Mr. P. says the offender "cannot ask for deliverance and salvation as a favor" &c. He has here blended two very distinct ideas, and treated them as though they were one and the same. That the offender, after enduring all the punishment which he deserves and all that will be beneficial to him, cannot consistently ask for deliverance from suffering or punishment as a favor, I admit. But can he not consistently ask for salvation as a favor? Most certainly he can. All that he has a right in justice to demand is a deliverance from suffering, which might be effected by ANNIHILATION! He could not in justice require salvation or eternal life. He could not ask for salvation as a reward for his sufferings. For eternal life, which is the unmerited gift of God through Christ; he is entirely dependent on the unpurchased, free, unbounded grace of God. Jesus Christ saves men by the free favor of God, not in violation of justice, but according to its eternal requisition. Mr. P's similitude of asking deliverance from "confinement in the county jail" does not apply to his subject. Because after the culprit has suffered the term of confinement for which he was sentenced, he has a natural and undeniable right to the blessings of liberty, as much as any unoffending citizen. But the sinner, after suffering the punishment due to sin, has no right salvation. "Salvation is of

the Lord."

3. Mr. P. argues that sinners cannot suffer all the punishment the law requires because they are forgiven. He says, "forgiveness implies that

the sinner forgiven is not punished in his own person according to law and justice." Then law and justice are violated! It is a fundamental er- ́ ror, common to all partial systems of salvation that God is at war with himself that mercy demands what justice will not allow-that as justice and mercy cannot both be exercised towards the same creatures, the human race will be divided, one part becoming the subjects of an unjust mercy, and the other part the victims of a merciless justice! Where does Mr. P. learn that "forgiveness implies that the sinner forgiven -is not punished according to law and justice" Certainly not from the bible. By what authority does he teach a world of sinners that they shall not be punished "according to their works" Certainly not by the authority of God; for the scriptures explicitly teach the following sentiment, "whosoever doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong done." Forgiveness is the exercise of divine mercy to those who can neither produce that mercy nor save themselves; but it never delivers any from the punishment they deserve; because justice and mercy are not opposing, but harmonizing attributes. "Thou wast a God who forgavest them, though thou tookest vengeance of their inventions" P's. 99, 8.

4. Mr. P. says, "Christ is abundantly represented in the scriptures as delivering men from the curse of the law." If by "delivering men from the curse of the law," he intended delivering them from the just punishment of their sin, (as he probably did) then I deny that any such sen

timent is taught in the Bible. To deliver a child from the punishment his disobedience deseryes would be to violate the law of the parent.

To

deliver him from disobedience would be to make him honor and fulfil the law of his parent. "Thou shalt call his name Jesus for he shall save his people from their sins "—not from justice. Mr. P. says "the argument which I am now opposing, asserts that ali men will be saved, because the curse of the law is only so much punishment as will answer the purpose of salutary discipline and lead the soul to repentance." This is incorrect. The argument he was opposing, asserts no such idea. It does not pretend that any will be saved "by enduring the full curse of the law." The doctrine of disciplinary punishment admits of the exercise of justice and mercy towards every sinner. "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord." Rom. 6, 23. This death being temporary, every sinner may not only receive his wages, but also, the gift of God. Man needs no "deliverance from the means of repentance"-the bible teaches no such deliverance-Universalists believe in no such deliverance, and we would thank Mr. P. to be more particular to state our arguments correctly. In what manner does Christ save men from the curse of the law? Answer, by the power and influence of grace and truth, he saves them from the love and practice of sin; and when any one is saved from the commission of sin, he is saved from all the misery, punishment or curse, attendant upon iniquity when committed.

5. Mr. P. says, "that the law threatens a much severer punishment than any mere salutary discipline is evident also from the very terms used." He then notices such expressions as the following,accursed-cursed children-wrath—fiery indignation wrath without mixture, &c. These

expressions he thinks incompatible with parental kindness, or a punishment merely disciplinary. But did he mean to represent God to be destitute of parental kindness towards any of his creatures? Could any demon do worse than to burn with implacable vengeance towards his own children? The most dreadful curses denounced against sinners, are compatible with the exercise of parental kindness on the part of the divine being; or God is a revengeful being, whose character cannot be safely imitated by an earthly parent! Look at the curses threatened against God's chosen people as recorded in the 29th chapter of Deut. Are they not compatible with parental kindness? "But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance, which glory was to be done how shall not the ministration of the away, spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. For if that which was done away was glorious, much more that which

remaineth is glorious" 2d Cor. 3, 7-14. glorious ministration of death is to be abolished

and will be succeeded by the ministration of the spirit, whose effulgent glory shall eclipse the glory of the former, even as the twinkling star is lost in the presence and glory of the sun. But Mr. P. thinks "a certain class of persons" who are sinful are corrected on the principle of salutary punishment. For proof he quotes Heb. chapter 12, "whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth," &c. Does he not thus charge God with partiality? Why does God treat one class of sinners entirely different from another class? It is truly humiliating to see the complacency with which vain mortals divide the human species into different classes-carefully calculating themselves among the favorites of heaven! But lest there should be some mistake on this point, we will present him with a looking-glass, in which he may see himself. "Now we know, that what soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God." Rom. 3, 19.

Mr. P. says "It is sometimes necessary for kind parents to cast off a child utterly and finally, for the good of the family" &c.. Why? Because they are deficient in power to govern or reclaim the child. If they possess the power to reclaim the child and still cast him off utterly, we should justly consider them monsters in cruelty! God is not wanting in power, will or means to reclaim every sinner. After referring to Bru