In the next place it would prove, that the wicked would be annihilated, after being raised to immortality, which is impossible. And if it is contended that they are separated from the righteous, and doomed to endless misery; a difficulty remains, for how can immortality suffer misery? God "only hath immortality, dwelling in the light." And it will not do to say that the devil hath immortality, dwelling in darkness. The word immortality is never used in scripture, where it can be understood in such a

sense.

If I am correct in this, it necessarily follows, that whereever the scriptures speak of the gathering together of the children of Israel, after the destruction of Jerusalem, or wherever the new covenant is spoken of, it must be understood to mean the spiritual kingdom of Christ, in the immortal state. I know that many will be surprised at this; some no doubt will mock, and perhaps some will say we will hear again of this matter. If any one would understand these things, he should read the Old and New Testament through carefully and without the least prejudice, at least half a dozen times. He should carefully compare one passage with another, and be sure not to force any passage to mean what he would have it mean. I now proceed to notice brother T's answer to my question concerning the passages which speak of the second coming of Christ. He thinks that the passages in Matt. xxiv, 3, and James v, 8, refer to that coming of Christ, which took place when he visited, and overthrew the Jewish nation forty years after his ascension.

Now I ask what makes him think so?-Christ did not say that his coming would be to overthrow the Jewish nation, or at the time of the overthrow of the Jewish nation, but immediately afterward. The other passages, he thinks refer to a time still future. But what are his reasons? I do not see as they amount to much of any thing

more or less, than that this view of the subject does not agree with his notions concerning it.

In regard to the passage in 1 Thess. iv, 15, he admits that there is a difficulty in referring it to a yet future time. And his attempt to reconcile it to his views, I think is extremely unfortunate. But as I think it not possible but that had he taken the second thought he would have seen his error, I have no disposition to indulge in any remarks to his disadvantage. What does brother T. mean by what he says about all the living being changed, at the coming of Christ? Who says that all who were then alive were changed? Surely I have said no such thing; neither did the apostle Paul say that all the living should be changed at the coming of Christ. He says, "for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed." Does Paul, in his epistles, always mean all the living, when he uses the pronoun we? Does he ever mean so in a single instance? I do not now think of one single passage in any of the epistles of the New Testament, where the word has that meaning. Let us see if it cannot be proved by the words of Christ, as well as by the words of Paul, that some who were on the earth in his time, should live until the resurrection, and should not die. And first, let us look at Matthew xvi. 24--28. "Then said Jesus unto his disciples, if any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? For the son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, there be some standing here which shall not

me.

taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Now brother T. let us examine this passage just quoted. 'Whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. When shall he find it? I understand the time to be when he should come in the glory of his Fath er with his angels to raise them to eternal life, and reward every man according to his works. And when should that be? Answer. 'Verily I say unto you, there be some standing here which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.' The wise ones, who abound in this world's knowledge, have been somewhat puzzled to make this agree with their system of theology. Mr. Miller has it, that it was fulfilled at the transfiguration of Christ on the Mount, only six days after the words were spoken. But the words seem to imply pretty plainly, that most of the disciples should taste of death before the coming; and I think it proba ble, all but John.

And then again he was to reward every man according to his works. So Mr. Miller would make out that every man was rewarded according to his works, more than 1800 years ago, and yet the same thing is to be done over again in the year 1843. The coming of Christ spoken of in Matt. xxiv, Br. T. admits was to be in the generation in which he lived. Now look at the 40th and 41st verses. "Then shall two be in the field, one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken and the other left." Does not this look as if some should be changed at the coming of Christ; and that coming, too, that all Universalists believe to be past? Compare these two verses with Genesis v, 24. "And Enoch walked with God, and he was not, for God took him."

Again. John xi, 26.

"Whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die." Here a question arises,

whosoever liveth, how long? Or until what time? Answer. The subject was upon the resurrection at the last day. And I hope it is not necessary to prove that the last day, was at the end of the world, or second coming of Christ. John xxi, 22, 23. "Jesus said unto him, if E will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die." Here again a question arises; how happened the disciples to understand by this, that John should not die, except they had learned it from what their master had taught them? Now let us turn to 1 Thess. iv, 15, and see if the words do not plainly teach precisely what I understand the above passages in Matthew and John, to teach. "For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive, and remain unto the coming of the Lord, shailnot prevent them which are asleep."

Now I ask, if any person were to speak, or write, concerning an event which he did not expect would take place for the space of from eighteen hundred to ten thousand years, would he express himself in this way ? Would he not be much more likely to say, they who shall then be alive? It appears to me that nothing is more obvious, than that he was speaking of an event that should come to pass while some of the righteous, (for this I believe was his meaning) should remain alive. Compare the word remain, in this passage, with the same word in 1 Corinthians, xv, 6. "After that he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep."

Br. T. says: "Another difficulty already suggested to my brother, which to me is utterly irreconcilable is the want of any good ground of hope, on his theory, that all mankind will eventually be raised from the dead." Br. T. should consider that this does not at all effect the

soundness, or unsoundness of the theory; although if I were of that mind I might perhaps be as unwilling to embrace it as he is. It does not at all weaken my confidence in the truth of the scriptures, because they have thus far been fulfilled. Nor does it give me the least pain, to be assured that the ancient Patriarchs, Prophets and Apostles; with the whole house of Israel, together with the Gentiles, have so long enjoyed the blessings promised under the new covenant, where all know the Lord from the least unto the greatest. Where the wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock; and dust shall be the serpent's Where they shall not hurt or destroy in all God's holy mountain.

meat.

I gave an answer to Br. T's question, in my reply to his first communication on the subject, which I was in hopes would be satisfactory, if he would take the trouble to study it out. If he will open the book of Revelation and begin at the 20th chapter, he will find that a resurrection is there foretold. And it does not agree, as it regards time, with the resurrection, at the second coming of Christ; for it is after the beast was to be worshipped by peoples, and multitudes, nations, and tongues. Consequently it must be yet future. It also differs in other respects from that which was foretold to the Jews.

There was nothing said by Christ, or Paul, about the devil's being bound a thousand years; nor that the rest of the dead lived not again till the years were finished.— As to the question respecting the first chapter of Luke, brother T. entirely misunderstood me. The question was-How can the first chapter of Luke from verse 67 to the end, (meaning to the end of the chapter,) be satisfactorily and consistently understood, according to the common opinion, either of Universalists or limitarians? Or 10 make a shorter question of it-Have the Jews from