subject of it, and rouse him from the stupor that has siezed his faculties; and it is by no means an unimportant consideration that those churches which are the most successful in this direction, are those which are growing most rapidly in numbers and influence, and which exhibit generally the largest measure of the spirit that was in Christ.

"Just here I believe is where we have made our grandest mistake. For while we have numbered within our ranks some of the tenderest consciences, and some of the most vital, earnest Christians that the world has ever seen, yet, as a rule, we have failed to make those searching applications of doctrine which invariably result in a regenerated manhood. Not only have the clergy been too backward in pressing the matter as a practical and living issue, but the people have too often resented those affirmations of personal guilt, which require repentance and faith, before they can see the salvation of God. This is why the cause which ought to have swept the world ere this has halted so long that it sometimes seems almost to have reached a final pause. Nor can it go forward until this paralysis is cured. No matter how many dialectic victories we win, they are barren and worthless without the practical emphasis which makes the truth out of which they spring a two-edged sword, piercing to the very marrow of the soul. Sin is here, with all its desperate ugliness and potency of mischief, and it never can be cast out of our hearts or the world, while we weakly fold our hands and wait for the grace of God. The divine will must have the co-operation of human effort. We must fearlessly grapple with this arch-enemy of man and of Jesus Christ. Thus only can we demonstrate that we have either the sense of Christians or the spirit and power of a Church."-New Covenant, October 1, 1874.

We can

This shows that his brethren are striving after more zeal and efficiency, for which I am thankful. all do more in this respect.

But he says that John Hughes has not admitted that there will be punishment in the other world perhaps for a million of years, or something to that effect. Now, in Manford's Magazine for September, 1874, p. 389, there is an article from John Hughes, respecting the Braden-Hughes Debate, in which John Hughes says:

"It is true that he can not defend endless misery successfully. No man can. It is indefensible. It is not a doctrine of the Bible. I respect him because he admits that which he regards to be the truth. He admits that the gospel will be preached in the future world to infants, imbeciles, heathens, and imperfect Christians. He

also admits that the gospel was preached to the impenitent antediluvians by Christ in spirit after his crucifixion. But these admissions stir the bile of the brethren, they ridicule and rail at them, but they can not refute them. They regard this as admitting about all there is in the debate. Some of them say frankly to me, if they admitted so much they would admit it all."

Here Mr. Hughes endorses these things which he says Clark Braden "admitted," since we are only said to admit what is regarded as true. He then admits future punishment, and I suppose a million, or half a million of years for that matter, would not make much difference. And he admits that there is to be preaching there; and I have asked for the "commission," but in vain. No, brother Hughes, it was not the old school Universalists that taught a long future punishment, for they denied all future punishment; but it is the new school. But if I was to admit this preaching over there, he could not prove that it would have any more effect there than it has here, and he can not prove, therefore, that all will there accept Christ and be saved.

As to the opportunity of salvation in the future world, I quote from Thayer's Theology, pp. 128, 129:

"The power which he (the Father) has delegated to the Saviour remains with him till the work which he gave him to do is finished and, certainly, it is not finished in this life in the case of millions of souls dying in unbelief, and ignorance, and sin. Consequently this power to save continues beyond death; continues, as Paul says, till the end cometh, and this end, as shown, comes after the resurrection and the destruction of all evil. But it may be

*

asked, 'How is Christ to save men after death?' The answer is, By the same means and in the same way as before death, doubtless; only increased in power and directness, and operating without the obstructions incident to the flesh or earthly nature."

Here we are taught that men are to be saved in the future world, according to Mr. Thayer, "by the same means that they are saved here." But it has not been shown that these means have been provided for the future world; and I now ask the brother for the proof upon this point. But we are told that men will have

opportunities to obey God and be restored to his favor in the future world; and that the good will continue to desire the salvation of the wicked, that they will not be less solicitous there than here. In this connection we have heard much of the feelings of parents, companions, etc., in heaven while their friends are in torment. Upon this point we quote from his brother Thayer:

"The Sadducees fell into the common error, common even in our own time, that there is no change after death; that we carry with us into the future world, the feelings, preferences, and characteristics of this world; that what we desire here we shall desire there; and what we do here we shall continue to do there. All this the Saviour positively and plainly denies, and shows that such reasoning is false," etc. Theology, pp. 217, 218.

There, brother Hughes, you may argue that point with your brother Thayer. So far, I am sure he has the advantage of you!

Having thus answered the points in my brother's speech, I now proceed to my next negative argument, as follows:

IV. THE COMMONLY RECEIVED OPINION OF MANKIND, IN ALL AGES, IS CONTRADICTORY OF THIS PROPOSITION. The great mass of Pagans, Jews, Mohammedans, and Christians,-Catholic, Greek, and Protestant, have held the reverse of my opponent's proposition. But it is a well established principle in logic that whatever has had the concurrent assent of mankind in all ages is to be regarded as true unless the opposite can be clearly shown. We ask for the origin of this idea. Cicero says in his Tusculan Disputations: "Whatsoever has had the universal consent of all nations in the remotest past ages is to be received as true; for as men drew nearer to the source or origin of things, the stream of truth would be less corrupt." By this just rule of logic the presumption is clearly against my opponent, and he must prove his proposition true without a doubt, or else he is defeated.

Whence came this well nigh universal idea among all nations of all times? That we have correctly stated the historic facts, I refer to Prideaux, (Vol. I., p. 352) as quoted in King and Hobb's debate, p. 89. And also to Manford and Sweeney's Debate, pp. 237, 238, 365. In the "Pagan Origin of Partialist Doctrines," by J. C. Pitrat, it is conceded that two impersonated principles, endless hell, punishment, etc., were held by the ancient Persians, Hindoos, Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans. (pp. 59-67; 118-160.) See also "Rich Man and Lazarus,"

3.

Universalists often claim that the idea of endless punishment is of heathen origin. This we deny, although it was held by them in common with the ideas of the Creation, the Flood, the Fall, etc. That all these were sadly perverted by the heathen is true; but their very existence argues their divine, or true origin; since men have no power to originate such elementary ideas, though they may pervert them, and these perverted truths often became enormous falsehoods in their bearings. But let a man attempt to originate a radical or elementary idea, and he will feel the force of what we say, that this idea of endless punishment to the wicked was and is of divine origin, and has been transmitted to all peoples in all ages. And hence as a universally received truth, it must be received. We shall see how our friend will try to break the force of this argument. [Time expired.]

MR. HUGHES' THIRD SPEECH.

MESSRS. MODERATORS:-My brother made a remark about acorns that simply sprout and are then frost-bitten, and so fail to come to maturity; and then he asks the question if there may not be frost-bitten men as well as frost-bitten acorns. Well, I would say it depends a little upon the color of the hair, of

course! I apprehend the point that he wishes to make. I believe that man is an immortal being; but he was created under certain limitations and with certain liabilities. So I understand it, and so I understand my brother does. But then I believe that be. cause God loves man, and because he is infinitely wise, and has infinite power, that his love, operating through his infinite wisdom and power, will not permit any of his creatures to be "frost-bitten," in the sense of being punished endlessly in the future world. I do not believe that sin and suffering are stronger than God; but that he will overcome sin, and that man will be finally holy and happy with God in heaven.

He refers to "vengeance" again, and he quotes, "Vengeance is mine." Does he understand that vengeance here when applied to God is used in the same sense as when it is ascribed to man? Does he understand vengeance there to be anything more than the retributive justice of God? Let us quote it:

"Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.” Rom. 12:19-21.

I understand that God will "repay" men; that he will render to every man according as his works shall be, and that the justice of God will not be satisfied until the law is fulfilled. But I understand that mercy has as much to do in giving to every man according to his works, as the justice, or the power, or any other attribute of God has. I will quote Ps. 62: 11, 12:

"God hath spoken once; twice have I heard this; that power belongeth unto God. Also unto thee, O Lord, belongeth mercy; for thou renderest to every man according to his work."

Now here, no doubt, there is a reference to God's retributive justice. The rewarding of men according to