follows: "Purgatory is an invention of men; for they who believe go into eternal life; they who believe not into eternal damnation." And a corresponding article in the Bohemian confession runs thus: " Souls departing out of bodies are immediately either plunged into eternal punishment, or attain eternal joys."*

Mr. H. names John Huss and Jerome of Prague among those who "declared against the wickedness of the church" of Rome, who soon were persecuted to death for their testimony. "But those,' he adds, · were extraordinary men, who were prepared for this very work, so that the true church might not be wholly exterminated." p. 48. Now as these were Bohemians, and their cause zealously defended by their brethren, they could not have been Universalists. And further, they openly avowed their principles in opposition to the Pope, which, according to our author, a Universalist would not dare to do.

It has already been noticed, that the principle which Mr. H. opposes, had lost all its influence, generally speaking, by their absolutions, purgatory, and it may be added, pilgrimages, zeal for the Pope, &c. But the suggestion, that we hold, that nothing but the doctrine of eternal misery can reform the people, is far from being a correct, or candid statement. Merely that principle, we believe, would answer but small purpose, as observation verifies; but the system of religion, which embraces that doctrine, is the only religion that will benefit souls; that will be instrumental of the conversion of sinners, or of the reformation of morals in society. Other means

* Newton's Diss. Vol II pp. 245, 255, 256. In the original account. "Non credentes autem in damnationem æternum venire:" "In æternum e vestigio panas mergi.”

have often been tried, and have as often failed. The more enlightened among the heathen have tried their philosophy to but little or no purpose. In vain the Jews remonstrate against the sins of their fathers, and of the present age, while they neglect the true gospel of Christ. And can any one point out the instance, where the doctrine of Universal salvation ever effected a permanent reformation?

The system, which I am defending, represents sin as exceeding sinful; as deserving eternal punishment; that the heart of man is opposed to God, and full of moral evil, and must be renewed, or the soul cannot enjoy future happiness; that outward reform will not secure salvation; that there is a future judgment, and resurrection of the just and unjust; and eternal rewards of weal or wo in a future world: all which is plain in the Scriptures of truth. But leave these out of your system, and what carnal mind will care much about reformation of heart or life? Such a mutilated system the world will delight to hear, if they can but believe it. Smooth things are always most acceptable to those who choose the ways of death. I appeal to common sense, whether the fear of punishment be not calculated to restrain from evil; and the greater the punishment, the greater Otherwise why are will be its probable influence. penalties annexed to laws both human and divine? I also appeal to the sacred word for confirmation of this point. Ezek. XIII. 22. "With lies ye have made the heart of the righteous 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." In this passage it is implied, that to proinise the wicked life, when Jehovah had denounced death against them, unless they reformed, was not only lying, but it encouraged the wicked to persevere

in their iniquity, with hope of escaping at last the just judgments of God. O sinners take heed how you allow yourselves to be deceived with vain words!

SECTION IX.

In page 89 Mr. Hutchinson states the following objection as made against the principle he advocates: "You say (says the objection) that when the word everlasting is set to qualify punishment, as everlasting punishment, &c. it does not mean eternal : and if that is the case, how can you prove that the happiness of the righteous is eternal? or the duration of God, or of Christ? For everlasting is often used in Scripture to express the duration of all these."

His reply to this objection begins with the following extraordinary declaration: "If there was no other word beside everlasting to prove the duration of God, or Christ, or the happiness of the saints; then it could not be proved by Scripture, that they will be eternal, for it is certain that the original words from which everlasting is rendered, in both Testaments do not mean eternal."

I am

I take it for granted, that Mr. H. in the former part of this singular paragraph, does not so much object against the meaning of the English word everlasting, as he does to the sense of the original words, rendered everlasting, eternal, and forever. persuaded that he did not question, that the native meaning of everlasting was endless duration; but he thought that the sense of the original words would not warrant such an interpretation. Therefore my inquiry will be respecting the signification of AION, and AIŌNIOS, upon which he chiefly insists.

66

Mr. H., in order to support his declaration respecting the sense of the original words, tells us, that neither "AION," nor 99.66 AIONION," express eternity or eternal." p. 105. And he adds, "As it is allowed that AIONION never means eternal, it ought not to have been so rendered " It is readily owned, that in many instances the words referred to admit of a limited sense, and so do the words everlasting and eternal in the English language; and indeed it would be difficult to find any word that does not vary in its meaning; but still it has its primary sense, which is always to be followed, unless the sense of the pasSage forbids it. I am wholly unacquainted with the Hebrew, (as Mr. H. sometimes refers to that) and make no pretensions to the knowledge of Greek; but if Mr. H.'s remarks upon the meaning of Aion, and AIONIOS, are correct, I am astonished at what I find in my Lexicon, in the Septuagint, and in the Greek Testament Nor can 1 account for the egregious blunders made by our translators in so universally rendering these words everlasting, eternal, and forever.

Schrevelius, in his Lexicon, renders AION by the Latin ævum, as its first sense, which primarily signifies eternity, notwithstanding what Mr. H. has said to the contrary. "AION, says a correspondent long acquainted with the Greek language, like our English word, is made up of two words, aei, ever, and on, existing, i. e. ever existing, or everlasting; from which is derived the Latin avum, which retains the signification of the Greek from which it is derived, viz. eternity, or endless duration." Mr. Balfour, a learned Universalist, in his inquiry into the meaning of AION, and AIONIOS, p. 249, acknowledges, "that the werd, AION, is compounded of AEI, always, and on, being, which, says he,