bution, your tares, has been adopted, so far as we can learn from ecclesiastical and profane history, by the entire mass of Jews (the small sect of Sadducees excepted) and Christians, Pagans and Mahomedans, from the days of the Apostles down to the beginning of the present century. Where did these tares all come from? I think your reapers must have acted the part of eye-servants, and left large patches of the old crop standing; with which the "enemy" seeded over the whole field again.Besides, it is a circumstance which I cannot account for, that the entire harvest or wheat, true doctrine-Universalism, gathered in by the angels, Roman army, should have been so soon lost and that for nearly eighteen-hundred years; for you are probably well aware of the fact, that the peculiar system of Universalism has not a single advocate in all antiquity. True, your authors tell us that Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and some other Christian fathers, were Universalists; but this is deception. These men believed in the doctrine of a judgment to come. They were Platonic philosophers, and their error consisted in blending the speculations of that vain philosophy in relation to the pre-existence and transmigration of souls, with Christianity.

3. It is not true that the end of the world took place at the destruction of Jerusalem. The word aion, world, here I admit, does not mean material world. The material world L have no reason to believe, will ever have an end. It denotes. age or dispensation, the gospel age, or dispensation. The Jewish age, or dispensation closed long before the destruction of Jerusalem. It closed at the commencement of John's ministry, if Christ is to be believed: "The law and the prophets (the Jewish age) were until John, since that time the kingdom of God (gospel kingdom) is preached, and every man presseth into it." Luke 16: 16. When the end of the Jewish age is referred to by the New Testament writers, it is spoken of as having already arrived.

"Now once in the end of the world (Jewish age) hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." Heb. 9: 26. Now when did Christ appear to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself? Not at the destruction of Jerusalem, for he had appeared, been sacrificed, and re-ascended to glory, more than 30 years before that event arrived. He appeared first as the Messiah, on the banks of Jordan, where John was preaching and baptizing, when John said—" Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world." John 1: 27.

4. Mr. Whittemore's exposition as to what is meant by "the righteous shining forth in the kingdom of their father, will not stand the test; for (1.) It is not true that the Jews, the enemies and persecutors of the Christians, were destroyed at the destruction of Jerusalem. Multitudes of the Jews survived the destruction of their city and temple, nor does it appear from the page of history, that their calamities purged their hearts of prejudice against Christ or his followers. (2.) It is not true that Christians, in consequence of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman army, experienced any remarkable degree of "earthly felicity." On the contrary, the Christians in Judea were separated forever from their unconverted friends, driven out from their houses and homes; their property given to the flames, and they were obliged to take shelter in "the dens and caves of the earth." Is this "shining forth as the sun in the kingdom of their father?" Is this experiencing "earthly felicity?" It is such "earthly felicity," such "shining forth in the kingdom" as Mr. Whittemore would be unwilling to receive as his reward for well doing. Let a company of furious savages be let loose upon the city of Boston-and with sword and toroh in hand, let them butcher the helpless, burn the city, Trumpet office and all, break up the Editor's family, and chase him into the mountains of Vermont-and he would be the last man who would call such a retreat-such a disaster, "shining forth as the sun in the kingdom of his father," or "comparative earthly felicity !!" (3.) Nor is it true that "the Church was separated from hypocrites and became pure," at the destruction of Jerusalem. No such fact can be proved from history. It is a fact invented to help out with this explanation.— On the contrary, the Church was more pure before, than after the destruction of Jerusalem. While the Apostles were alive, the Church was more pure in doctrine and discipline, than at any period since. As these holy men, one after another, passed away, men continued to rise in the Church, who brought in damnable heresies."

5. I cannot adopt your exposition of this parable, because. it requires me to violate an important rule of Biblical interpretation, viz:-That every explanation of Scripture, should be regarded as false, which does not harmonize with well known facts, or with itself.

Well, now your exposition of the parable of the tares and wheat, does not harmonize with well known facts;-well known historical facts are against it. It does not harmonize with itself; hence it must be false..

6. I cannot adopt your exposition because it is supported by sophistry and false application of scripture. 1 Cor. 3: 12— 15, is commonly brought forward to prove that the tares represent false doctrine, and not wicked men, and that while their false doctrines were burnt up at the destruction of Jerusalem, they themselves will be saved.

"Now if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest; for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. Cor. 3: 12-15.

Now, if you will consult the preceding context, you will readily perceive that the Apostle is speaking here only of believers, those who have built their hopes upon Christ the right foundation. "For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ; now if any man build on this foundation," &c. Now as all men do not build on this foundation, so the text affirms nothing as to their destination. Again. We are gravely asked, when we listen to a Universalist exposition of this parable, if tares can become wheat, or wheat tares. I answer yes.-Dr. Clark tells us that tares are a bastard, or degenerate wheat. Wheat then in Oriental Countries, sometimes degenerates and becomes tares, and by cultivation, like all degenerate plants, may be reclaimed. Tares, then among wheat, very fitly represent degenerate men, who may appear like and with the righteous, but are unlike them at heart. But if tares and wheat were never convertible, still there would be no impropriety in employing tares to represent the wicked in the final judgment. Sheep cannot be converted into goats, nor goats into sheep, and yet Christ likens the righteous to sheep and the wicked to goats. This you will admit. So the argument built upon the false premises, that wheat can never become tares, falls to the ground.

7. It is an outrage upon good sense, to call the Roman army, a class of human butchers, the angels of Christ. No where in the New Testament, are wicked men or devils spoken of as the angels of Christ.

8. The Roman army, did not at the destruction of Jerusalem, as a matter of fact, do either what Christ says is to be done at the harvest by his angels, or what Universalist expositors represent them as doing. They did not "gather out of

the kingdom of God all things that offend, nor them which do iniquity;" nor did they gather out of the church, or out of the whole or any part of "the material universe" false doctrines. If Universalism be true, they gathered out of the earth, I will admit, some thousands of wicked Jews, and gave them a passport by the sword, to the world of the blessed.

9. I reject your exposition of the parable of the tares and wheat, because this parable was evidently designed to represent the same event with the parable of the drag-net which Christ delivered on the same occasion.

"Again, The kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind; which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away. So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." Math. 13: 47-50.

Here the bad fish, is evidently designed to represent the same thing as the tares; their being separated from the good by the angels at the end of the gospel age, or world, cannot be said to represent the purging out of false doctrine, without giving the lie direct to the Son of God. Angels shall come forth and sever OF THE WICKED from among the just." Can language be more plain?

In fine, I have carefully examined, your standard authors on this parable. I have frequently heard your preachers attempt to explain it away. I have also carefully examined the explanation which Christ has given of his own words as therein employed, and I find so much that is false in point of fact, absurd and contradictory in itself considered, in the Universalist exposition; while in the exposition given by the Savior himself, I find so much that is natural, easy, and obvious to the common sense of mankind, that I hope you will not regard it as disrespectful to you, or fanatical in me, to wholly decline the adoption of your exposition, while I take that of the Son of God. Yours as ever.

LETTER XXIII.

My Dear Sir:

I have yet on hand, several important scriptural arguments in favor of the doctrine of future retribution; but as I intend to bring this correspondence to a close soon, I shall not have time, or space to notice them all, and those passages which I now bring forward can receive only a brief notice.

In this letter I will draw an argument in support of a judgment to come, 1. From 2. Cor. 5: 10. "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

No honest man of common understanding will deny that this text appears to speak of a common judgment. This doctrine stands out, without explanation, as the truth generally does,upon the very face of the text. The text cannot be made to teach any other sentiment without explanation. The Universalists have a way of getting rid of the obvious common-sense meaning of this text. But what is that way?-Mr. Whittemore shall be our guide. He says,

"For we must all appear before the judgment seat," is a figurative expression, taken from courts of justice. It signifies that we must be judged by Christ's laws. At the destruction of the Jewish nation, there was a general judgment among the nations of the earth." Universalist Guide p. 187.

Here then we are again directed back to the destruction of Jerusalem for light. The destruction of Jerusalem is the ScapeGoat upon whose head the Universalists lay the sins of all nations. It is a key to every threatening,and a "grand catholicon," "a matchless sanative" for every fear. Mr. Whittemore makes an effort to sustain his perversion of this text by resorting to an old trick, which Universalist preachers are wont to practice upon the ignorance of their hearers, viz: find fault with and amend the translation. Hear him.

"There are four words in this verse, which are supplied by the translators. We will put down the passage with those four words inclosed in brackets, as follows, viz: "For we must all appear before the Judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things [done] in [his] body, according to that he hath done, whether [it be] good or bad."

Now, to all this I reply,

(1.) The translation does not need mending. The words