false idea; for we acknowledge that the threatenings shall be fulfilled, and not that the disobedient shall escape unpunished. There is a great deal of difference between these two ideas, though you would intimate them to be the same, and that we contradict God by assuring the wicked that they shall escape the just judgement of God. But we only declare that an end shall finally come to their punishment, and that when they shall be sufficiently humbled a dispensation of mercy shall succeed that of judgement. Let me ask you, has not God threatened mankind with death on the account of sin? "Dust thou art and unto dust thou shalt return." Gen. iii. 19. Well, tell me, is this threatening either weakened or destroyed by the knowledge of the great doctrine of the resurrection of the dead? Did not God threaten the children of Isreal with dreadful judgements to prevent their sinning, and that they should be dispersed among all nations? But will you say that he either weakened or destroyed the force of his threatenings, because he promised them at the same time that at least he would return their captivity, and restore them as at the first, and do better unto them, than at beginning.

The laws of this country condemn criminals to death; would it be thought that I should weakken or destroy the force of the penal statutes, by saying, that the execution of their law could only be felt for a certain time, beyond which it could not endure? Is not every, malefactor under the sentence of death supposed to know this? And yet will any presume to say, that these laws are entirely weakened, and their force

destroyed because they do not condemn transgressors to endless punishments? But, if it be allowed that torments, which are but momentary have a considerable influence in restraining many vices, there cannot be the smallest reason to fear that the doctrine of just retribution according to the deeds done in the body, wilk open the door to vice and immorality, but on the contrary. But this objection is so near akin to the last which you proposed, that it hardly deserves a distinct consideration; for if the doctrine of the Restoration does not lead men to commit sin (as I am sure it has no such tendency) ther no harm can be apprehended from its being known in this state. And whereas you argue, that as it would not be proper for the present state, we may be sure that God hath not revealed it; and therefore is highly proper for men to to know in the present state. You will please therefore to notice that the universal doctrine, so far from tending to render the divine threatenings useless or vain, weakening their force, or setting them aside, operates in the direct contrary manner. I as much believe as you or any other man can do, that all the threatenings will be fulfilled upon the finally impenitent; but dare not carry the matter so far as to set aside the gracious promises of God, with which the Scriptures appear to me to abound, in favor of the final recovery of all at last.

Friend. It must I think be confessed that if the doctrine of the Restoration be true, it would be matter of great joy and comfort for good men to know it, for they have often great trouble and anxiety of mind on the account of their

families, friends, neighbors, acquaintance, and mankind in general; which sorrow would be greatly relieved, could they have an idea of the Restoration of all things in the manner you hold it. But however true this may be, it seems not to be plainly revealed in the Scripture, otherwise it would not be hidden from the eyes of so many great and good men.

Minister. It is possible, that a subject may be revealed in the plainest manner, and yet the best of men may remain ignorant of it. For instance, were not the sufferings, death and resurrection of our Lord plainly revealed in the Scriptures of the old Testament? And yet we know that the apostles of our Saviour did not understand one of those prophecies. Nay, when Jesus told them openly and expressly that he must be delivered into the hands of men, and that they should mock, scourge, and crucify him, and that the third day he should rise again, they did not comprehend his meaning; although he spoke to them frequently and very plainly upon the subject, and said, "Let these sayings sink down into your ears; for the son of man shall be delivered into the hands of men. But they understood not this saying, and it was hid from them, that they perceived it not; and they feared to ask him of that saying." St. Luke ix. 44, 45. And in another place we read, "For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, the Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day." It is impossible that words should be more express, or less liable to be misunderstood. "But (as the evangel

ist immediately informs us) "they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him." St. Mark, ix. 31, 32. And in the same chapter we find, that after our Lord Jesus was transfigured upon the mount in the presence of Peter, James, and John, "As they came down from the mountain he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead. And they kept that saying with themselves, questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean." Ver. 9, 10. This was what Christ taught them not only plainly, but also frequently. See St. Matt. xvi. 21. xvii. 9, 22, 23. xx. 17, 18, 19. xxvi. 31, 32. St. Mark, viii. 31. ix. 9, 10, 31, 32. x. 32, 33, 34. xiv. 27, 28. St. Luke, ix. 21, 22, 44, 45. xviii. 31, 32, 33, 34.

Yet notwithstanding the plainness and frequency of these predictions, and the pains which Christ took to instil these ideas into them, they never understood them at all until some time after they were fulfilled. For when they saw him taken and delivered into the hands of men, and treated exactly according to his own words often repeated, they were entirely disappointed, and all their hopes seemed to die within them.-And when he was risen from the dead, they would not believe the testimony of those who had seen him, and would hardly trust their own senses, so ignorant were they of what he had told them.

St. John was the first of the disciples who believed that he was risen, for thus he writes, "Then went in also that other disciple, who came first to the sepulchre, and he saw and believed. For as yet they knew not the Scripture

that he must rise again from the dead." St. John, xx. 8, 9. This instance is so much to my purpose, and proves so evidently that a thing may be plainly revealed, and expressed in the clearest manner, and yet not be understood, that 1 hardly need mention any more. But I will mention another, and that is, the calling of the Gentiles. This was spoken of by the prophets, in the clearest language; and Jesus after his resurrection gave a full commission to his apostles, which one would think it was impossible for them to misunderstand.

"All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth, go ye therefore and teach all nations," &c. St. Matt. xxviii, 18, 19. "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature." St. Mark, xvi. 15.

"Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead on the third day; and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things." St. Luke, xxiv. 46, 47, 48. "Ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you; and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Judea and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." Acts i. 8. But the apostles themselves, even after the miraculous descent of the Holy Ghost upon them, were without understanding, respecting the calling of the Gentiles, until St. Peter was taught it by a vision from heaven. See Acts, x.

And St. Paul speaks of this subject as a mystery that was hid from ages and generations, and particularly revealed to him, and not to the saints