« السابقةمتابعة »
On Hell, as a place of Future Punishment. The meanings of
The question considered whether men receive in this world all
Same subject continued. The assertion, that men are fully
punished in this life for their sins proved to be false because
it is opposed to some of the fundamental doctrines of divine
Revelation-Such as salvation by the grace of God through
a Mediator-The Probationary character of the present life-
A future Judgment and future punishment-And the motive
to personal godliness derived from fear-Modern Univer-
salism is therefore necessarily destructive to the souls of
Preliminaries which the Restorationists must first establish before
they can derive any advantage from criticism on disputed
Scriptures cannot contain contradictory doctrines-The Future
state of Punishment, shown from the Scriptures, not to be a
state of discipline or trial-Universalism, the offspring of the
Means are not used in the future state for the purification of
damned spirits and for their restoration to the favour and im-
age of God-not the punishment itself-Penal sufferings not
Same subject continued-The Word of God, Read or Preached,
not a means used for the recovery of the damned-nor the
sanctified efforts of the Pious-nor the Mediatorial and Inter-
cessory offices of Christ-nor the influence of the Holy
Spirit-Objection, that God can work without as well as with
The doctrine that the design of the means, if any, to be hereafter
used is to restore the souls of the damned to the kingdom of
Argument from the benevolence of God as being inconsistent with
eternal punishment refuted-annihilation not the punishment
of the wicked, and is opposed by Universalism-Recapitula-
Passages explained viz :-Gen. xii. 3-Ps. xxii. 27.-Ps. lxviii.
9.-Is. lvii. 16.-Eek. xvi. 55.-Matt. xvii. 11.-Acts iii.
21.-Rom. v. 18-Rom. xiv 9.-1 Cor. xv. 22.-1 Cor. xv.
24.-1 Cor. xv. 25. 28.-1 Cor. xv. 26.-Coloss. i. 20.—
Philip ii. 10. 11.-1 John iii. 8.--Rev. v.13.-Rev. xxi. 4.-
N. B. The reader will observe that the first line page 107 is
ON HELL, AS A PLACE OF FUTURE PUNISHMENT.
As this work professes to contain a refutation of Modern and Ancient Universalism, it will be necessary briefly to state, that the Ancient Universalists were the advocates of a limited future punishment, embracing the doctrine of the final restoration to eternal happiness in heaven of all lapsed intelligencies; but the Modern Universalists, as contradistinguished from the former, believe in no future punishment whatever, asserting that all men are punished in this world for their sins, and, on death, are immediately received to everduring felicity. Both opinions, however, are entertained by numerous persons at the present day-the term "modern" is given to distinguish the later modification of Universalism from the former,-not with the intention of conveying the idea that all the Universalists of the present age are unanimous in their rejection of a future limited punish
For the sake of method we shall commence with the •pinions of the moderns.