the last person that God should create. He afiirmed that passage teaches, that all the dead will be assembled before God's bar to be judged. That is what he read it to prove. But I reminded him of what he had said about "all nations" not including the dead; and he at once saw where he was, and so admitted that all nations did not include the dead; but he added, "the dead will be raised and judged too" clearly making a distinction between " the 39^ Oral Discussion. dead " and the " nations." I then showed that Jesus, in that passage (Matt. xxv. 31-40), said nothing about the dead, the resurrection, or a future state. He simply spoke about judging tlie nations. Our friend saw that he was again cornered and exposed, and in his last speech gave up this second position with regard to all nations not including the dead, and affirmed, that " all nations may include all mankind," that is, the dead as well as the living. I confess, that I cannot understand how an honest and sincere man can resort to such trickery in defense of his faith. Before I would beat about in that manner to save my cause I would give it up. After shifting about in this disgraceful manner to make out that somebody will be damned eternally, he contended that " all nations may mean all mankind," yea, that such terms do sometimes mean all mankind. Surely, if " all nations" ever mean all mankind, they mean that in the Promise of God to man. In that Promise the words " all nations" arc so carefully qualified that their intent is as clear as daylight. The Promise reads, " All nations whom Thou hast made," " All nations of the EARTH," " All families OF the earth," " All kindreds OF the earth." And then, to remove all doubt of the universality of the Promise, it is expressed in other terms equally as universal in their meaning: "Every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall swear that in the Lord have I righteousness and strength," "I will draw ALL men to me," " To him are all things," " As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." These passages all relate to the one Promise — the Promise of universal blessedness. The gentleman thinks it is funny that "all nations" yudgment — Punishment. 399 may mean less than " all nations whom God hath made," but that it is profound wisdom to assert that " all nations whom God hath made " means less than simply all na- tions! We all know that by the words "all nations" we often mean all nations of a given period or given portion of the earth ; but I challenge him to produce a passage in the Bible where the phrase " All nations whom God has made" means one soul less than all mankind. It cannot be done. In the discourse of which his text is a portion, " all nations" occurs several times. Christ told his eleven disciples, that " ye shall be hated of all nations." There, all nations, of course, meant the existing nations of the earth when the disciples were living. Again, he said, "And this Gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world, for a witness unto all nations," and Paul wrote a few years after, that " their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world ; " that the Gospel had been " preached to every creature which is under heaven." These passages explain what is meant by all nations in the gentleman's pi-oof-text. He is astonished beyond measure, that I am so stupid as to suppose that when a person is addressing another, he means by you and ye^ the person or persons addressed, not somebody that may be living on earth somewhere thou- sands of years hence. He thinks, that when Christ told his disciples, " When YOU shall see all these things " — ■ one of which was his coming in power and glory, he did not mean they should see one of them, but somebody's eyes would see them several thousand years after ! It is pretty hard to believe, that a man can be in earnest in such kind of talk. But he must be so absurd as to say that you and ye do not mean you and ye, or admit 4CK!) Oral Discussion. that Christ has come in judgment. And then he told us, that Moses, when he said " A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you" used the word you in the same ridiculous sense. Here again he is mistaken. Barnes says, "This promise pertains to the series of prophets which God would raise up, and has no direct reference to the Messiah." And he says this is the view nearly all commentators take of the passage. Joshua was one of the series, and the Jews, Moses addressed, did behold him. So hy you Moses meant those he was talking to. He said that I " scouted the necessity of being bap- tized in water. I do no such a thing. Baptism is a useful institution. It is so regarded by my brethren. But we do not think it is a condition of salvation, and all go to hell who are not immersed in water. My brethren are as earnest in the necessity of obeying the Gospel as any people can be, notwithstanding his false insinuation. He may- deny here that immersion is a condition of salvation; but I have proved from his own productions that he believes there is no salvation without it. He has said several times that I misrepresented him and his brethren, and in my last reply I remarked : " The gentleman said I garbled his printed sermon, Webster's dictionary, and the productions of his brethren I had read from. Now let him prove it. I demand PROOF. Here are the books, magazines, and papers I read from. Now, sir, prove your charge or take it back. He has charged me several times with misrepresenting A. Campbell ; but he has never attanpted to prove it. I can prove he has misrepresented Campbell, and will do it if it is denied." This is what I called on him to do, but he passed it Judgment — Punishment. 401 all in silence. He knew I had not misrepresented him, his brethren, or the dictionary. He teaches, his brethren teach, that there is not a promise in the Bible for one that has not been immersed in water. In one of his speeches he said I had pretended to have had a discus- sion with Rev. Alexander Campbell, of Bethany, Va. There is not a word of truth in his statement. The brother said, " I know not just what the punish- ment of the wicked will be ; " and all through this dis- cussion he has tried to make us think, that endless dam- nation will be about what most of mankind will want in hell, and he has charged me with misrepresenting his and his brethren's views of future punishment. It seems he has made similar statements about hell in another quarter, and one of his brethren calls him to an account for it. I find the following in the Christian Standard^ the Disciple organ of Cincinnati, Ohio, from S. W. Leonard : " Bro. Sweeney says : ' I know not what the future hell of the wicked will be, any more than I know what the heaven of the righteous will be.' But, do we all believe what the Bible says? Let us see. Christ says, Matt. XXV. 41 : ' Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlast- ing FIRE, prepared for the devil and his angels.' The Revelator says. Rev. xx. 10: 'The devil that deceived them was cast into a lake of fire and brimstone, * * and shall be tormented day and night forever and ever.' Also xxi. 8 : ' But the fearful and unbelieving, * * shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone,' This we believe; but Bro. S. don't even suppose it to be true, for he says : ' I have never supposed that God is going to follow up the poor wretched man who will not have heaven, and vin- dictively punish him to all eternity with some horrible instrument of torture in a lake literally burning with fire 402 Oral Discussion. and brimstone. Nothing of the sort.' So we see that neither Christ nor John came any way near suiting Bro. S. in their description of hell. He cannot even suppose that it will be anything like their representation of it. Neither does he believe that Christ told the truth in Matt. XXV. 41, in saying that hell was 'prepared;' for Bro. S. says, ' Perhaps the sinner will, in a gi'eat meas- ure, make his own hell, which may not be wholly unlike some scenes in this world.' Such teaching would suit the Spiritualists; but Dives (see Luke xvi.) tried in vain to get a drop of water into his hell." This brother Leonard is sound in the faith, and don't adopt his brother Sweeney's new fangled notions about hell. He even charges his brother with infidelity, and with pretending to be wiser than Christ. Now, this Mr. Leonard is right, and Mr. Sweeney is wrong, if those passages quoted mean endless torment. Spur- geon, Edwards, and all these other hell-fii*e preachers are right, if those passages mean what Mr. Sweeney says they do mean — endless punishment. Either the Spur- geon view of those passages must be received, or the Universalist view. One or the other. There is no middle ground. Either the horrors of hell are fast imaginatio7i, as Mr. Sweeney's hymn book sings, or sin and woe will have an end. The gentleman told us, that after reading the Bible " carefully and prayerfully " he was satisfied it teaches " everlasting destruction." Wonderful ! No one denies it teaches everlasting destruction, as clearly as it teaches that the priesthood of Aaron was an '•'-everlasting priesthood ; " that the Jews should have " the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession," (Gen. xvii. 7, S) ; that the " mountains are everlasting" though they shall be "scattered" (Hab. iii. 6); that "the servant jfudgment — Punishment 403 shall sen^e his masi&Y forever " (Ex. xxi. 6 ) ; that "stran- gers shall be hondvnen forever " (Lev. xxv. 46 ) ; that " the earth ahxdcth. forever" (Eccl. i. 4) ; that " the earth with her bars was ahout ]onah forever " (Jonah ii. 6). If the brother has read the Bible " carefully and prayerfully" he must have seen that forever and everlasting do not mean endless duration, but, as Barnes says, " an age." If there was less inlidelity in his creed, and more wis- dom, love, mercy, and justice, he would see the " fiendish spirit" of endless damnation, and be amazed at the un- belief that believes in such cruelty. No; "I would not if I could" believe in eternal hell torments. While God is Wise, Merciful, Just, and Good; while Jesus is the loving Savior of the world; while the Gospel is good news to all, I would not believe in eternal wrath and vengeance. God, Jesus, the Law, the Gospel, must all be transformed into pure malignity before I can subscribe to such a fiendish creed. From the garden of Eden to the ends of the earth ; from Adam down through all generations, there has been far more virtue than vice, truth than error, joy than sorrow, hap- piness than misery, hence the good man rejoices that God made this world. But if this world had been the hell of the gentleman's creed, angels would have wept tears of blood when Adam was made in the image of God. The gentleman reached his " recapitulation." Let us see what he has done for his proposition. He assumed that a judgment that was future eighteen hundred years ago must, therefore^ be future now. Such a " must there- fore " is not worth refuting. Because the French Revo- lution was future when Christ was on earth, there has not yet been a French Revolution, according to the 404 Oral Discussion. gentleman's logic ! He admitted that Christ, when on earth, promised to come again in his kingdom, shortly, and that that coming took place long since. That, then, was Christ's Second Coming. His coming In his kingdom. Then the spirit of truth was poured upon the disciples, and Christ was "glorified in his saints," and he has been "glorified In his saints" In all ages since that day. They were then, and have been ever since, exalted to the right hand, to heavenly places in Christ Jesus; they entered the Gospel kingdom "which is righteousness, joy and peace in the Holy Spirit," and partook of its life — its everlasting life. That was a coming In " glory," and for a glorious purpose. But the kingdom was to be taken from the Jews, and they cast into outer darkness. As the temporal judgment that came on Idumea Is called " unquenchable fire," punish- ment forever ; as the seventy years captivity of the Jews is called " everlasting shame," " everlasting contempt," so the tribulation that came on the Jewish nation Is called " everlasting punishment," " everlasting destruc- tion." And as the principles of the kingdom blessed, saved, and glorified In the first century, and has blessed, saved, and glorified the saints in all ages and climes, so the principles of that kingdom have condemned error and vice In high and low places among all nations, " the Jews first, and also the Gentiles." When Christ came in his kingdom, his reign, his judg- ment, commenced ; and that reign, that judgment, will continue till he shall resign the kingdom to God the Father (i Cor. xv.) The judgment day Is the day of Christ's reign. It commenced when Christ came In his kingdom, "to be glorified of his saints" and dreaded by his enemies. We have seen that Matt. xxiv. and xxv. ; Judgment — Punishment. 405 2 Thes. 1. 6-10; Acts xvii. 31; 2 Peter iii. 3-10, and Rev. XX., all refer to this coming of Christ in his kingdom to reign, to judge. This is evident from the passages themselves, and from Matt. x. 33, xvi. 27, 38, xxiv. 34; James v. 7-9; Rev. xxii. 6, 7, 10, 13, 30. These pas- sages inform us ivhcn the gentleman's proof-texts, just referred to, were fulfilled. And his texts are further illustrated by Dan. vii. 13, 14; Isa. ii. 3, 4, ix. 6, 7, xxxiii. I, 16, xxxiv. 1-16, xlii. i, 4; Jer. xxiii. 5, 39, 40; Zee. xiv, I. 2, 3. 1 hope you will delib- erately examine these scriptures I refer to when at your homes, and you will see that they illustrate and explain the gentleman's proof-texts, and show that he has misapplied them. For what is meant hy Jire, hell, punish?nent, I refer you to the quotations from the Bible in my last reply, to which the brother paid but little attention. My friend told us, that aionios is the word by which the Greeks expressed endless duration. We have only his say so for that, as he furnished no evidence of its truth, whereas I have proved from the best authority that aiofiios means time indefinite. Even A. Campbell says it signifies " time indefinite." The learned world is against the gentleman. Besides, neither Christ nor his disciples were Greeks ; they were Hebrews, and we have proved that neither Josephus nor the Bible writers meant endless duration by everlasting. Philo, Josephus, and the Pharisees, expressed endless duration by aidlos, and the brother said that word is from the same root that aionios is. Half of that statement is true, and half is not true. Besides, usage attached endless duration to aidios, but not to aionios ; hence the Pharisees used the former word and Jesus the latter. 4o6 Oral Discussion. So much concerning the coming of Christ in his kingdom, to reign, to judge, to reward, and punish. The gentleman has made a poor reply to my arguments on these points. But he did the best he could, and as much as any one could do. But I am sorry to say, that there was a shameful misrepresentation running through all of his last speech. I say shameful, because it must have been designed. He knew better. I stated distinctly in my first reply on the proposition before us to-day, that when Jesus would deliver up the kingdom to God, it is said he would come again. He came in power and glory in his kingdom, and then the judgment com- menced. He will also come when all who die in the Adamic nature shall be made alive in the heavenly na- ture, to deliver up the kingdom, the redeemed universe, to God, and then God will be all in all (i Cor. xv.) And between the beginning and ending of this kingdom ; between the coming in the kingdom and the coming at the end of it, all the judgment, punishment, hell, dam- nation, in the New Testament, are limited. There is no judgment, punishment, damnation, hell, after Christ's coming at the end of his kingdom. Nothing of the kind. God will then " be all in all." But he represented me as affirming, that the oialy coming spoken of in the New Testament was Christ's coming in his kingdom before some whom he addressed would die. When Paul said, " When Christ who is our life shall appear^'' he doubtless referred to his coming when God shall " be all in all," and I said so in my first reply, but he declared I referred that passage to his com- ing in his kingdom. He also misrepresented me in his comments on Phil. iii. i8, 21. I told him that the com- in£f to " changfe our vile bodies" referred to the resurrcc- yudgment — Punishment. 407 tion. Why did he thus mistake my position r He also misrepresented Paul in saying that he connected the destruction of men with that coming. He did no such a thing, as the passage shows. The apostle represents the "enemies of the cross" as then living, and the de- struction being at hand when he wrote. Men can be destroyed this side of the resurrection. He pursued the same unfiir course when speaking about i Cor. xv. Notwithstanding I had told him, over and over again, that the coming spoken of there referred to the resurrec- tion, he represents me as teaching that that coming has taken place. I am amazed that he should do so. Per- haps he had no other way of filling out his time. He had better have said nothing. He also affirmed, that Paul "connects the destruction of enemies" with that coming. Yes, he does. But what enemies? Mr. Sweeney says, some of mankind. Now see how he errs. " Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule, and all authoritv, and power. For he must reign''' [that is, rule, I'udge] "till he hath put all enemies under his feet. And the last enemy, death, shall be destroyed." Observe, the apostle names the enemies that shall be destroyed — all rule, authority, power, death. Unfortunately for the gentle- man's creed, m an is not named. It is also unfortunate for his creed, that those enemies the apostle names are to be DESTROYED, ANNIHILATED, for he bclieves that evil power, evil rule, evil authority, and death, will not be destroyed, but will reign in hell eternally — reign as long as God reigns. This passage is a complete refuta- tion of his endless misery system. In the same connec- tion the apostle says, " As in Adam all die, even so in 4o8 Oral Discussion. Christ shall all be made alive," but Mr. Sweeney says, none will be in Christ save the little squad who are immersed in water. Again, In the same chapter, " All things shall be subdued unto God, * * that God may be all in all." Mr. Sweeney will have it, that only a small portion of all things will be subdued to God, and that God never will be all in all. In the same con- nection the apostle refutes the dogma, that coiTuptlon and dishonor will be raised from the dead to debase and degrade millions of immortal spirits eternally. " It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory." Dishonor and corruption will be burled, to rise no more forever. But Mr. Sweeney contends there will be a resurrection to coiTuption and dishonor, and God will perpetuate them eternally. He also misrepresented me in saying I referred Acts' iii. 21, where Peter speaks of the "Restitution of all THINGS," to Christ's coming in his kingdom. He knew better. He did the same wicked thing in his remarks about I Thes. iv. 13-17. He also, contrary to ti'uth, stated that I said that passage is " figurative." Let it be remembered, that when Christ's coming is connected with the resurrection, the future state, the restitution, not a \vord is said about judgment or PUNISHMENT. Judgment and punishment only are con- nected with the COMING in his kingdom. He read what Paul said about the " crown " he ex- pected to receive when he died. But according to the gentleman, Paul has not yet been crowned, and will not be till the future judgment he talks about. Paul expected to be crowned on the day of his death; hence he desired " to depart and be with Christ." The righteous yudgment — P unishmejit . 409 Judge would then, he expected, crown hhn. But accord- ing to my friend, Paul was to be in the ante-chamber several thousand years waiting for his crown! What absurdities. He again read the passage in which the apostle speaks of judging "quick and dead," and remarked, that I quoted " Doctors" who said saints and sinners are meant. One of them is the apostle Paul. " You hath he quick- ened who were dead in trespasses and sins." When sinners they were dead; but they were quickened into spiritual life. He read a passage that speaks of God being able to destroy soul and body in Gehenna. In \\\\ last reply I showed what is meant by Gehenna., and he made no attempt at a refutation. John said, "God is a^^A' of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham," (Matt. iii. 9), but he has never done so. So God is able to anni- hilate soul and body in Gehenna or anywhere else, but I have no evidence that he has annihilated one of Adam's race. The gentleman has, at least, two hells in his creed. Hell No. One he tells us, is the air, the atmosphere. The Rich Man went to that hell, and, as he met Abra- ham there, h-eaven, too, must be the atmosphere. The baptized all join father Abi*aham in air when they get through here; and the unbaptized join the Rich Man. Both parties ai"e neighbors up among the clouds, where they are suspended, perhaps, by balloons tied to their heads or heels. All who have died the past six thousand years are up there in the atmospheric heaven or hell, and there they will remain, likely, ten times six thousand years longer. As Paul desired "to depart and be with Christ," they, too, are up there as well as Abraham and 4IO Oral Discussion. the Rich Man — if the gentleman is right. He thinks they will all remain thus suspended till the judgment day, and then the souls in the air and the bodies in the graves will be reunited, and all martialed to the judg- ment seat. Hell No. One will then be abandoned and abolished, and the unimmersed will be cast into hell No. Two to roast eternally, and the other party will go some- where else, and have a good time rejoicing over the damnation of their unimmersed fathers, mothers, chil- dren, brothers, sisters, husbands, wives, and neighbors. If he replies, they will not rejoice at their damnation, I answer, if they do not rejoice they must be indifferent to their condition, or weep tears of intense agony, and the latter only would be christian. But this division and damnation of mankind is all a fiction, and of the earth earthy. In the words of Charles Lamb, the immortal Essayist and Poet : " Blessed be God, The measure of his judgment is not fixed By man's erroneous standard. He discerns No such inordinate diflFerence and vast Betwixt the sinner and the saint, to doom Such disproportioned fates." That great Poet of this century, Alfred Tennyson, strikes the true note : "Behold ! we know not anything; I can but trust that good shall fall At last — far off — at last to all, And every winter changed to spring." ***** " That God which ever lives and loves, Oije God, one law, one element. And one far-ofF, divine event To which the whole creation moves. " yudgment — Punishment. 41 1 I wish to make a correction before I close. When discussing the first proposition, I remarked that the Apostolic Times advocated innate depravity. Subse- cjuent reading" has convinced me I was mistaken, and I here nialve tlie correction. The other books antl papers of my friend's denomination, I read from, clearly teach all that was attributed to them. I thank the Moderators for their kindness and atten- tion during this protracted discussion. May they, Brother Sweeney, and all the hearers, be profited by this inves- tigation. [ Time expired.