those passages in the scripture generally supposed to signify the destruction of the world by fire, and commonly called the last judgement, must be understood according to the above mentioned science of correspondences, which teaches, that by the end of the world, or consummation of the age, is not signified the destruction of the world, but the destruction or end of the present Christian church, both among Roman Catholics and Protestants, of every description or denomination; and that this last judgement actually took place, in the spiritual world in the year 1757; from which era is dated the second advent of the Lord. and the commencement of a new Christian church, which, they say, is meant by the new heaven and the new earth in the Revelation, and the New Jerusalem thence descending. They use a liturgy, and instrumental as well as vocal music, in their public worship.

From the London Universalist Miscellany.

RULE FOR UNDERSTANDING THE WORD, ALL, IN SCRIP TURE.

It is well known that the word all, as it occurs in the Scriptures, admits of various acceptations. Sometimes it means literally and mathematically, the whole, without any exception; at other times only a part, and some times only a small part. These different uses of it have contributed much to support the controversy, which has long existed concerning the extent of the death of Christ, and Christians on both sides, have argued with apparent force, alternately insisting on the restricted or unlimited sense of the word. Could a certain extent be found in the scriptures themselves, to determine always how we are to understand it. much dispute would be avoided, and the controversy relative to the extent of the death of Christ would be settled; and by the same rule, the doctrine of the Restoration might be proved to be true or false. It is reasonable 19

suppose that the Scriptures to afford sufficient ground for such a rule; for it is contended that the Bible is a plain book, and easy to be understood, in all its doctrines and precepts, by every honest and diligent reader of it. Let the following rule therefore be kept in view, viz. That whenever we meet with the word all, in connexion with any point of doctrine, it always means literally and mathematically the whole, including all its parts; but where it is used historically, it frequently admits of hyperbole This use of the word is consistent with common sense and common usage. If any man can find a single exception to this rule in the whole Bible, be is invited to make it known. To illustrate this rule, consider Heb. ii. 8. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. And also 1 Cor. xv. 27. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under bim, it is manifest that he, only, is excepted which did put all things under him.' In these passages the Apostle gives instances of the word being taken in its fullest latitude, when connected with doctrines. When we meet with it in relation to the death of Christ for men, the same extensive sense of the word is necessarily un¬ derstood, as Isa. liii. 6. The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.' The prophet had been saying, 'All we like sheep have gone astray we have turned every one to his own way.' It is evident that he here describes the whole buman race; for we have all sinned and come short of the glory of God; so that he asserts, that all who have gone astray, have had their iniquities laid upon Christ. This can never be disproved unless it can be showed that some men have not sinned; which would be an express contradiction both to Scripture and experience.

In historical passages it is different, as in Matt. iii. 5, 6. Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan." Here we must understand only a part of Jerusalem, &c. For we are elsewhere told, that the Scribes and Pharisees rejected John's baptism.

But we are no where told of any for whom Christ did not die; nor any where told of any who are not given to him, &c. It is presumed, therefore, that the above rule is strictly true, and if kept in view. in reading the scriptures, will be of great service to serious inquirers after truth.

"THE CHRISTIAN MESSENGER."

Referring to our last, we find the following: "The fourth number of this work is received; in which the Editor acknowledges the mistake pointed out on page 111, of this volume of the Messenger, in relation to our remarks on a piece signed "Hyram," in the second number of the Repository, and which were inserted on page 52, of this volume; and to the reasons which he has given for the mistake, being undoubtedly satisfacto ry to himself, we shall make no objection, having nothing personal either against the Editor, or the supposed author of the piece; neither have we in the least changed our opinion respecting it. Whatever the author 'attempted to do, it appears to us that he has done but very little, if any thing less or more than what we named. It will be perceived that we only stated how the writing 'APPEARED TO US ;' but we did not, neither do we now say that Hyram meant to be 'disingenuous ;* tho, as it must be acknowledged, we left room to draw a conclusion that that was our opinion. Having thus explained, we shall say no more on this part of the subject."

As we find our opposers are disposed to "say no more" on the part of the subject alluded to above, we shall not attempt to provoke them to it, by additional remarks; for, ere now, we were heartily sorry tỏ find, ourselves engaged in a controversy, which could, at the best, promise so little interest to our readers.

They complain that in Hyram's piece, they find noth, ing to answer, because they do not find him on the question, according to the method they proposed. They

are very careful not to engage to defend their own sentiments; but if we will state the doctrine of future punishment "clearly and explicitly, so that the discussion may not be merely about words, and then state the seriptures on which" we "shall rely for its support; and shew that those scriptures must necessarily be so construed," they "pledge" themselves, "if life and health is spared, to fulfil" their "promise" as found in our last, page 153. But here it seems they must be lame, the we meet them on their own plan. For if we take the affirmative, on the question of future punishment, they must the negative. On maintaining negatives by scrip ture, see what they say: 'It is not pretended (as we know of) that the scriptures prove that there will be No future punishment; for how can they prove a nega tive ?" We have now only to observe further, that this piece from the Christian Messenger was not received in season for Hyram to answer; they may, therefore, expect to hear from us in our next.

From Paley's Moral Philosophy.

OF THE USE OF SABBATICAL INSTITUTIONS.

An assembly cannot be collected, unless the time of assembling be fixed and known before-hand; and if the design of the assembly require that it be held frequent ly, it is easiest that it should return at stated intervals. This produces a necessity of appropriating set seasons to the social offices of religion. It is also highly convenient, that the same seasons be observed throughout the country, that all may be employed, or all at leisure together for, if the recess from worldly occupation be not general, one man's business will perpetually interfere with another man's devotion; the buyer will be calling at the shop when the seller is gone to church. This part, therefore of the religious distinction of seasons, namely, a general intermission of labor and business during times previously set apart for the exercise of

public worship, is founded in the reasons which make public worship itself a duty. But the celebration of divine service never occupies the whole day. What remains, therefore, of Sunday, beside the part of it employed at church, must be considered as a mere rest from the ordinary occupations of civil life; and he who would defend the institution, as it is required by law to be observed in Christian countries, unless he can produce a command for a Christian sabbath, must point out the uses of it in that view,

First, then, that interval of relaxation which Sunday affords to the laborious part of mankind, contributes greatly to the comfort and satisfaction of their lives, both as it refreshes them for the time, and as it relieves their six day's labor by the prospect of a day of rest al-. ways approaching; which could not be said of casual indulgences of leisure and rest, even were they more frequent than there is reason to expect they would be, if left to the discretion or humanity of interested task masters. To this difference it may be added, that holidays, which come seldom and unexpected, are unprovided, when they do come, with any duty or employment; and the manner of spending them being regulated by no public decency or established usage, they are commonly consumed in rude, if not criminal pastimes, in stupid sloth or brutish intemperance. Whoever considers how much sabbatical institutions conduce, in this respect, to the happiness and civilization of the laboring classes of mankind, and reflects how great a majority of the human species these classes compose, will acknowledge the utility, whatever he may believe of the origin, of this distinction; and will, consequently, perceive it to be every man's duty to uphold the observation of Sunday. when once established, let the establishment have proceeded from whom or from what authority it will.

Nor is there any thing lost to the community by the intermission of public industry one day in the week. For in countries tolerably advanced in population and the arts of civil life, there is always enough of human labor, and to spare. The difficulty is not so much to procure, as to employ it. The addition of the ser