If their Punishment was the Result of Passion, it might alter; for what is more changeable than Passion? But when it proceeds from immutable Principles, the infinite Perfections of God, and the eternal Reasons of Things, it will be as immutable as they are; unless the Reason of the Case, (the Weight in the Scale), should be alter'd, by a Change of the moral Character of the Creatures concerned; which we have no reason to expect. But this Author, by an odd Confusion of Ideas, at the same time that he is supposing no Passions in God, seems to represent him as if he acted passionately, and doomed his Creatures to a more dreadful State of Misery than they deserved, or than Divine Justice, which is inseparable from infinite Goodness, will permit. Upon this Supposition it is reasonable to presume, that when his Passion abated, or his Revenge was gratified, he would contrive some Method to relieve them. But this is by no means the Case. Nor is the Author consistent with himself, when he represents Divine Justice as dooming them to the Hatred of God, &c. For in the Paragraph immediately before, he goes so far as to say, "the "Torments it seems to inflict upon Sinners, do not "proceed from Justice, but from themselves, who lay up "Treasures of Wrath, Rom. ii. They alone feed the "Worm, that must gnaw them, and pile up combus"tible Materials for the Fire that must burn them." It is certain that it was not God, but themselves, who were the Cause of their Hatred of God: And if this which was their Crime, continues to be their Punishment, it is no more than what is agreeable to the Constitution of Things, and the Appointment of Providence, which makes Sin the Punishment of itself.

When these Considerations are laid together, and are allow'd their due Weight, without Prejudice or Passion; nothing more, I conceive, will be needful to defend our Doctrine, or make it appear consistent with Reason: For that, it is to be remember'd, is the point in view; not to prove it from Reason, but to reconcile it with it, and with our natural Notions of God's Perfections. The proper Proof arises from the Scriptures; to them we appeal'd, and by them we must be determin'd; provided only that the Case be not, in the very Nature of it, incapable of Proof, by being plainly absurd, or contradictory to some clear Principle of Reason. This, I think, is not the Case of the Doctrine of the Eternity of future Punishment. It appears to be consistent at least with Reason; and if Reason does not gainsay or contradict it, and Scripture asserts and teaches it, we can reasonably ask no more.1 The latter of these Points is consider'd in the two former Chapters, and the first in the present. If the Principles laid down be true, I think they are sufficient to justify the Conduct of Providence on this head. And our Adversaries themselves, one or other of them, bear testimony to the Truth of all, or most of them; as might be prov'd, if that was necessary, from their own plain Concessions. Even the first, which is as it were the Pillar and Ground of all, is allow'd by Mr. Whiston; and must, in consistency with themselves, by all who are in the

1 This makes it very different from the Case of Transubstantiation, with which our Adversaries affect to compare it: See Burnet, p. 302. Whiston, p. 2. Transubstantiation is plainly contrary to Sense and Reason, and is built upon one figurative Expression of Scripture: The Doctrine here asserted is not contrary to Sense or Reason, is taught in Variety of plain Expressions, and countenanced by the whole Tenor of Scripture.

Hypothesis of Annihilation: Because it cannot be conceiv'd that God would annihilate any intelligent Beings, if they were good for any thing, or capable of being made better. It is possible therefore for them to become, in the moral sense of the Expression, Salt that hath lost its Savour;1 incorrigibly, and incurably wicked, and beyond all Recovery utterly depraved for ever.

The Objections against this Doctrine, are founded chiefly upon Mistakes concerning it; and Men are prejudiced against it, because it is not fairly represented to them. Sometimes it is pretended that Men are damned for Temptations which they could not avoid, or for Infirmities which they could not help; in short, for any thing, rather than their own wilful Wickedness, and their own impenitent Hearts. Every thing is raked together, to lessen, and in a manner, to annihilate the Guilt of human Wickedness. Yet Sin is of ill desert; and if there be any thing that can make Sin itself become more exceeding sinful, it is all included in Christian Sin, as the Gospel contains the whole Counsel of God, in the Dispensation of Jesus Christ, to prevent it. Sometimes our Doctrine is represented as if it supposed God to delight in Cruelty and Barbarity, as damning his Creatures by Acts of Power and Dominion, without any regard to Mercy, or even Justice. Whereas it supposes no such thing; but, on the contrary, that he did every thing that became his Character, to save them; that they destroyed themselves; and reap the Fruit of their own Doings, unavoidably, and in the natural Consequences of things. He has no delight in their Sufferings, which he would have prevented; but that,

1 See No. XXXVIII.

tho' they are contrary to his original Design, he can make them serve to no good Purpose, can bring no Good out of this Evil, is more than ought to be said, because it is a great deal more than can be proved. It is pretended that this Constitution of things, in which so many of his Creatures become finally miserable, is inconsistent with the Justice, and Wisdom, and Goodness of God: Foreseeing that so many of them would miscarry, He had better have laid aside his Scheme, and desisted from creating them. But it should be considered, whether this would not restrain God from creating any free Beings at all: For it is not Liberty enjoyed only in such a Degree, or such a Situation as Men are placed in, that may be abused, but Beings of another Order, and placed in different Circumstances, may equally pervert it; and fall by that means from their first Estate, into the Condemnation of the Devil. It is evident, that let what Numbers you please miscarry, if this was so far from being necessary, or what they were unavoidably and fatally subjected to, that they had a fair and free Choice of everlasting Happiness, (the same which even they had who actually partake of it) there can be no Injustice done them; nothing, inconsistent with the Justice of God. And his Wisdom and Goodness, we may be confident, can contrive no Scheme, but what, upon the whole, it will be much better to execute, than to lay aside. The Good will be much greater than the Evil, and Happiness finally, and upon the whole, vastly prepollent. Must this Scheme then be defeated, because some of the Individuals, it is foreseen, will make themselves miserable, and with regard to them merely, it were good if the Scheme had been dropped? But this cannot come to pass without their own most

unreasonable Perverseness; and shall that defeat so glorious a Design? Surely I may venture to say, without any Danger, or Imputation, of Rashness, that it is consistent with every Perfection in God to create free Beings, (Angels or Men), tho' He foresees some of them will make themselves so miserable, that with reference merely to their single Case, it had been better if they had not been created. But to blacken our Doctrine more, and render it more odious, the Numbers of those who miscarry, in comparison of such as are saved, are magnified sometimes beyond all the Bounds of Reason and Truth. I have had occasion to take notice of This, more than once already.1 But I would here ask, upon what Scripture, Reason, or Experience, this Representation is founded? The Question, Are there few that be saved? was once put to our Lord himself: Luke xiii. 23. But He declin'd giving any direct Answer to a matter of such Curiosity, in which the Querist had no concern. thought it of more consequence to give them this useful Admonition, Strive to enter in at the strait Gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. That is, I suppose, because they sought only, and did not strive; or did not strive lawfully, seeking to enter by undue means, or when it was too late For the Miscarriage, I presume, must be charged upon themselves, or else it would be but a poor Encouragement to others to strive to enter in. And indeed it appears clearly from the subsequent Verses that this was the Case: These Seekers have nothing to plead in their behalf, but some external Advantages, or Relation; but were Workers of Iniquity, when they should have been working out their Salvation; and apply for Admission after the 1 See No. VI. and XX.

He