greater afflictions sent on men in this life? It is manifest, that most men might suffer much greater afflictions, than they really do suffer. And if greater pain be all that is wanting to lead them to repentance, it seems that to inflict that, would be the greatest instance of goodness, and might supercede the necessity of hell-torments.

It is granted by Dr. C. and others, that hell-torments will certainly lead to repentance all who suffer them. At the same time he objects to the idea of leading sinners to repentance by the efficacious grace of God, that it destroys moral agency. But if there be a certain established, unfailing connexion between hell-torments continued for a proper time, and repentance; those torments as effectually overthrow moral agency, as effica cious grace. All that need be intended in this instance, by efficacious grace, is such an exhibition or view of the truth and of motives, as will certainly be attended with repentance. But such an exhibition of the truth as this, is supposed by Dr. C. to be made in hell. And why this exhibition made in hell is more consistent with moral agency, than an exhibition which is no more effectual, powerful or overbearing, made in this life, I wish to be informed.

Perhaps it will be further pleaded, that though it be feasible to lead sinners to repentance in this life; yet it is not wise and best. But why is it not as wise and good, to persuade sinners to repent, without the use of helltorments, as by those torments? If indeed it be fact, that God does not inflict endless but disciplinary misery on sinners, we may thence conclude, that it is wisely so ordéred. But this is not to be taken for granted; it ought to be proved before an inference is drawn from it. It is the great question of this dispute.

9. That future punishment is not merely disciplinary, appears from the various declarations of scripture, that

those who die impenitent, are lost, are cast away, perish, suffer perdition, are destroyed, suffer everlasting destruction, &c. as in these texts; John xvii. 12, "None of them is lost, save the son of perdition.”—Luke is. 25, "What is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, and lose himself or be cast away."-Matt. xiii. 48, "Gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad (saxρa the dead, rotten fish) away." 2 Peter ii. 13, "They shall utterly perish in their own corruption."-Heb. x. 39, "We are not of them that draw back unto perdition ¿ but of them that believe unto the saving of the soul."2 Peter iii. 7, "But the heavens and the earth which are now, are reserved unto fire, against the day of judgment, and perdition of ungodly men."-Matt. x. 28, "Fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell"-2 Thess. i. 9, "Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and the glory of his power."-But what truth or propriety is there in these expressions, if future punishment be a mere discipline? The damned in hell are no more cast away, lost, destroyed; they no more perish, or suffer perdition, than any of God's elect are cast away, &c. while they are in this world. Hell is no more a place

The wicked in hell are

of destruction, than this world. no more vessels of wrath fitted to destruction, than the saints are in this world. The damned are under discipline; so are even the most virtuous and holy, while in this life. Yet they are not lost, cast away, rejected as reprobate silver, or destroyed by God; but are kept as the apple of his eye. And as the means of grace, under which the damned are placed, are far more adapted certainly to secure and promote their greatest good, than any means which we enjoy in this state; to consider and to speak of them as lost, cast away, destroyed, &c. because they are under those means, is to the highest de

gree absurd. They are just as much further removed from a state, which can justly be called destruction, perdition, &c. than they were, while in this world, as the means of grace which they enjoy in hell are more powerful and effectual to prepare them for happiness, than those means which they enjoyed in this world.

Suppose a man seized with some dangerous disease, and a variety of means is used for his recovery, but in vain. Suppose it appears, that if no more effectual means be employed, he will never be recovered. Suppose further, that at length an entirely different course is taken with him, a course which is not only far more likely than the former to be successful; but concerning which there is absolute certainty, that it will be successful: I ask, can the man now under the operation of these most excellent and infallible means, with any truth be said to be lost, to be cast away, to be destroyed, &c.? Or if those terms must be applied to one or other of those situations, in which we have supposed him to be at different times; to which of them are they applied with the least truth and reason? This example may illustrate the subject now under consideration.

10. If it be consistent with the divine perfections, to subject a sinner to misery, for the sake of advancing his own good, as is implied in the very idea of disciplinary punishment, why is it not equally consistent with the same perfections, to subject a sinner to misery, for the sake of promoting the good of the system; provided that misery do not exceed the demerit of the subject ?—I presume no believer in endless punishment, will plead for any degree or duration of punishment, which is not subservient to the glory of the Deity implying the greatest good of the universe. Therefore, all such punishment, as is not subservient to that end, is foreign to the present question. Further, it is now supposed to be

proved, that other punishment than that which is adapted to prepare the sinner for happiness, is justly deserved by the sinner. Now since this is allowed or proved, why is it not consistent with every attribute of the Deity, to inflict that other punishment, provided only it be subservient to the good of the system?

It is holden by our opponents, that the punishment of a sinner may lead him to repentance. So it may lead other sinners to repentance; or it may restrain them from sin, and in a variety of ways may equally subserve the good of those who are not the subjects of the punishment, as it may the good of him who is the subject of it. And that the good of other persons may be of equal worth and importance, nay, of far greater worth to the system, than the good of the transgressor himself, cannot be denied. Therefore, as I said in the beginning of this article, if the personal good of the sinner be a sufficient reason why he should be punished according to justice; why is not the good of others, or the good of the system, a sufficient reason for the same proceeding? And is it not evident, not only that such a punishment is consistent with the perfections of God; but that those perfections, goodness itself not excepted, require it? In this case, to inflict a punishment merely conducive to the good of the person punished, would be no fruit of goodness, but of a contrary principle; and the doctrine of merely disciplinary punishment, if it mean a punishment conducive indeed to the good of the subject, but destructive to the good of the system, is so far from being built on the divine goodness, as some boast; that it is built on a very different foundation. I am aware, that it is holden by the advocates for universal salvation, that the good of the system cannot be promoted by the endless misery of any individual, but requires the final happiness of every one. Merely to assert this however, as

some do very confidently, is perfect impertinence. Let them prove it, and they will do something to the purpose.

The

11. If none of the damned will be punished for any other end than their own good, and yet they all deserve to be punished more than is subservient to their own good; then some of them deserve to be punished for a longer term, than that which in scripture, according to Dr. C's sense of it, is said to be forever and ever. punishment, which in the language of scripture is said to be everlasting, forever and ever, &c. will actually be suffered by some of the damned, as is agreed on all hands. But if none of the damned will suffer any other punishment than that which is conducive to their personal good, then the punishment which in scripture is said to be forever and ever, is conducive to their personal good. They therefore deserve a punishment of greater duration than that which in scripture is said to be forever and ever: and of course that more durable punishment is the curse of the divine law, and is threatened in the law. But where in all the law, or in all the scripture, is any punishment threatened, or even hinted at, of greater duration than that which shall last forever and ever?—So that this scheme of disciplinary punishment necessarily brings us to this absurdity, that the true and real curse of the divine law, is not contained in the law; and that the punishment justly deserved by the sinner, is no where revealed or even hinted at, in all the scripture. Yet the scripture assures us, that some sinners will be in fact punished according to their demerits, so as to pay the uttermost farthing, and to receive judgment without mercy. And no man pretends that any sinner will suffer more than that punishment which in scripture is said to be forever and ever. The consequence is, that that punishment which is forever and ever, is the whole that the