« ElőzőTovább »
pear to be closing remarks on the subject of the prophecy, but not at all calculated to continue it, as the subject of prophetic history.
As it respects duration, we only find in the text the little word still, which signifies yet or longer. To illastrate the use of this word, we introduce the following passages : John vii. 9; “When he had said these things unto them, he abode still in Galilee.” Acts xv. 37; “Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still."
That the text under consideration is applicable to the present state of man, is made evident by comparing it with some others of a similar nature. tice a like expression in the words of God to the prophet Ezekiel. “But when I speak with thee, I will open thy mouth, and thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God, He that heareth, let him hear, he that forbeareth, let him forbear; for they are a rebellious house." Chap. iii. verse 27. To suppose the Lord was altogether indifferent whether the people gave attention to the words of the prophet or not, would be putting an interpretation to the passage which few people would be willing to adopt. Nor have we reason to believe that we are under any
such necessity from the manner of its phraseology. No doubt the idea is merely prophetic, that some would hear, and some would forbear. The reason which is given to the prophet, is calculated to justify this interpretation ; for they are a rebellious house. Another passage of this description is found in 1 Cor. xiv. 38. “But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.” To account this expressive of a wish, would be to oppose the manifest sentiments of the apostle. It could by no means accord with the many expressions of his love of mankind, and his great zeal in the cause of the Redeemer. But if we may understand this imperative form, as expressive of simply the future tense, as we have reason to believe, in some instances we may, the true sense of the passage is easily obtained.
It is always requisite that we attend to the connection in which we find a passage, and to the nature of its subject, to discover its real meaning. From these considerations it is hoped, some light is thrown on the passage of our present discussion,
AYOTICE OF A PAMPHLET, ENTITLED, THE ERRORS OF
UNIVERSAL SALVATION REFUTED, IN A SHORT AND COMPREHENSIVE ESSAY. BY JOSHUA WADE. This is an octavo pamphlet, containing 104 pages, and appears only remarkable for ignorance and fanaticism. The author dates his preface, Berlin, 21st of January, 1821 ; but the printer has been sufficiently careful to conceal bis own name and the name of the place from which the book was issued. To the generosity of some unknown, and probably well meaning person, we are indebted for the book, who recently deposited it in a school house in this town, undoubtedly for a warning to poor Universalists. "Much applause,” says the writer, "is due to the merit of those who in a high and elegant style have made discoveries of things, which are concealed from the illiterate; yet it must be acknowledged, such sublimity of thought as a general thing, cannot become so extensively useful to the vulgar, as that which is more simple, and better adapted to a low capacity.” Mr. Wade appears to give us to understand that he is capable of appreciating the merit of those who in a high and elegant style have made discove; ries of things, which are concealed from the illite rate,” and the wonderful faculty of adapting “such sublimity of thought to the vulgar”_"to a low capacity." Notwithstanding we are “not to be surprised at any inelegancy as it respecte a grammatical construction; as it must appear, the author can lay no just claim or pretension to the polish of mental improvement." We read the preface of this work through, and were fully of the author's opinion, that he could "lay no just claim or pretension to the polish of mental improvement;" tor were we "surpris
ed at any inelegancy as it respects a grammatical construction.” We read his whole work through, and when we closed the book, we were not at all astonished that "sin and righteousness cannot agree to cohabit together."*
We frequently meet with prefference, opperation, hallance, attonement, attrocious, United States is the greatest political preacher-she has been preachingshe has taught she has gained, him- will be as certain,-him -contradicts, counteracts, or alters his testimony, &e. &c. &c. We thought when reading, we would surely lash the printer for some of it, did we but know who he was; but the probability is, he has had a task sufficiently hard for his patience, and aware of what he was engaged in, has cautiously concealed his name.
This writer insists much on the force of what he calls “the unpardonable sin," and "the sin not to be prayed for,” which is nearly all he pretends to urge against universal salvation from the scripture. Should he carefully look, he will find there is no sin in the Bible which is called unpardonable. The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost-to-which he alludes, has been shown by many writers to have reference to particular periods which are of a limited nature. It is generally conceded that those sinners are few, in comparison with the whole human race. Those who wish to urge their certain endless misery, ought to be willing to admit, that all others will as certainly be forgiven, according to the literal construction of the passages that speak of it. But it makes the number of the damned too few to coincide with the views of any partial denomination among us. The sin, not to be prayed for, is treated in a separate article in this number.
We calculate to trouble the reader with but very few quotations from this work. The following is from the 13th page; "The doctrine of Universal Sal.
* Page 81,
vation which we make the principal topic of our present consideration, has become very popular in many places; and has called up the attention of the unbetieving world in a remarkable manner ; who are well pleased to embrace a system of religion, which will finally carry them to heaven, tho they should live and die in their sins ; without examining whether the truth of such a pleasing doctrine may not be disputa ble; which meets with such general approbation from the unbelieving world."
Notwithstanding the increasing popularity of our doctrine, this writer seems to flatter himself with much more success than any of his precursors.
“We consider,” says he, "we have silenced the Universalists, and for that reason we are at leisure to attend to matters of more importance." So we find in a pamphlet of 104 pages, to refute the errors of universal salvation, after the work was accomplished, there was about 40 or 50 pages to be occupied with other inatter !!. The readers have so much extra, of which there was no notice given in the title page. Thus the "carnal reasoning” of the Universalists is confounded by this champion of Calvinism. But we suspect the Calvinists themselves will not glory however at the shout of victory ; nor wreath his head with immortal laurels. Never did the Universalists multiply more rapidly, than at the present period. No less than six periodical works belonging to them, receive constant support, and are finding their way to every part of our country. We tell Mr. Wade and public, he has not accomplished his object; there is something yet for him to do. But before he appears again as an author, we advise him to study the rudiments of his own language. A little more logic and rhetoric if he wishes to confute such carnal reasoning (of which he has much to say) would be very beneficial. A proper use of the gender and number of nouns to a spiritual writer, or a writer on spiritual things, would be something of an ornament in this enlightened age. He may find himself a tax upon his learned brethren, should he again attempt to write by virtue of his spiritual gift, and make such a wonderful display of igjorance and fanaticism. We are far from being offended, as
our writer seems to suggest, would probably be the case ; and equally as far from apprehending, we shall be called to suffer severely in consequence of his work. Such publications, to be sure, may have their use in the hands of the religious enthusiast, and place a stumbling block in the way of some feeble brother or sister. A crazy head may gather some of its contents, and a noisy tongue proclaim it to the uninformed and prejudiced mind, with tolerable success. But this is the most that we can anticipate from its influence; and this is the principal consideration that induced us to notice the work so much as we have.
FROM THE CHRISTIAN PHILANTHROPIST. The following supposed refutation of the syllogisms which
were published our 28th No. appeared in a late Rhode. Island Intelligencer,
“The writer who has taken the pains to construct this syllogistic reasoning, has done less, I apprehend, towards bringing the “controversy to an end” than he seems to imagine. This assuming of major terms as true in a sense which belongs to the question at issue, because they may be true in a sense which does not, is a very fallacious mode of reasoning. In this way we see many easily prove that Christ is not a man. For instance, no man is, or can be, a mediator between himself and God. Christ is the one mediator between God and man. Therefore Christ was not a man.
“No man can make an atonement for himself, nor become the propitiation for the sins of men. "By Christ we have received an aton nent, and he is the propitiation for our sins," &c. Therefore Christ was not a man.