The above objection goes upon the ground, that all things which are infinite in fome refpects, are fo in all refpects; and are the fame in all refpects. Whereas nothing can be more falfe. A line or cord of half an inch diameter, and a cylin der of five feet diameter, both extending ad infinitum, or without end, are both the fame in one refpect; they agree in length. But who would from hence inter, they were both the fame in every refpect? An infinite line is the fame as an infinite fuper ficies, in one refpe&t. They are both the fame in length, but as to breadth the latter infinitely exceeds the former. Again, an infinite fuperficies is the fame in length and breadth as an infinite folid; but in depth the former bears no proporrion to the latter. So fin may be infinitely aggravated with refpect to the object it is committed againft, or the evil it tends to ef fect; and in this refpect its aggravation cannot be increased.Still it may not be infinite with refpect to the degree of hatred and oppofition to the object, against whom it is committed.

Thefe three laft objections contain the fum of Dr. C's realoning against the doctrine of the unlimited evil of fin, and its defert of interminable punishment. The Reader will find, in Dr. Edwards against Dr. C. Chap. iv, a more lengthy, and perhaps a more accurate anfwer to them, than is here given.

Objection 6. Dr. Priefly argues, that whereas there is no proportion between finite and infinite, nor between time and eternity; fo finite beings in a finite life cannot deferve an endlefs punishment.t

Anfwer. This being nearly the fame objection over again, we have only to add-There is no proportion between God and the creature. The happiness of God fwallows up all propor tion, when compared to the happiness of a mere creature.Therefore, when the finner would ftrip God of his happiness, to promote his own, he deferves a punishment out of all proportion. A punishment out of all proportion, as to duration, or an endless one, is no more than answerable to the finner's defert.

Objection 7. Mr. Winchester says, Two things that are diametrically oppofite to each other, cannot both exift to all eternity if they are both infinite, they will mutually destroy ⚫ each other; if one be infinite, and the other finite, the finite 'must be deftroyed; and which ever is most powerful, muft deftroy the other. Now fince holiness and fin, evil and good, are exactly oppofite one to the other; it is evident, one must at last prevail over the other, how long foever the contention ' and

This illuftration is used by Dr. Edwards and othors. + Inftit. Vol. ii p. 383.

and ftrife may continue; and fince goodness is the perfection of God, and evil the imperfection of the creature, there can be no doubt, that as good exifted before evil, fo it fhall exift to all eternity, when evil fhall be no more.'*-This, Mr. W. adds was one of the firft arguments' that led him into the univerfal fcheme.

Anfwer. The fallacy of this objection is very obvious. And, 1. We are to notice, it does not directly deny that fin deferves endless punishment; but afferts that it is impoffible fin and mifery, or evil, fhould continue without end. Divine goodness, because it is infinite, muft neceffarily destroy every finite thing that is directly opposed to it; and therefore must neceffarily deftroy fin and mifery. Mr. W. does not fay, nor even intimate that God is engaged, and certainly will do this, to anfwer fome wife ends. But his argument is, Two things that ⚫ are diametrically oppofite to each other, cannot both exift to all eternity; if they are both infinite, they will mutually deftroy each other; if one be infinite, and the other finite, the finite must be deftroyed; and which ever is moft powerful, must destroy the other.' Not the leaft intimation does he give, that God will certainly, or neceffarily, because the public good requires it, deftroy all that is opposed to him, or all evil. But he urges the neceffity of the cafe, a blind neceffity; or the impoffibility of its being otherwife, from the nature of the cafe. As when two elements jar together, and that which is the leaft powerful cannot but give way, and be overcome. But, be this neceffity of what kind it may, it must arife either from the nature of God or the creature, or both. And in either cafe it goes to deftroy Mr. W's fcheme. If in this matter, God acts from neceffity, he is not praife worthy for this act. If he deftroys all fin and mifery, because he cannot do otherwife, there is no virtue in this act according to Mr. W's doctrine. So if fin is neceffarily deftroyed, and the finner cannot poffibly help forfaking all fin and turning to God, there is no virtue in this forced repentance, as Mr. W. calls it.

2. The above objection is not only a contradiction in Mr. W's and Dr. C's fcheme, but it is a contradiction to Scripture. The facred oracles reprefent fin and finners as being abfolutely dependent on God. And that he is able to continue them in exiftence, longer or fhorter, or put them out of exiftence, juft according to his pleasure. Arife go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words.-Ö house ' of Ifrael, cannot I do with thee as this potter? faith the LORD. Behold,

Dialogues, p.40.

Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, fo are ye in mine hand, O houfe of Ifrael.'* What neceffity has the potter to destroy his own veffels ? and whether they be veffels of honor or difhonor? Cannot he keep them for his own ufe, while he himself exifts? Or cannot he deftroy them, put them out of exiftence, when he pleases? In like manner, Scripture invariably afcribes liberty and power to God; for him to do with all his creatures as he pleases.

3. The fame power which can, of itself, deftroy fin and mifery, is able to continue them in being. Or certainly this is true of almighty power. Therefore, as the Almighty is unchangeable, so if he is able to continue fin and mifery in being, or deftroy them to day, he is able to do the fame to-morrow, and to all eternity. Certainly, Mr. W's fcheme which goes to deny Omnipotency, which needs an atheistical argument to fupport it, may justly be suspected.

4. There was no neceffity of a Mediator on Mr. W's plan, to redeem men from fin and mifery. Thefe,as he argues, cannot poffibly exift to all eternity, in oppofition to divine goodnefs. On his plan, God muft neceffarily put an end to all fin and mifery, or redeem men from them; and whether it be done with or without a Mediator.

5. The above objection, when applied, muft give a wrong reprefentation of the ftate of the damned. It must represent their fin and mifery, as being oppofed to God in fuch manner, that he is obliged to destroy them for his own fafety. He is neceffitated to put fin and mifery out of existence, and deliver the damned from them, purely from principles of felf-defence. This is the language of the above objection: Two things diametrically oppofite to each other, cannot both exift to all e'ternity.' As though the damned were not in chains, and under abfolute controul. As though God were not omnipotent, and as able to overrule fin and mifery in hell, for his own honor, and to eterity, as he is in this world for an age. Again, the above objection represents the damned as being opposed to God, and carrying on a warfare against him, just as finners are in this world. Whereas the cafe is quite the reverse. The hatred and blafphemy of the damned, in connection with their punishment, has no tendency to difhonor God. On the contrary, all the damned fay and do, tends to his honor. As when a malefactor, faft bound in chains, going to the place of execution as when this pitiful wretch curfes his judge, curfes his jury, and vows vengeance to his country; this only declares to

*Jerem. 18. 2, 6.

the

the world the juftice of that authority, which rids the world of fuch a monfter. So when the damned vent out their horrid blafphemy against God, inftead of weakening and breaking down his authority, as finners do in this world; inftead of this, their blafphemy only returns on their own heads. It shows to the world what they would do to God, if they could. And therefore helps to illuftrate his juftice, in punishing them without end. So that the fin of the damned, in connection with their mifery, inftead of doing evil, does the greatest good. It fets off divine juftice in the most amiable and glorious manner.

Punishment anfwerable to finners' deferts, is an effectual antidote againft their fin, and completely bars it from doing evil. The cafe is infinitely different from what it is to take fin feparately, or when it goes unpunifhed. In this latter cafe fin and finners reign, and trample on divine authority; they even doubt whether there is a God to judge the world, yea, they often queftion the very being of a God. But where juftice is fully executed, they are totally cured of fuch doubts. To their for row they know that there is a God. Accordingly, where juf fice is fully difplayed, there God reigns, or juftice is triumphant. And all that the damned can poffibly do by their blafphemy, is only to condemn themselves out of their own mouths.

We have now, my dear Sir, gone over all the material ob. jections, brought againft this doctrine. And, because fin tends to do infinite mifchief, to root holiness entirely out of the world, and make God and faints miferable forever; it is evident, beyond all contradiction, that finners are infinitely criminal, and deferving of endlefs punishment. From hence it is infered with certainty, that part of mankind, and all the damned, will fuffer without end. For the Scripture plainly afferts that fome of mankind fhall fuffer their full defert. And as they deferve endless punishment, and fhall pofitively fuffer all they deserve, it is undeniable that they will fuffer to an abfolute eternity.The places of Scripture, which exprefsly declare that impeni. tent finners fhall fuffer the full wages of their fins, are the following:-Eccl. xii. 14. God fhall bring every work into judgment, with every fecret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be bad.' Ifai. iii. 11. Wo unto the wicked, it 'fhall be ill with him: For the reward of his hands fall be

6

'given him.' Pfal. xxviii. 4. 'Give them according to their Ideeds, and according to the wickednefs of their endeavors :give them after the work of their hands, render to them their defert.' Matt. xvi. 27. For the Son of man fhall come in the glory of his Father, with his angels: And then he shall Teward

reward every man according to his works.'* Rom. ii. 5, 6, 9. But after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurelt up 'wrath against the day of wrath, and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; who will render to every man according • to his deeds. Tribulation and wrath upon every foul of man that doth evil.' 2. Cor. v. 10. For we must all appear be'fore the judgment feat of Chrift: That every one may receive the things done in the body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad? Rev. xviii. 6, 7. Reward her even as the rewarded you. How much the hath glorified

⚫ herself, and lived deliciously, fo much torment and forrow give her. Rev. xx. 12. And the dead were judged out of those things that were written in the books, according to their "works. Good deeds and bad are here given as a diftinction between believers and unbelievers; and their oppofite rewards. As in John iii. 36. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son fhall "not fee life.'

From the above, the confiftency of endless punishment with full atonement, naturally follows. As,

1. Men justly deferve this punishment. This punishment can do them no injury, but is perfectly confiftent with their defert. In this very material article, that is, with regard to their desert, endless punishment is therefore confiftent. And it is so notwithstanding full atonement; for full atonement does not render their fin lefs finful or ill deferving. It makes provifion for all fuch as forfake their fins, to escape from their juft defert; but it cannot alter their defert, any more than it can turn fin into holiness.

2. If fin is infinitely criminal, and the finally impenitent receive the full wages of their fins, as has been fhown; then the atonement has made no provifion for these characters, as fuch, to fave them from their juft defert. And this agrees with fcripThe blood of Chrift has opened the way for all men, to turn from fin and find mercy; yet the fame awful curfe lies against fuch as remain impenitent, as though no atonement for fin were made. He that believeth not, fhall be damned.'+

ture.

3. If fin is infinitely criminal, and the day of judgment is the time fixed, for fuch as are found in their fins, to receive their full reward; then are they, at this folemn crifis, totally cut off from the benefits of Chrift's death, and must remain under

S s

Though this refers to Chrift's coming to deftroy Jerufalem, &c. yet its complete fulfilment will be, when Christ comes to judge the world, at the last day.

+ Mark 16. 16.