51st Psalm, it is written by David: "Have mercy upon me O God! according to thy loving kindness, according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies, blot out my transgressions." Also, in Nehemiah, ix. 17, it is said: "But thou art a God ready to pardon, gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness." Isaiah, lv. 7, teaches the same belief, where it is written: "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him, and to our God, for he will abundantly PARDON."

That remission of sins might be made possible to man on repentance, was the very object of the promise of the seed of the woman, who was to come. This we prove from Luke, xxiv. 45, 46, 47: "Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures, and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." In this last quotation it is shown, that both the doctrine of the remission of sins, and that of repentance, are taught; and that by the eternal God himself, in the person of Jesus Christ, after his resurrection from the dead; and yet both these doctrines, so deeply interesting the character of the Son of God, and the happiness of all true penitents, is denied by Universalists, for the reason above given. As it respects repentance, they consider this doctrine as held by the orthodox and as taught in the Scriptures, as highly licentious; for say they, it allows a man to be as wicked as he will all his life long, providing he repents but a moment before his death, which saves him. But this is a false view of the subject; for as life is so uncertain, it is always recommended to all men, by all orthodox ministers of religion, to repent now; and besides this, they always teach the immense importance of spending the whole life in piety and religion; because they believe this circumstance will greatly enhance their glorification in heaven, as a reward which the righteous judge will bestow according to character, at the general resurrection. With this view, are the doctrines of repentance and pardon licentious? We think not; while on the contrary opinion, as held by Universalists, namely, that repentance and remission are not possible, we show that such an opinion is directly licentious, as follows: Will any man be religious, or lead a virtuous life, except it be for his temporal interest, when he believes that his own conscious sufferings when he sins will expiate the guilt? and when he believes that if he happens to die suddenly, or by accident, a vile and wicked person, that the general resurrection will bring him up soul and body, fitted for heaven? We think not; and indeed we aver that he will not; as such a conclusion is as natural as is effect from

cause. The charge of licentiousness lies at the door of Universalists, therefore, so far as we are able to understand the subject. We could multiply Scripture quotation to a great length, in support of the truth of the doctrines of the remission of sins, and of repentance, but think the above sufficient. But some Universalists, being aware how extremely preposterous it is to deny these wholesome and strictly Bible doctrines, confound repentance, remission, and conscience suffering, all together, believing it consistent to be pardoned and punished besides; which belief equally nullifies both ideas; for if a man is punished according to the demands of divine justice, how is he pardoned? or if he is pardoned how is he punished? We answer, that on this view, punishment and pardon are both destroyed.

This doctrine, that of no repentance, and no remission of sins, as bestowed by the Supreme Being for the sake of his Son, is radically bad in its influence on the morals and dispositions of men. But in what way, says one? As follows, we reply: if God the best of beings, will not pardon offences on repentance, how is it that men who are infinitely less good than God is, can pardon each other? Most certainly if God will not pardon why should men do so? As far as possible, men should imitate in their disposition the excellencies of their Creator; and therefore if God will not pardon, but will exact punishment in this life to the full amount, why should not men do so when they trespass against each other? Such an influence on society would be very horrible; and yet it is the direct influence of the no pardon system of Universalists. But the Scriptures are against it, as in all the above quotations on these subjects, and especially where it is writen, that except men forgive one another their trespasses, neither will God forgive them. Christ said to the man sick of the palsy, "Son be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee." Matth. ix. 2.

But as a climax of inconsistency and perversion of Scripture, as is common to Universalists, we notice Mr. Ballou's free and fearless use he has made of the 4th verse of the 21st of Rev., which reads, "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more (temporal) death, neither sorrow nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain, for the former things are passed away." From this text Mr. Ballou is sure that an end to all suffering is then to be made when he could but have known that the whole was spoken of the persevering saints, of whom it is said in another place-Rev. ii. 10: "Be thou faithful (this was on condition,) until death, and I will give thee a crown of life." We say he (Ballou,) could have but known, that the above 4th verse of the 21st of Rev. was spoken of the righteous at the end of time; because the chapter preceding, namely, the 20th of Rev., from the 11th to the 15th verses inclusive, describes the damnation of the finally impeni

tent at the end of time, as follows: "And I saw a great white throne, and him (Christ) that sat upon it; from whose face the earth and the heaven (its atmosphere) fled away, (into hell,) and there was found no more place (in the universe) for them. And I saw the dead, both small and great, stand before God, (Christ,) and the books (the Old and New Testaments,) were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life, (in which is written in heaven the names of such as have been faithful until death,) and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death (the grave,) and hell, (or hades,) delivered up the dead which were in them, and they were judged every man according to his works, (to consist in degrees suited in severity to their characters, but all eternal, as God's judgments are eternal.) And death and hell (the globe and hades, which is in its centre,) were cast into the lake of fire: this is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life, was cast into the lake of fire," or the second death. But as it respected the righteous, who had been faithful until death, a crown of life was given to every one of them, and from whose eyes accordingly all tears were wiped away. How, therefore, Mr. Ballou can infer, that in the above acount St. John has made no difference between the finally good and finally bad, at the day of judgment, is strange. Now, could we but believe as Universalists do, we should immediately discover that all those of whom the Revelator speaks, when he says that "whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire,”—that this lake of fire is nothing after all but the fire of God's love-the fire of the Holy Ghost-or the fire of the destruction of the Jews by the Romans-the fire of salvation from alll sin-then we might say with Mr. Ballou, that sure enough, there should be no more sorrow, nor crying, nor sighing, nor any more pain, except what the captive Jews might cry and feel. But this is not so; as in the operation of the real fire of salvation, there is no mention made of brimstone, as is in the case of the fire of the hell of the damned-which is a very remarkable distinction, which, if it is foolish and absurd, the matter lies between God and those who disbelieve it. There was no brimstone used at the siege of Jerusalem, was there? The result, therefore, is, that no more sorrow and crying is to be feared or felt by the finally righteous, after the day of final account; while to the other there is to be no end of sorrows.

Shapes of Spirits, both Good and Bad.

As to the forms or shapes of evil spirits, in their natural or first condition, immediately after their fall, or at the present time, there is no reason to doubt but they retain the same which they had before their fall-except the lineaments of innocency, happiness, and glory of their first condition has departed. But what was their first shape or fashion of existence? This can be answered in no way but by ascertaining what the shape of those angels was who never fell from their first condition in which they were created. And as to the shape of such angels, we have no clue by which to ascertain their forms, except those instances in which they have appeared to men; and those have always been in the human form, clothed with wings, or with white robes. To prove this, we bring forward the Bible accounts of such appearances. And in doing this, we shall avoid all those cases in which there is a doubt whether the being called an angel was a man or a spirit; and those other cases, where angels are spoken of, of whom there is no doubt of their being spirits, but their forms are not specified. But such as are specified, are as follows: Judges, xiii. read the whole chapter, and it will appear that the angel was in the form of a man, because the wife of Manoah, and the mother of Samson, speaks of him to her husband as being a man, not knowing at first to the contrary. But the sequel, which is found at the 20th verse, shows him to have been a spirit; for when the flame of the sacrifice, which Manoah of fered to the Lord on a rock, the angel ascended in the flame up toward heaven; which a mere man could not have done. the 6th verse of this chapter, the wife of Manoah said to her husband, in describing the looks of the man who had been at their house in "his absence, that his countenance (or face) was like an angel of God, very terrible."

At

Daniel, viii. 21, "Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision, at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation," and informed him of things to come in after times, respecting the Messiah. The proof that this man called Gabriel, was a spirit, is that he flew, or was caused, as the text reads, "to fly swiftly," and to reveal to Daniel things in futurity. Can a man fly? We know they cannot; this then was a supernatural angel, and his form was that of a man, or Daniel would not have called him a man, if he had not been in that form.

This same angel, who appeared to Daniel, about five hundred years afterwards appeared to Zacharias, at a time when he was within the holy of holies in the temple, offering the annual oblation, according to the law of Moses, and said to him, "I am

Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God, and am sent to speak unto thee." The proof that this Gabriel was a spirit in the form of a man, is that no man was allowed to enter the holy of holies, except the High Priest, and him but once a year. And further, in proof that he was a spirit, when Zacharias came out of the holy of holies, or from behind the veil of the temp le, he was dumb and could not speak, by which they perceived that he had seen a vision Luke, i. 19, 22. It was this same angel who announced to Mary, the mother of our Lord's human nature, that the Messiah should be born of her; as that same angel who appeared to her is called Gabriel. Luke, i. 26 to 33 inclusive. It was in the form of a man, that the angel appeared, who came and rolled away the great stone which had been placed at the door of the tomb, where the Saviour's body was laid after his crucifixion; see Matth. xxviii. 2, 3, "And behold there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door and sat upon it. His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow; and for fear of him the keepers (the Roman guard,) did shake, and became as dead men." The proof that this same angel was in the form of a man, is found in Mark, xvi. 5, 6: "And entering into the sepulchre they, (the women, Mary and others.) saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted. And he saith unto them, be not affrighted. Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him." The proof that this angel was also a spirit, is that he, "the angel of the Lord descended from heaven." The same is shown also, from St. Luke, xxiv. 4: "And it came to pass, as they (the women, Mary and others,) were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments; (such no doubt as adorned the Saviour, when he was transfigured on the mount, when his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow, so as no fuller on earth can white them,) and as they (the women,) were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they (the angels,) said unto them, He is not here, but is risen."

The account given of the angels who appeared to the women, who went to the tomb of the Saviour, by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, is very similar to another account, found in Daniel, x. 5, so far as relates to the form and appearance of angels, which reads as follows: "Then I lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a certain man clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz: his body was like the beryl, (a bluish green pelucid hue,) and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in color to polished brass. and the voice of his words like the voice