Here is not a word about a state of future punishment, much less endless damnation, and yet the good prophet Jeremiah thought, that if he had never been born, it would have been far better for him.

Friend.—I must confess, I never before considered it possible to answer this objection; you have done much towards solving it; but you must consider, that both Job and Jeremiah passionately exclaimed, and, through sorrow, uttered such words, as, in their cooler moments they repented of; and therefore, what they spake of themselves cannot wholly set aside the objection. Had they delivered those expressions as general truths, and declared, that man had much better never have been born, than to have suffered such degrees of worldly sorrow, it would have more than answered the objection; but, when men under grief exclaim in such a manner, we cannot ground a matter of such importance upon what they say respecting themselves; as their minds, being overwhelmed with trouble, and the immediate sensations of pain, are biased, and cannot utter the calm dictates of sober reason. But Christ, though under great sorrows himself, saw the case of Judas so deplorable, that he expressed himself. thus respecting him; which was the sober truth, without exaggeration; and could this be said of him, or of any other of the human race, upon the supposition that misery is not absolutely endless? Minister. We do not find that Job or Jeremiah ever recanted, in their cooler moments, what they uttered in their sorrows; and our Lord, speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem says, "And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days." See St. Matth. xxiv. 19, St. Mark xiii. 17. Not because of their future, endless damnation, in distinction from others; but on account of their present trouble and sorrow; as is explained, Luke xxi. 23. "But woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days; for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people." And when the Saviour was led to death, we read, " And there followed him a great company of people, and of women, who also bewailed and lamented him. But Jesus, turning unto them, said, daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but for yourselves, and for your children. For behold the days are coming, in the which they shall say, blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck. Then shall they say to the mountains, fall on us; and to the hills, cover us.-For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?" St. Luke xxii. 27, 31.

And who would not, a thousand times, choose rather never to have been born than even to see, far less experience, the miseries which came upon Jerusalem and its inhabitants? Would it not have been better for mothers never to have been born, than to have killed and eaten their own children in the siege and would it not have been bet

than to have been food for their mothers!

But Solomon not only represents a state of great misery and affliction in this life, as worse than not to have been born, but also, a state of the greatest prosperity, if it ends in disgrace; for he says, "If a man beget an hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years be many, and his soul be not filled with good; and also that he have no burial; I say that an untimely birth is better than he. For he (the untimely birth) cometh in with vanity, and departeth in darkness; and his name shall be covered with darkness. Moreover, he hath not seen the sun, nor known any thing: this hath more rest than the other. Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good!" (i. e. no equivalent good, to balance his disgrace.) "Do not all go to one place?" All came from dust, and turn to dust again. Eccl. vi. 3-6.

The state here described by Solomon, is not only infinitely better than the damnation of hell, though limited by certain periods; but far preferable to many, if not to most situa tions of men in this life; and yet he prefers an untimely birth to a man who lives more than twice the age of Methuselah, and has an hundred children of his own, if he has not his soul filled or satisfied with good! and that he hath no burial, or has not honour, (credit, or reputation) at his death.

Long life and many children, were formerly esteemed as the greatest of blessings; but as the things of this life cannot fill the soul with good; so a man had better never have been born, than to have enjoyed the good things of this world in the greatest profusion, if he dies in disgrace, and has no burial, or is not honoured at his death. Yet this is not worthy to be named in the same day with the damnation of hell! yet is frequently threatened as a great and terrible judgment; which if it falls upon a man, however he may have enjoyed long life, health, wealth, and all kinds of prosperity; it makes it worse for him than if he never had been born, according to the decision of God himself; and, therefore, no wonder that Christ said of wicked Judas, "Good were it for that man if he had never been born."

Though I have answered you so largely, yet one word might have sufficed to have answered the whole objection at first; viz. had Judas died before he had been born, and perished from his mother's womb, he would never have sinned, far less betrayed Christ; he would have entered into peace immediately, "where the wicked cease from troubling, and where the weary are at rest." In that case, he would have escaped the judgment that came upon him, and would have had more rest than those who should live in all the affluence of life two thousand years, and beget each an hundred children, and yet should not be honoured at their death.

Some would have answered the objection shorter, by saying, Christ promised twelve thrones to his twelve apostles, among whom

CONTENTS OF DIALOGUE III.

OBJECTION. That the doctrine of the Restoration tends to licentiousness, and is calculated to en courage the wicked in a continuance of their evil ways, &c.

ANSWER. First, by shewing the principles upon which the doctrine of the Restoration is founded. 1. God is the Creator of all. 2. His benevolence is universal. 3. Christ died for all without exception. OBJECTION.-That Christ did not die for all, because he did not pray for all.

ANSWER.-This objection is entirely groundless;-for though in one place he prays exclusively for his apostles, yet a little after he prays for all that should believe on him, through their word, &c. 4. Another of the first principles upon which the doctrine of the Universal Restoration is founded, 18 the unchangeableness of God. 5. The immutability of his counsels; confirmed by his oath. 6. That God hath given all things into the hands of Christ, and that nothing that is given to him shall be lost. 7. That the Scriptures must be fulfilled, and that none of them can be broken. Secondly, It is proved that the doctrine of the Restoration cannot lead to licentiousness, because it is perfectly consistent with experimental religion. Queries asked upon this subject. A little sketch of the author's experience. Queries submitted to the consideration of all experienced Christians. Inferences deduced therefrom in favour of the doctrine of the Restoration. Thirdly, It is proved that the doctrine of the Restoration does not lead to licentiousness, by its tendency to practical religion. 1. We are commanded to love all mankind, even our enemies. 2. To do good to all. 3. To forgive all that trespass against us. 4. To pray for all men, that they may be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. The belief of the Restoration so far from preventing us from these things, enables us to perform them with pleasure and consistency. All shall be restored at last by the blood of Christ. Fourthly, It is proved, that the doctrine of the Restoration is according to godliness, because the belief of it tends to fill our hearts with all amiable tempers, &c. Fifthly, The doctrine of the Restoration is vindicated from the charge of licentiousness, by an appeal to facts, especially by the amiable conduct of the Tunkers, or German Baptists in America, who universally hold these sentiments. Reply to those who call this the doctrine which Satan taught Eve in the Garden. Dr. Whitby's grand objection, that the unbelievers shall not see life, answered.

OBJECTION.-The doctrine of endless punishment said to be the greatest possible restraint upon sin. ANSWERED.-1. By showing that God does not always lay the greatest possible restraint upon sin. 2. The idea of limited punishment by appearing more just and reasonable to the mind, is more calculated to restrain sin and iniquity than the doctrine of endless misery. 3. That in fact, though the greater part have professed to believe endless damnation, yet their belief appears not to have much restrained them from sin. 4. The great number of heathen people that die without ever hearing the gospel, infants, idiots, persons born deaf, &c., render it probable that many are reclaimed in a future state. 5. That the intention of God is not so much to restrain sin, as to shew its enormity; and finally to destroy it out of the universe. 6. If the doctrine of the Restoration should be abused, that can be no argument against it, as the gospel itself has been perverted; yet it is the greatest blessing to mankind; therefore it is evident that this glorious doctrine cannot justly be charged with the least tendency towards licentiousness.

OBJECTION. It would not be prudent in God even if he intended finally to restore the wicked to let them know his gracious designs beforehand; it is time enough to let them know his gracious purposes towards them, when his former threatenings have failed of their effect, but not before.

ANSWERED.-God has thought it the abounding of his wisdom and prudence to make known to his saints this mystery of his will, even his promise to rehead all things in Christ. The discovery is chiefly intended for the comfort and satisfaction of the good, and not for the encouragement of the bad. God has frequently mixed promises of great mercies with threatenings of terrible judgments; yet his threatenings are not thereby weakened.

OBJECTION.-The doctrine of the Restoration seems not very plainly revealed in the Scripture, or it would not have been so long hidden from so many great and good men.

ANSWER.-Things that have been plainly revealed have been still hidden from great and good men; as the death and resurrection of Christ.

QUESTION.-But how comes this man to know better than all the world? &c.

ANSWER. The charge denied. Many have known, believed, preached and defended it. The doctrine of endless misery is one principal cause of the disagreement among Christians.

DIALOGUE III.

Friend.-I am glad to meet with you, to nave some farther conversation upon the very important and interesting subject of the final Restoration. Since I saw you last I have had opportunity of hearing some very capital objections made against this system, which I beg leave to state in the plainest and strong

Friend. One grand objection that is very generally made against the doctrine of the Restoration, is, that it tends to licentiousness; that it is the doctrine that the serpent preached to Eve; for we read, (Gen. iii. 4,)" And the serpent said unto the woman, ye shall not surely die ;" and that it is a doctrine calculated to give encouragement to the wicked Minister. Your frankness is well pleasing to continue in their evil ways; that it is to me, and I am ready to hear whatever can "saying, peace, peace, when there is no be urged against my sentiments, and will do peace;" and that this doctrine is as dangermy endeavour to answer all reasonable objec-ous as that of the wicked prophetesses of tions; therefore propose them as soon as you

est manner.

Ezekiel's time, of whom God says, "With

sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life. They say unto them that dispise me, JEHOVAH hath said, ye shall have peace? and they say unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his own heart, no evil shall come upon you." Jer. viii. 11, Ezek. xiii. 22, Jer. xxiii. 17.

It is said that it is the nature of God to lay the highest possible restraint upon sin, and, therefore, he has threatened it with eternal or endless punishment; and this is even found too weak to prevent the prevailing iniquity. What a flood of impiety, therefore, would overflow the world, if it should be generally believed, that after some ages of suffering, mankind should be restored to some degree of happiness? Would not the restraints be wholly taken off from the lusts and passions of the wicked, if once this doctrine should become prevalent? Will you be so kind as to give a fair and candid reply to this objection? Minister. This objection is stated with all possible, force, I shall, therefore, endeavour to answer it as well as I can; putting in this careat, that if I shall not answer it to your satisfaction, do not imagine that no solid answer can be given; but impute it to my not being sufficiently master of my subject, or not being able to express my mind so clearly as I could wish. As this objection is frequently made, and often used, by people who mean well, but have not considered the subjeet thoroughly, I shall be as explicit as I possibly can upon it.

I would first observe, that the great truths, or first principles, upon which the Restoration is founded, and from which it is derived by natural and easy consequences, are far from tending to licentiousness. But in order to . make this evident, it will be proper here to set them down in their order.

First Principles upon which the Doctrine of the
Final and Universal Restoration is founded.

which God himself deduces the certainty of the final end of wrath, as I have observed before: "For I will not contend forever, neither will I be always wroth: for the spirits should fail before me, and the souls which I have made." Isaiah lvii. 16. Those who venture to contradict their Maker, and say that he will contend forever, and be always wroth! ought to be able at least to give us as good a reason why he will, as he has assigned why he will not; and consequently prove that he hath not made all souls; which is the true foundation upon which endless misery must be founded, and the only doctrine which is perfectly consistent with it.

The poor untutored Indians in America, argued (with a missionary that was sent from Sweden to convert them) from the universal providence of God, that he, who was so kind a Father as to provide for their bodies all things needful, had not wholly neglected their souls. But this I do not insist upon, though, I think, the argument has weight in it; and certainly, the providential goodness of God, and his long suffering, tends to lead men to repentance. Rom. ii. 4, 2 Pet. iii. 9.

2. The universal benevolence of the Deity, or the love of God to his creatures, is one of the first principles from which the general Restoration is deduced; and who can say that this leads to licentiousness? If those who believe that God loves them, in particular, find that consideration the strongest obligation on them to love him again, and to obey his will; by the same rule, if all the individuals of the whole human race, were to believe that God loved each one of them, would not the same cause produce the same effect? And if so, can this be charged as a licentious doctrine, which is expressly grounded upon a cause which powerfully operates to produce holiness? Is there anything like argument in this reasoning? I know that God loves me, and seeks to do me good; therefore, I must hate him. What should we think of a woman who should leave her husband; and do all in her power against him, and should be able to give no better reasons for it than the following:

1. GOD is the universal and only Creator of all; contrary to the opinion of the Manichees" My husband loves me, and I know it, and of old, who believed the devil to be the creator of most, if not all visible things. The Mugletonians of the last century, and the Buchanites lately, assert nearly the same sentiments; contrary to Rev. iv. 11, Col. i. 16, Psalm c. 3, Numb. xvi. 22, Isaiah lxiv. 8, Ezek. xviii. 4, Zech. xii. 1, and a vast number of other scriptures.

Now who can say, that this noble thought, which St. Paul enlarges upon so beautifully, (Acts xvii. 24-30) tends in the least, to make inen wicked? Does it not tend to dignify and ennoble human nature, to be told, that God is our Father, Creator, and First Cause: and that we were made by his power, according to his will, and for his pleasure and that the chief end for which he made us, was, to glorify his name and enjoy him forever?as the Assembly's Catechism beautifully declares. This is one of the principles from

he has always loved me, and always will; and therefore I am determined to hate, ridicule, despise, and contemn him, and have left him for this cause, and am determined never to love or obey him more." Bad as human nature is, I question whether such instances often occur. We commonly say, that love begets love. "We love him because he first loved us;" says the apostle, 1 John iv. 19. There fore, the doctrine of God's universal benevo lence, cannot lead to licentiousness, in any light in which it can be viewed: for if he really loves us, he will do all in his power to bring us to love him again, and to be like him; and I am sure the consideration of his love to us, goes as far as moral persuasion can go, to induce us to love him again; nay, the belief of it is acknowledged to be one of the strongest motives to obedience; and the love of God, shed abroad in the heart, pro

never denied in any place, and is plainly, and pointedly declared in those I have quoted. And, besides, it is evident that in the apostles' time, the universality of the death of Christ was a first principle, universally acknowledged, and therefore, St. Paul reasons from it as such; which it would have been highly preposterous for him to do, if that had not been the case: as, for example, "For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all," (which is not disputed by any, and which we know to be a truth) "then were all dead: and that he died for all; that they who live, should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him that died for them, and rose again." 2 Cor. v. 14, 15.

Friend. But have you never heard it argued that Christ did not die for all, because he did not pray for all?

duces the best effects, and is the most powerful principle, and spring, of good and virtuous actions, that we are acquainted with. This being a first principle, from which the Universal Restoration is concluded, we are happy to find, that "God is love:" and that he "so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life: For, God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved." See 1 John iv. 16. St. John iii. 16, 17. But it is not so much my business now to shew, that the sentiment is scriptural, as to shew that it is not of a dangerous tendency. The following words, how ever, are so beautiful, that I take the liberty to mention them :-" but thou hast mercy upon all; for thou canst do all things, and winkest at the sins of men, because they should amend. For thou lovest all the things that are, and Minister. I remember, when a lad, I was abhorrest nothing which thou hast made; for sent to a neighbour's house, and overheard never wouldst thou have made any thing, if the good man, the master of the family, read thou hadst hated it. And how could any in a book after this manner: "Christ did not thing have endured, if it had not been thy will; die for all, because he did not pray for all; I or been preserved, if not called by thee? But pray for them; I pray not for the world, but thou sparest all; for they are thine, O Lord, for them which thou hast given me, for they thou lover of souls. For thine incorruptible are thine." St. John xvii. 9. And I then Spirit is in all things: therefore chasteneth thought the argument conclusive; but I am thou them, by little and little, that offend, and now at a loss whether the author of that book warnest them, by putting them in remem- meant to deceive his readers; or, whether he brance wherein they have offended, that leav- had never read the chapter through critically. ing their wickedness, they may believe on For had he read the 20th verse, he would have thee, O Lord. For thy power is the begin- found these words, which would have overning of righteousness; and because thou art thrown his hypothesis:-"Neither pray I for the Lord of all, it maketh thee to be gracious these alone; but for them also, who shall beunto all. But thou, O God, art gracious and lieve on me through their word." If Christ true; long suffering, and in mercy ordering had prayed for all, in the 9th verse, for whom all things. For if we sin, we are thine, know- he died, he could not have enlarged his prayer ing thy power; but we will not sin, knowing so much in the 20th verse, as to take in not that we are counted thine." Wisdom of Solo- them only, but all who should believe on him mon xi. 23, 26; xii. 1, 2, 16; xv. 1, 2. "Je-through their word. Neither does he stop hovah is gracious and full of compassion, here, but goes on to pray for those that beslow to anger and of great mercy. Jehovah lieve in these words: That they all may be is good to all; and his tender mercies are one; as thou, Father art in me and I in thee: over all his works. All thy works shall praise that they also may be one in us." And why thee, O Jehovah; and thy saints shall bless is all this unity prayed for among unbelievers? thee." Psal. cxlv. 8-10. Surely, it hath never been accomplished; but it shall be, for this great and admirable purpose, viz.: "That the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me, I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one; I in them and thou in me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me." v. 21-23.

3. Another great principle upon which the Restoration depends, is, that Christ died for all: "We see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he, by the grace of God, should taste death for every man." (or all.) Heb. ii. 9. "If any man sin we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous. And he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." 1 John ii. 1, 2. "For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." 1 Tim. ii. 5, 6.

I need not multiply passages to prove that Christ died for all; for though the universality of his death is not expressly asserted, in every text where it is mentioned that he died,

66

Friend. But when shall the world believe, and know that Christ is sent from God?

Minister. When all that believe shall be one, as the Father and Son are one. When the great marriage of the Lamb shall be cele brated, and his bride shall be one, in the bond of universal love and fellowship, as the Father and Son now are: when the church shall be perfected in one; shall dwell in love, and dwell in God, as the Father dwells in the Son, and the Son in the Father: when Zion's