knowledgment of our discipleship before the Father and his angels, interest in the book of life, and a seat with Christ in his throne are conditionally promised in the scriptures, and if these do not express the final salvation of men, we know not in the use of what expressions and figures the ultimate salvation, even of any, is taught in the Bible. We think we have now proved that salvation is conditional. This argument may be thus stated.

1. Whatever is conditional may be lost, or forfeited by a non-compliance with the conditions on which it is suspended. 2. Salvation is conditional, and therefore it may be forfeited and lost; and if the sinner can forfeit the salvation of his soul, and come short of the interest he has in the gospel by a non-compliance with its conditions, the doctrine of the certain salvation of all men cannot be true, and the endless punishment of a portion of the human family, such as do not comply with the conditions of the Gospel, is certain, unless a shelter is sought from it in the absurd doctrine of annihilation, which has neither reason nor scripture for its support; and even in such an alternative the doctrine of universal salvation must be given up.

IV. The scriptures teach that there is a possibility and even danger of coming short of salvation. Heb. iv. 1. "Let us therefore fear, lest a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it." On this text Dr. A. Clark remarks thus: "Seeing the Israelites lost the rest of Canaan through obstinacy and unbelief, let us be afraid, lest we come short of the heavenly rest through the same cause. Heb xii. 15. "Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God." On this text Mr. Morse in his reply to Mr. Parker, page 15, has given the following comment. "The apostle left out one word which should have been inserted, if he meant to state any thing to Mr. P's. purposethat word is endlessly. If the Apostle had said lest any man endlessly fail of the grace of God,' we should be obliged in candor to admit it as evidence of never ending wo. As it is, it affords no such evidence." In reply to this very extraor

dinary comment we say.

1. Mr. M. has laid down a rule of evidence here which, if applied to his own theory will ruin it forever. According to

his remark, "endless wo" cannot be proved without the use of the word endless, and if so, endless salvation is not taught in the scriptures: there is not a blessing promised in all the Bible in the use of the word endless. To place this matter in a clear point of light, we will apply Mr. M's own words to the promise of God, which he quotes, and on which he much relies. On page 10, he quotes the promise of God made to Abraham, as repeated, Acts iii. 25. "In thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." Now, hear Mr. M. "The apostle," (God in this instance,) "left out one word which should have been inserted if he meant to state

any thing to" Mr. M's "purpose-that word is endlessly. If the Apostle," (God in this case,) "had said, in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be endlessly blessed, we should be obliged in candor to admit it as evidence of never ending" happiness. "As it is, it affords no such evidence." Mr. M's remarks will apply equally well to every other promise which can be adduced in proof of universal salvation.

we

2. Mr. M's pert remark may be retorted upon himself in view of the same text which gave rise to it, thus: "Had the Apostle said, lest any man fail of the grace of God” for a season, for life, or for a limited period in eternity, should be obliged in candor to admit" that it furnishes no "evidence of endless wo." As it is, it furnishes clear evidence. In the text, nothing is said of times or seasons, but the expression is unqualified, "lest any man fail of the grace of God." Now, no man, who is saved by grace forever, can be said unqualifiedly to fail of that grace by which he is saved. Mr. M. farther remarks on this text thus: "Every rational being must perceive that there is a great difference between failing of the grace of God at any particular time, and failing of that grace, finally." This is no doubt correct, and we presume also that they will perceive that as nothing is said in the text of " any partiular time" the apostle warns them against failng of the grace of God "finally and eternally." The expression, "lest any man fail of the grace of God, unconnected as it is, with any reference to a particular time or period, clearly implies that the failure is a final one; and for Mr. M. to take it for granted that the Apostle

has reference to some temporary or limited period only, is no better than to beg the whole question at issue.

ye rec

2. Cor. vi. 1. "We then as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.” By referring to the closing words of the preceding chapter, we shall see what is meant by the grace of God in this text. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseech you by us, we pray you in Christ's stead be onciled to God; for he hath made him to be sin," (a sin offering,) "for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. We then beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain." From this connection we see that by the grace of God is meant, the grace of reconciliation whereby we are "reconciled to God," which is the proper benefit of the atonement or of Christ's being made an offering for our sin. The benefits of the atonement then, may be received in vain, that is, those for whom it was made, to whom the word of reconciliation is preached, who for a time receive this grace, may, after all, fail to be ultimately benefitted by it. Now we have shown in Chapter III. that the death of Jesus Christ was an offering for sinners, by virtue of which, and by which only, they can be saved; hence, as it is here shown that they may come short of the benefits of his offering for them, it follows that in such case they must be lost for ever. The text under consideration clearly teaches that we may receive the grace of God in vain; and can any one, who receives the grace of God in vain, nevertheless be saved by that grace? Or can any one, who is saved forever by grace, still receive such grace in vain? It is impossible. Should it be said by universalists that the sinner may receive certain gifts of grace in vain, and then be saved by after and more abundant gifts, or that he may receive the grace of God in vain for a season, and then be saved by grace afterwards, we reply that such a position would be fatal to the doctrine of the certain salvation of all men. If any portion of the grace of God can be received in vain, another portion may, and all on the same principle. Or if the sinner may receive the grace of God in vain for a season, on the same principle he may receive it in vain longer, and forever. As sinners can be saved only by grace,

if such grace can be received in vain, they may come short of salvation forever; we see therefore that this text is fatal to universalism, for it clearly teaches that the grace of God may be received in vain. The apostle would not have besought the Corinthians not to receive the grace of God in vain if there can be no such thing-if the thing is in itself impossible.

Matt. vii. 13, 14. "Enter ye in at the strait gate, for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction and many there be that go in thereat; because strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." On this text Dr. Clarke among other remarks has the following: "Our Saviour seems to allude here to the distinction between the publick and private ways mentioned by the Jewish lawyers. The publick roads were allowed to be sixteen cubits broad, the private ways only four. Enter in (to the kingdom of heaven) through THIS strait gate of doing to every one as you would he should do unto you, for this alone appears to be the strait gate which our Lord alludes to. With those who say, it means repentance and forsaking of sin, I can have no controversy. That is certainly a gate, and a strait one too, through which every sinner must turn to God in order to find salvation. Gate among the Jews signifies metaphorically the entrance, introduction, or means of acquiring any thing. So they talk of the gate of repentance, the gate of prayers, and the gate of tears. When God, say they, shut the gate of paradise against Adam, he opened to him the gate of repentance." On the expression, "broad is the gate," the Doctor says, "a spacious roomy place, that leadeth forward into that destruction, meaning eternal misery." There is no necessity or room for controversy about the meaning of the term gate, as used in this text, for it must be obvious to all that it here has reference to our moral characters and conduct; nor is it on the meaning of the word gate that the strength of the argument depends, but on the meaning of the terms life and destruction as used in this text. The text informs us that there are two gates or ways, that is, two courses of moral conduct pursued by man, that one of these, the strait gate, leads to life, and the other, the broad gate, to destruction.

What then is to be understood by life and destruction? If these refer to the rewards and punishments of a future state, the question is settled that the text teaches that there is danger of coming short of salvation, for as these two gates are opposed to each other, if one leads to endless life, the other, of course leads to endless destruction. Now, that the text really speaks of that eternal life which will be conferred on the righteous in a future state, appears as follows. The text cannot be true in relation to any temporal blessing. It most clearly teaches that the strait gate, by which we must understand a course of duty and virtue, leads to life. Now, suppose we understand natural life, and by the opposite destruction, natural death, and the text is false, for there is no gate, strait or broad, that leads to life in this sense.

This would make the text say that sin leads to the death of the body, and that duty and virtue, the strait gate, lead to exemption from the death of the body, to an earthly immortality, which every one knows to be false. Nor will it relieve the difficulty to suppose that the text refers to the destruction of the Jews; for, keeping temporal life and death in view, the text is still untrue in this sense. The Jews were not all slain-did not experience temporal death, though it must be admitted that those who were captured by the Romans passed the wide gate and pursued the broad road. On the other hand many of the christians perished before the overthrow of the Jews. Stephen was stoned, and James was slain with the sword, and many others perished, if by perishing temporal death be meant in the text; though it cannot be denied that every true christian entered in at the strait gate, and pursued the narrow way which leadeth unto life. We see then, that by life, to which the strait gate leads, we cannot understand natural life, or the life of the body; and by destruction to which the wide gate leads, we cannot understand natural death, or the death of the body. Nor will it afford any relief to understand these terms in a very highly figurative sense, as expressing prosperity on one hand, and a state of calamity and affliction on the other, for the text is no more true in this sense than in the preceding one. To sustain this view, it must be made to appear that the strait gate, that is, the path of duty and piety, always leads to prosperi