BT 837. •B26 48 сод Cop, I District of Massachusetts, to wit, wit,? District Clerk's Office. BE IT REMEMBERED, that on the sixteenth of November, A.D. 1828, in the fifty-second year of the independence of the United States of America, CHARLES HUDSON, of the said District, has deposited in this office the title of a book, the right whereof he claims as Author and Proprietor, in the words following, to wit: "A Reply to Mr. Balfour's Essays, touching the State of the Dead, and a Future Retribution. By Charles Hudson, Pastor of a Church in Westminster, Mass. "Search the Scriptures."-Jesus Christ.". In conformity to the act of the Congress of the United States, entitled, "An Act for the encouragement of learn ing, by securing the copies of maps, charts and books to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned:" and also to an act entitled "An Act supplementary to an act, entitled, An Act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts and books to the authors and proprietors of such copies during the times therein mentioned; and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving, and etching historical and other prints." JOHN W. DAVIS, Clerk of the District of Massachusetts CONTENTS. Introduction. Mr. Balfour's pretensions to fairness noticed- Statement and examination of Mr. B.'s system. most men not saved at all on Mr. B.'s plan-saved by death-by the resurrection--by divine instruction -without faith and repentance-Mr. B.'s reason from Mr. B.'s evidence of the mortality of the soul exa- mined-Evidence of the immortality of the soul, and Acts xxiv. 25, xvii. 30, 31, Heb. ix. 27, 28, Matt. Scripture proof of a future retribution. John v. 28, 29, Matt. x. 28, Luke xii. 4, 5, xvi. 19- Immortality and the resurrection, considered- Analogy-Opinions of the heathen origin considered -A charge of inconsistency noticed-Frequent chan- ges of opinion betray weakness-Mr. B. provoked the REPLY. says. THE volume before me is entitled, "Three EsOn the Intermediate State of the Dead ; the Resurrection from the Dead; and on the Greek terms rendered, Judge, Judgment, Condemned, Condemnation, Damned, Damnation, &c. in the New-Testament. With Remarks on Mr. Hudson's Letters in vindication of a future Retribution, addressed to Mr. Hosea Ballou, of Boston." This volume was occasioned by my Letters to Rev. Mr. Ballou in vindication of a future retribution. Mr. Balfour tells us, that the matter was principally collected before the publication of my Letters, and as it was deemed a full answer to my book, he thought best to publish it much as it was, to avoid the appearance of controversy. In reviewing this production, I shall confine myself principally to those parts which relate to the subject of a future retribution. Before examining his arguments, it may be proper to notice his pretensions to candour and fairness, and the spirit of his performance. Mr. Balfour says, pp. 266, 267, “It has been no concern of mine, to what result this examination might lead. My object has been to ascertain what sense the sacred writers meant to convey by the language they used. Our desire is, that the truth of God may be made manifest, whether our views of the above texts be right or wrong; and shall listen to any thing which can be advanced, showing that we have misunderstood them, I shall be happy, if I am in error, to see it pointed out." Again, he tells us, p. 332, "that his object in writing is not to defend himself, or any other man, but to keep to the question at issue." From this we might naturally expect that his book would betray no desire of victory, no artful attempt at evasion, no personal attack upon his opponent. But a perusal of his Essays and Remarks may perhaps lead to the conclusion, that his pure devotion to the cause of truth is no greater than other men's, and that he has not kept entirely clear from personal reflections. Though Mr. B. has assured us that he writes to defend no man, he has laboured in his Essays to defend himself, and has added to his Essays more than fifty pages, a great part of which is to defend himself and Mr. Ballou from what was advanced in my Letters. Yes-he enters into Mr. Ballou's defence with no small degree of warmth. He says, p. 307, "One of three things must be certain. 1. Mr. Hudson's views of what constitutes a Christian must be extremely vague. 2. Or Mr. H. acts the hypocrite. 3. Or he grossly misrepresents Mr. Ballou's sentiments." Now what occasion for all this severity? From what circumstance does he draw his inferences with so much assurance? Why, because I addressed Mr. Balloy with the common title of "dear brother," |