turned; shall return to their former estate; and shall be received by Jerusalem, as daughters in the everlasting covenant: Jerusalem and her daughters, more wicked themselves, than Sodom and her daughters, shall be restored at the same time; shall remember their ways and be ashamed; shall never open mouth any more to glory over the meanest of mankind; when the great JEHOVAH shall be pacified towards Jerusalem, for all that she has done, and towards Sodom and Samaria, for all that they have done also, inasmuch as they shall return from their long captivity, and be given to Jerusalem for daughters. See Ezek. xvi. 53, 55, 61, 63.

Now, by Sodom and her daughters being returned from their long and dreadful captivity, we must understand one of the three things either, first, the return of their descendants; or, secondly, the restoration of the land whereon the cities stood; or, lastly, the restoration of those very persons who were destroyed.

It cannot be the first; for there are none of their descendants remaining on earth; all were destroyed by fire and brimstone; none of the inhabitants escaped, Lot and his daughters excepted; who were only sojourn ers, and were the descendants of Terah and relations to Abraham.

As it cannot be the first let us try the second. A very ingenious gentleman supposes, that in the time of the Millennium, the Dead Sea shall be turned into land, and shall again become a beautiful well watered plain, and be given to the posterity of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: For he argues, and seemingly very justly, that as God promised Abraham all the land which he could see from the place where he then stood; (see Gen. xiii. 14-17) and as the plain of Sodom was in sight, it was included in the grant: and though the Dead Sea now occupies the place where those cities, stood; yet God's promise cannot fail; and therefore, in the Millennium, the Dead Sea shall be swallowed up, and the place shall become a fruitful plain. But whoever will read Ezek. xlvii. 8-11, may plainly see, that the waters that shall issue out from under the threshold of the holy house, shall be brought into the Dead Sea; and shall so heal those deadly waters, that they shall become fruitful, and bring forth fish in great abundance; exceeding many; like the great sea, which is now called the Mediterranean; which fish shall be more useful for food, to the innumerable inhabitants that shall then be in that happy country, than all the vegetables that would grow there, even though the whole place was turned into a fruitful garden.

Friend. But are you certain, that by the sea, is meant the Dead Sea, or Lake of Sodom? Minister. Yes. 1. Because all the other waters in those parts, produce great plenty of excellent fish; and therefore, need not healing. 2. Because fishers shall stand upon the banks of the sea, from Engedi even unto En

eglaim, places that are well known to be con tiguous, to the Dead Sea; one of which is nearly at the northeast corner, the other at the west end of the same. 3. The marshes, and the miry places thereof, shall not be healed; but shall be given to salt, as specimens of what the whole is at this time; which barren and deadly spots shall remain, as standing evidences of the truth of Scripture, and the exact fulfilment of prophecy..

Thus, as Sodom cannot be restored in her posterity, there being none remaining on earth; neither shall the Dead Sea be turned into land, in the Millennium; it follows, as the only remaining sense of the return of Sodom's captivity, that those very inhabitants, who were destroyed by fire and brimstone from heaven, shall be restored to a state of felicity. And thus, both the doctrines of annihilation and endless damnation, fall to the ground at once.

Friend.—But as it is the second death, after the day of judgment, that is to destroy the bodies and souls of the wicked in hell; perhaps, the inhabitants of Sodom, Samaria, and Jerusalem, may be restored before that period, and may not be cast into the lake of fire.

Minister. It is evident by our Saviour's words, (for we must not contradict any part of the Scriptures) that this will not be the case; for he saith, that it shall be more tolerable for the land (that is, the inhabitants) of Sodom, in the day of judgment, than for the cities where his gospel was preached, and his miracles wrought, and yet the inhabitants remained impenitent. See St. Matth. xi. 24; x. 15; St. Mark vi. 11; St. Luke x. 12. From all which passages it is evident, that the inhabitants of Sodom will be condemned in the day of judgment, and punished in the lake of fire; and though their misery will not be so great as that of the inhabitants of the cities where our Saviour preached, and performed his mighty works; yet they will be miserable in that day; and, consequently, the return of their captivity is not to be expected, till after the creation of the new earth. Therefore, it is plain, that the lake of fire is not designed to annihilate those who are cast therein: since all that are not found written in the book of life, at the day of judgment, will be cast into the lake of fire. They whose names are in the book of life, will be happy. The inhabitants of Sodom will be miserable, in some degree; therefore, will not be found written in the book of life; consequently, will be cast into the lake of fire. They will be restored; their captivity shall be returned; therefore the lake of fire shall not anihilate them. They are set forth for an example in their punishment; and consequently, in their Restoration. I need not pursue this argument farther. It appears evident to me; and till it be fairly answered, I shall add nothing more.

Friend. I lately read a sermon written by one Mr. B— in which the writer brings many strong reasons for the eternity of hell

turned; shall return to their former estate; and shall be received by Jerusalem, as daughters in the everlasting covenant: Jerusalem and her daughters, more wicked themselves, than Sodom and her daughters, shall be restored at the same time; shall remember their ways and be ashamed; shall never open mouth any more to glory over the meanest of mankind; when the great JEHOVAH shall be pacified towards Jerusalem, for all that she has done, and towards Sodom and Samaria, for all that they have done also, inasmuch as they shall return from their long captivity, and be given to Jerusalem for daughters. See Ezek. xvi. 53, 55, 61, 63.

Now, by Sodom and her daughters being returned from their long and dreadful captivity, we must understand one of the three things either, first, the return of their descendants; or, secondly, the restoration of the land whereon the cities stood; or, lastly, the restoration of those very persons who were destroyed.

It cannot be the first; for there are none of their descendants remaining on earth; all were destroyed by fire and brimstone; none of the inhabitants escaped, Lot and his daughters excepted; who were only sojourners, and were the descendants of Terah and relations to Abraham.

As it cannot be the first let us try the second. A very ingenious gentleman supposes, that in the time of the Millennium, the Dead Sea shall be turned into land, and shall again become a beautiful well watered plain, and be given to the posterity of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: For he argues, and seemingly very justly, that as God promised Abraham all the land which he could see from the place where he then stood; (see Gen. xiii. 14-17) and as the plain of Sodom was in sight, it was included in the grant: and though the Dead Sea now occupies the place where those cities stood; yet God's promise cannot fail; and therefore, in the Millennium, the Dead Sea shall be swallowed up, and the place shall become a fruitful plain. But whoever will read Ezek. xlvii. 8-11, may plainly see, that the waters that shall issue out from under the threshold of the holy house, shall be brought into the Dead Sea; and shall so heal those deadly waters, that they shall become fruitful, and bring forth fish in great abundance; exceeding many; like the great sea, which is now called the Mediterranean; which fish shall be more useful for food, to the innumerable inhabitants that shall then be in that happy country, than all the vegetables that would grow there, even though the whole place was turned into a fruitful garden.

Friend. But are you certain, that by the sea, is meant the Dead Sea, or Lake of Sodom? Minister.-Yes. 1. Because all the other waters in those parts, produce great plenty of excellent fish; and therefore, need not healing. 2. Because fishers shall stand upon the

eglaim, places that are well known to be con tiguous, to the Dead Sea; one of which is nearly at the northeast corner, the other at the west end of the same. 3. The marshes, and the miry places thereof, shall not be healed; but shall be given to salt, as specimens of what the whole is at this time; which barren and deadly spots shall remain, as standing evidences of the truth of Scripture, and the exact fulfilment of prophecy..

Thus, as Sodom cannot be restored in her posterity, there being none remaining on earth; neither shall the Dead Sea be turned into land, in the Millennium; it follows, as the only remaining sense of the return of Sodom's captivity, that those very inhabitants, who were destroyed by fire and brimstone from heaven, shall be restored to a state of felicity. And thus, both the doctrines of annihilation and endless damnation, fall to the ground at once.

Friend. But as it is the second death, after the day of judgment, that is to destroy the bodies and souls of the wicked in hell; perhaps, the inhabitants of Sodom, Samaria, and Jerusalem, may be restored before that period, and may not be cast into the lake of fire.

Minister. It is evident by our Saviour's words, (for we must not contradict any part of the Scriptures) that this will not be the case; for he saith, that it shall be more tolerable for the land (that is, the inhabitants) of Sodom, in the day of judgment, than for the cities where his gospel was preached, and his miracles wrought, and yet the inhabitants remained impenitent. See St. Matth. xi. 24; x. 15; St. Mark vi. 11; St. Luke x. 12. From all which passages it is evident, that the inhabitants of Sodom will be condemned in the day of judgment, and punished in the lake of fire; and though their misery will not be so great as that of the inhabitants of the cities where our Saviour preached, and performed his mighty works; yet they will be miserable in that day; and, consequently, the return of their captivity is not to be expected, till after the creation of the new earth. Therefore, it is plain, that the lake of fire is not designed to annihilate those who are cast therein: since all that are not found written in the book of life, at the day of judgment, will be cast into the lake of fire. They whose names are in the book of life, will be happy. The inhabitants of Sodom will be miserable, in some degree; therefore, will not be found written in the book of life; consequently, will be cast into the lake of fire. They will be restored; their captivity shall be returned; therefore the lake of fire shall not anihilate them. They are set forth for an example in their punishment; and consequently, in their Restoration. I need not pursue this argument farther. It appears evident to me; and till it be fairly answered, I shall add nothing more.

Friend. I lately read a sermon written by one Mr. B, in which the writer brings

torments, most of which have already been mentioned and answered in these Dialogues; but he makes use of one which has not yet been brought under our consideration, which is that the damned are under the necessity of constantly committing fresh sin, and therefore as they will always continue to sin against God, so of necessity their punishment can never cease. Have you ever thought of this? Minister. Yes, I have frequently heard it mentioned, but as it appears totally void of all foundation in the Scripture, it hardly deserves any notice. The objections that I feel myself concerned to treat with seriousness and respect, and candidly to answer, are those which appear to be drawn from the book of divine Revelation; but if I must attend to all those which the ingenuity of men might raise against the doctrine of the Restoration, I should not only have a very hard task, but should never know when I had done, and besides the discourse would dwindle into trifling and conjectures, very unsuitable to the nature and importance of such an awfully serious subject. I must observe, that this objection is nothing but a rash ungrounded assertion, or bold conjecture, without the least foundation either in Scripture, or reason, and if I was to assert just the contrary, I cannot see why my assertion would not be a sufficient answer. Nevertheless, lest it should be thought that any objection can be raised, that cannot be fairly answered, and that I, knowing the strength of this, would willingly evade it, I will say a few words upon it. The Scriptures universally hold forth the idea, that men will be judged, condemned, and punished according to the deeds done in the body. God will render to every man according to his deeds." Rom. ii. 6. "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad." 2 Cor. v. 10. "And that servant which knew his Lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes; but he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes." St. Luke xii. 47, 48. These, and all the passages that speak of future punishment, constantly hold it forth as a just retribution for the evil deeds done in this life; but never intimate any thing of what this objection holds forth, of punishment being continued ad infinitum for crimes committed hereafter. Besides, it is plain that punishments or corrections are intended to stop men from sinning, and under the divine agency to take away their sins. "By this therefore shall the iniquity of Jacob be purged: and this is all the fruit to take away his sin." Isai. xxvii. 9. This is universally allowed to be the design of troubles and sorrows in the present life, and why not in the next state also? The Scripture says nothing to forbid this idea, but much to encourage it; articularly that awful passage where the

prophet says, and it was revealed in mine ears by Jehovah of Hosts, surely this iniquity shall not be purged from you, till ye die, saith the Lord God of Hosts." Isai. xxii. 14. If then iniquity shall not be purged away after death, it is certain that men shall not always continue to sin in a future state, for they must cease to commit iniquity, before it can be purged away. And though their punishments may at first cause them to rage, (as we see is frequently the case in this world) yet they continue until the most stubborn shall be entirely subdued and humbled.

Friend. There is another argument of this same kind, viz. that is not founded upon any particular text of Scripture, which is directly contrary to the one you have been answering, which I have formerly thought unanswerable in favour of the doctrine of endless punishment, which is the infinity of sin, being against an infinite object, containing infinite hatefulness, and justly therefore deserving infinite punishment. Sin is a crime of infinite magnitude, because God is a Being of infinite majesty and perfection. Every crime justly demerits punishment proportioned to its malignity! and consequently every offence against God demerits infinite punishment. No mere creature can ever suffer an infinity of punishment in any limited duration. It follows therefore, that a sinner deserves to be eternally punished. Farther, every man is under infinite obligations to devote himself to the service of God, his infinitely_glorious Creator, Preserver and Benefactor. To violate an infinite obligation is to commit a crime of infinite malignity. A crime of infinite malignity, deserves infinite punishment. Can it ever be proved then that everlasting, or endless punishment is not the proper desert of a life of sin? I have often said, that this argument, trite and common as it is, never was, nor ever would be fairly answered: nevertheless, I am willing to hear what you have to say upon it.

Minister. As this argument, is often urged, as of the greatest weight, and as you have stated it in its greatest possible force, I shall endeavour to answer it fairly and particularly.

If sin is infinite, then we must ascribe to it one of the perfections of the Deity, which strikes me as something absurd, if not something worse; sin, a privation, an act of a worm, infinite? Actions must, in my opinion take their denomination from the actors, and not from the objects. Infinite actions, or actions of infinite magnitude require infinite power to perform them. If sin is of infinite magnitude, goodness is more so, as deriving a power from God to the performance of it. But if you grant that David spoke in the name of the Mediator in Psalm xvi. you may be at once furnished with a proof, that even goodness, in the highest state in which it ever was exhibited in the world, was not consider ed as of infinite magnitude by the great perF

I grant indeed that there is a passage of Scripture which mentions the word infinite as belonging to sin and iniquity, but then it is mentioned in such a connexion as shows it to be used as Josephus frequently mentions it, for a very great multitude. And thus it is used by many good authors, who certainly do not mean to use it in the first and proper sense of the word. The sacred writer, in the passage alluded to, takes particular care to guard us against any such idea, as though sin was of infinite magnitude, or virtuous and righteous actions, which approach far nearer to infinity, as having their source from the fountain of infinite goodness. For Eliphaz says, "Can a man be profitable unto God, as he that is wise may be profitable unto himself? Is it any pleasure to the Almighty that thou art righteous? Or is it gain to him that thou makest thy ways perfect? Will he reprove thee for fear of thee? Will he enter with thee into judgment? Is not thy wickedness great? And thine iniquities infinite?" Job xxii. 2-5. And language very similar to the above is used by Elihu: "If thou sinnest what dost thou against him? Or if thy transgressions be multiplied, what dost thou unto him? If thou be righteous, what givest thou him? Or what receiveth he of thine hand? Thy wickedness may hurt a man as thou art, and thy righteousness may profit the son of man." Job xxxv. 6-8.

These expressions, if they teach any thing, I should think, expressly declare, that no actions of men can by any means be of infinite magnitude, in the sense in which we commonly understand that word; though their numbers and magnitudes n ay be so great as to be styled infinite, as the word is sometimes used.

You assert in consequence of your ideas of infinite sin, that every offence against God demerits infinite punishment. If the case be so, does it not tend entirely to take away the disnction which God hath made between sins of infirmity and sins of malice, sins of ignorance and sins of wilfulness, lesser and greater sins? All sins are offences against God, and if every offence against God is of infinite magnitude, how can any be greater? and thus the distinctions are entirely destroyed, and, all sins will be esteemed equal, contrary to the whole tenor of the Scriptures.

If every offence against God demerits infinite punishment, then it will follow, that

serve, unless they are doomed to endless misery; what then will become of all those threatenings where God threatens to punish people for all their iniquities, and yet to shew favour to them afterwards? This is impossible upon your plan, for none can ever receive all the punishment due to their sins, during numberless ages. Yet if the word of God be true he can deal with transgressors as they have done, and yet be gracious to them afterwards. "For thus saith Adonai JEHOVAH, I will even deal with thee as thou hast done, which hast despised the oath in breaking the covenant. Nevertheless, I will remember my covenant with thee in the days of thy youth, and I will establish unto thee an everlasting covenant. That thou mayest remember and be confounded, and never open thy mouth any more because of thy shame, when I am pacified towards thee for all that thou hast done, saith Adonai JEHOVAH." Ezek. xvi. 59, 60, 63.

Here is an instance to the purpose of those whose sins were of the deepest die, and to whom God threatens to deal as they had done, and to punish them for all their numerous and aggravated transgressions, and yet to remember mercy for them afterwards, and to be pacified towards them for all that they had done. All which things would be absolutely impossible, according to your ideas. In many other parts of Scripture God promises to render to transgressors according to their works and ways, and yet to be afterwards gracious unto them. And in one place, at least, where God is declaring the great mercies which he will manifest unto the children of Israel in returning them to their own land, and causing them to dwell safely therein, he says, "And first, I will recompense their iniquity, and their sin double; because they have defiled my land, they have filled mine inheritance with the carcasses of their detestable and abiminable things." Jer. xvi. 18. What do you think of this? If every offence is of infinite magnitude, and deserves infinite punishment, which can never be fully executed, then how can God punish a people for all their iniquities, and do to the greatest sinners as they have done, yea, and recompense their iniquity, and their sin double first, and then be gracious unto them, and love them, and be pacified towards them afterwards? And the prophet Isaiah says, "Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God. Speak ye comfortably unto Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned; for she hath received of the LORD's hand DOUBLE FOR ALL HER SINS." Isai. xl. 1, 2. Here a fact is said to be accomplished, which upon your scheme can never be done to all eternity; for if every offence against God is of infinite magnitude, and deserves infinite punishment, none can ever have received single for one of their sins, far less double for all.

And therefore nothing can possibly be more

trite and common argument, that as every sin is of infinite magnitude, so it justly demerits infinite punishment, which as no mere creature can bear, must necessarily subject all who are recompensed according to their own doings to endless misery.

Besides, if I was to grant you, contrary to Scripture, reason and common sense, that every offence is of infinite magnitude, and naturally deserves infinite punishment, how would you prove from that, the certainty of endless misery? Do you make nothing of the reconciliation which our Lord Jesus Christ has made for all sinners and for all sins?

Let me ask you seriously, did not Christ make a full and complete offering and propitiation for the sins of the whole world? Is it not certain that his merits were far greater than the demerits of all mankind? Is he not the lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world? If Christ died for all men, without exception, as you grant, and removed all their iniquities, and bore them away, and reconciled all to God by his death while they were enemies; much more as he has paid so great a price for their ransom, he will recover them out of their lost estate, and save them by his life. "Where sin abounded, grace did (or shall) 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." Rom. v. 20, 21.

I conclude, that let sin be ever so great, the grace of God is greater; and if you will have it that sin is of infinite magnitude, I hope you will not deny the propitiation of Jesus Christ, which he made for all sins, the same character. Therefore if you magnify sin, and insist upon the greatness of its demerit, I will endeavour to magnify the all-powerful Redeemer, above it and speak of nis power to redeem all the human race for whom he shed his blood. And then you will gain nothing in favour of the doctrine of endless damnation, by all your arguments founded upon the infinity of sin. Christ being far more infinite to save, than sin can be to destroy; and as he has undertaken to redeem and bring back those who were lost, there is no danger of his failing to perform it.

black night, one in endless damnation, and the other in gloomy annihilation. But on your plan light rises out of obscurity, and a glorious day succeeds the darkest scenes. This view of things sets the Book of divine Revelation in the most pleasing light, and appears, for aught any thing that I can see, consistent with the Divine perfections. But why, since you believe the Universal Restoration, do you not mention it more freely and fully, in your public discourses?

Minister. On the other hand, some ask me, Why do you ever mention it at all in your sermons; since it is not essential to salvation to believe it? To them I give these answers: 1. St. Paul declared to Timothy, that this Universal Gospel of God's being the Saviour, or Restorer of all men, but especially of those that believe, was a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation; and that they laboured and suffered reproach, because they trusted in God, as the universal Saviour. But he was so far from being ashamed of this belief, that he said to Timothy, "These things command and teach." 1 Tim. iv. 9-11. And so am I determined to do, at proper opportunities: notwithstanding the reproach and contempt awaiting me for so doing.

2. Though it is frequently said to be a matter of little or no consequence, if true; yet if it be any part of the record God hath given of his Son, (as I think I have proved) we are in danger of making him a liar, if we believe it not. See 1 John ver. 9-11.

3. Though you may be Christians, and not believe it; yet I cannot; though once I could also. But now the evidences of its truth appear so plain to my mind, that it would be criminal in me not to believe it; since I do believe it, would it not be highly dishonest in me to deny it? I have never done so yet, when asked; and God forbid, that I should be ashamed to publish, what he has commanded to be made known.

4. I have commonly acted merely on the defensive, and I never should, that I know of, have preached it in public, or but rarely, far less have written upon the subject, had it not been represented as a dangerous and destructive heresy; and people been cautioned against hearing me, on that account.

5. I have been frequently desired to preach upon the subject, expressly; and could not well refuse, without betraying a cowardly disposition.