Chicago Daily Tribune Newspaper, January 21, 1878, Page 2

2 grevcnl good men from hecoming bad men, of ad men from paselng over to the slile of the gooxl. Whether the bad will finally all pass averto the side of the good, Is a subject upon which Christlans differ; but so far as this warld {3 concerned, between the righteous and the wicked, there fa no gulf fixed, cither great or small, which may not be passed over. The distinctlon between right and wrong inlieres in the very nature of things, but man's relations to there principtes ace constantly changing. Tadmit that the eccond step In sin s casier than the first, and that there fs such a condition of the mind a3 a habit. So much {8 common ground. Butwhile this 18 true, it Is not the ‘whale truth, and we do not get the whols truth untd we place right by the _side of this that other fact or law of the the soul, that the most sbandored of nlt sinners lving upon the earth may repent. 1do not gay will repent, but may dogo. It s posaible for him to do so. Fur- thermore a larze troportlon of the converts is taken from this very class of persons. We have then these three facts: (1) The tendeney of man Lo go from bad to worse. (2 Tha enervating power of sin,~peryerting and disinteprating the cntire manhood. (3.) The frecdom of the will, whereby It 1s possible for thie worst to refornt The freedom of the will scems to be an essen- tial part of mau. But {f man's moral state s fisend in, death, and no esaential change in his tnoral atate be posaible afterwaril, will you telt me what has hecome of his freedom of the willl And If hie have potter of cholee afier, as he had Lelore deathi, how 18 it thut his doom fs fixed | Remember the last we know of may, reforma- tlon I possible. As our Methodist Iricndssing, \While the 1amp holde ont to barn, ‘The vilest sinner may retarn, 1f, then, there beno chango after death, or in death, will not man start on lils journey fn the next world with this power ol chofeel Fur- thermore, what kind of a bielng s nian with this freedom of the will eliminated trom him? Is be man any longer! 1 wish the worthy Doctor of the Centenuary Chureh would be kind enough 1o tell me! To” hia sermon of last Sunday, Brother Thomas says: Now, between thege two cxtreme systems, Cal- vinism and Universalism, the one holding fhat it way never made powsible far all to be saved, an thieother holding that all would certainly be finali maved, between these two came Methoilism, with 11a dactriue of 8 universal atonement—that God Joved (he whole worlds that Christ died for all3 that Jle is no tespector of parsous, and thal n every nation he that fearcth God and worketn righicousners da accepted; that man ia & woral agent, is free 1o accept or to reject the offers of mercy and the means of grace, and will bo judged and rewarded or punlshed according to his oppor- tunities, and conduct, and character, this honor. Ing o, dignifying man, and exalting both justico and merey. Placing Univeraalism in this paragraph whero my Sricad puta Metbodism, 1 accept every word hesays. ‘“The atonement s umiversal,’ nun s & moral azent, fs free to accept or reJ(-cl. the offers of wmerey,” ete. But there Is between Methodism and Universallsm just this differ- ence: The Methodist beligves that the Ireedom of the whlis llmit-d to this 1ife, but that by tomo unesplained process the sonl s robbed of this freedom by death; while the Universalists Dold that the function of the will fs an essential clement af our manhuvod, awl ecan no moro ba tuken aut of the soul than the cousclence itaelf, and that were it pussible so to change man's moral uature, ho would not only cease to bo man, but there would e to virtue in his obedl~ enee, nor sin In his disobedicnce. In other words, while the Methodists hold to their cardi- nal doctrines of man’s free moral ageney, bub Yimit It to three-score years and.ten, wo aceept ull that they do, and an eternity of freedom be- slides. But admitting that the freedom of the will 1x fndestructnble, and ibat the sinful may aban- don thelr evil ways In the next life, as in thls, what evidence liave we that they will do so! This is a rrave guestion, and” deseryes careful and conalderate pttention. In_ the first place, I Srankly say that my views of tlad, ns He Is pre- eented to me in the New Testament, necessi- fate the final oledience of ull routs, Godis eoverelms in 1lis unyverse. He s intrinslcally fie loves Wischlldeen, He hates Infquity, is thelr coemy. And this wiee, zood, In- tinite Being, has not ereated man without forc- thought, nor without o plan. What that plan < nust be wionght ont., Evil present cub bo recoti fled with His merey, tor it is tempurary; bt evil endless, permuanent, secms (o dethrono I At any raie, it dethrones Clod os the Yather. W Jid He fasbion the world and wan thus? No matter what form of specch we use to cover up the pwial fact, thera it 18,—God 1s the Author v endless evil Why then, do T believe that tho whole intel- Tigent ereatlon will tinally tic brought ato moral conformity with the will'of Godd My answer is tis: Becaure Iam not on athelst, but a be- Tiever fan th 1ol the New ‘Testament. The God of the New Testament caonot be defeated n Uis purpozest tie whole universe is fllled with His pres and power. Al the rellirions ol the world more ur Jess clearly reveal God, hut the y tarity of the Chrlstlan syvatem fa that it_reveats God ecking and suving the lost. e not only lives and groverns the uni- verge which He Lins franed, Lot ile acls upon the roula of men. He not only acts in them, through them, but upon them.” Ho seeks thy lost. ~And there s uo [njunction nore compre- Liensive or tlunificant than that which requires uy to be “lat cther with God." Those who deny 1) premacy of God in the maorul realn, must 1, iced that lhu{ do not stand unnn utkeistle ground, und virtually over- relizions i sceking to avold the von- clusions which we press upon their atteutlon, Weeny that God is the Father, and that evi} 88 a fixed result I8 not consistent with the con- ception of Gl Thoy tell us that nothwith- fe tlis doctrine of DHivine Patornity, ovil now cxisis, und there s every reasen to suppose that it will alwiuys cxfst, notwithstandiog all that God hasdonciodestroyit, Whatls thisbut athe. fsmi—the denlal of ‘the existence aud sov- erelznty of the God of tha Gospels, ‘The “Chrstian fdea of God must be kept prominent fn vur thought in ull discussions of tnla theme. Man, left to himselt, is by no means curtubn to find the right way, Dut God comen 20 liln akil, e shows Lilm the way of life. That way munavolls. But, bucauso therefs a dis- tinction Letween right and wrong which Is fundamental und indesteicsible, aud becsuse the wroni 4 rooted in notbloe that §s abldiug und essentivl, und because the soul of man however debused, does yet hiear the voles of God, and Kuows |t is the “volce ot a friend be- cause, fu aword, evil us o tixed result,—in the upiverse ol tiud reems incomputible buth with the soveriguty and gooduess of God,—do we belleye uud teacl, * that In the dispensation of the ful- uees ol time tiold will gatuer togetlier in oue all things I Christ, both which are In Heaven, und which sre on carth, cven in Ihn " that all souls will ut lust be brouwht to repentance, aud shure e bleasinus of the new birth, ing every pluse ol the subjeet of condition that fs largely speculu- tive, It beconies oue to epeak with considerate caution. Our foformation fn regurd to the spiritual world is very meagre, Wo know actu- wlily less in reference ” to detatls than we think, Weure to live nzain. Our uext miode of existe enculsto by what s termed spiritual. But while we gratefully accept the fact, wo ure not nble of ourielves to fortn a distinet conception offt. Al our Weas of spiritual thiogs sre col- ored by materia! torms aud forces, Joha, fu Rtevelation, i his cifort to portray the giurles of the spitftual world, does but por- tray the besuttes of @ waterlal city, and wd- dresaes our senre of the beautiful aud our cstl- wate of material values. An ungel o slmply humen belue with wings, When, theretore, oue sticiupls tu cavlaln the process of *the divine government, outeids of specific - furmation, he needs to proceal with great care, for bo bay launched his sbib upon u broad eecan aud the shore fn any cdst d out of siuht and far away. 1. specde ation sy be tuterceting and helpful to some, but whetlier it i$ true no oie cun sav. * ‘The pastor of the Centrul Chburch excuscs hiself from teuching anythiog specitic {n re- urd to the tuture life, on the ground that he Bisa nowtedie, uuly beliet. Hub who s kuowledze! Who professes to have anyi But our frieid dous ot hicsitute to express himsetl iu reference to the being of God sud *he doc- tlne of lmmortality, Has he any Knowledye upon these subj ut ls, any direct, specitic tuformutiynt Ie teaches ou “these subjects, not what he knows, Lut what ho thinks, L;:Mul —aud that is all that is permitied to any of us. For myself, i1 [ did not belleve in the Dible, [ should prabably bave sume kind of au fdea fn 1egand to the herealter; but what It would ba J cannot, of course, say. But aluce 1 Christ us fina) suthoiity o matters of falth, [ rest in the boliet which § think His words justle 1y, ‘That behief b substuntiolly this: That all in under the divive law must e sdequately wad fully punbbied,—if not {o tble world, then In the 1ife to come. ‘Flaat the conscyucuces of ainfuluess, 8o fur us Llhey sre vested in churacter, eatend futo the future wuild. ‘That ut sowe thye, sud fu the way uppolnted ol Giwd, ull souls, through the wedjstion of Chrict, ure to mttuin to the perivction of nan. Luod iu bulluess and peace. BIN WILL RUIN. SEHMON BY TUE REV. T. C, CLENDENING, The Bev. 1. C, Clendenntug preached W the Laugicy Aveuue Metbodist Church to 8 large sudience last evenlug, taking as bis topic, **8iu WL Buln,” und gs lis test: Tuede ehall go' away futo Srerisatiog muut, but the rigbteous loto Jife eterual.: axe., ‘The sermion was us follows: mun's fut unlsh- —VJIHH.. ‘Thicseure the words uf Jesus Chiriat, o which He | T™H CHICAGO TRIBUNE: MONDAY. JANUARY 21, IN78, professes to know and Lo assort human deatiny, In this assortion there I8 no hesitation, equivo- eation, or qualificstion. The destiny of one class of men is contrasted with the destiny of Another class of men. Thess men go Into pun- ishiment, those men into Ufe. This punishment 18 eternaly that Mfe fs eternal. The word Indi- eatmg the duration of the punishment and the duration of the lifc is the seme word. Because 1 receive Christ as the (nfalible téachér, And because these words are so eimple, cldar, and dircet, this ona statement {s snficlent for my faith and my judgment. I know there arc men who hope these wonls mar have some other,somehidden, Interpretation. Therearemen who aseert that the doctrine of eternal punish- ment {s not truc, whether Christ taught it or not. The positions taken by the latter class of persons is: First, such doctrine fs not In the Til- ble; necondly, IC it s in the Blble, why, then, thie Bible is not true, To quote Scripture to these men without first clearing away some of the prejuilices aud show- ing the sophiatey of someof the arguments which they present would be uscless, and there- fore we do not desizn ot this hour to deal - rectly with the teaching of tha Sacred Word, Only stopping now to say that Dible-teaching s £0 frequenty direct, and explicit upon this sub- ‘Jeety that for ane, It T could bo made to belleve that It does not teach the remediless ruln of the fmpeninent einner, 1 should despair of cver as- certalning Bible meaning upon any subject, and snould abandon theeffort. Those who deny tha verity of the doctrine, and yet do not contess- edly repudiate the divine fnspiration of the Holy Scriptures, do, nevertheless, most mani- festly repudiata them as tholr chosen authority. 1t {s evident to the most casual observer that these men do place very much more confidence in thelr own nrguments, theorics, and philos- ophles, independent of this book, than they do in its teaching or authority. To some of these arguments and theorics we turn at this hour. Oncof the most plausible and effectivo argi- ments ogainst the truth of God Is based upon human sympathy and parental affection. Asks the non-bellever: *Would an earthly parent Furmll his child, whatever might have heen his lault, or however deep his crime, to sufler for- &ver It ho had power to rescus him? Most surcly not. Aud if mnot, then how much less will od, our ITeavenly Fatlier, who is infinitely more kind and Joving than earibly varent can be,—how much less will le permit ono of Ilis children to suffer forever when Ie has power to rescuel” Now I confeas that argument, at fiest look, weoms very fair and strong, It appears sufliclent to condemn this doctrine at onco and forover as false. But let us look closo at it for » moment. The first statcment in this armient Is that an carthly parent would not allow his child to sulfer forever it he could pre- vent it, That statement ia so scif-cvident that no man wil deny it. The next statement is that Uod i better, inure tender, and loving than ever was or can bo earthly parent, That s no true that it cannot be disputed. ‘The third statement Is that If parental power could pre- vent eternal suffering it would; and this third part of the argument is sdmitted to be true. Thie fourth statement Is that God has power to prevent eternal sulfering, ond this fourth part of the argument I8 admitted to bo trite. Now, in this argument there aro but tive statements, we huve fuoked ot four of them and we all ad- mit them to be correct. Thero Is but one mare, let us look at that. Heroit fs: Beeause Gi bus power to prevent cternal suffering, therc- fure He will prevent . Is that true? Wil tiod prevent suffering. nln{mly beeausello basthe puwer so to dof Gud has power to prevent cternal suflering, then He hus power to ‘prevent suffering for a momeat, for a day, for o year, for thousands of years, Only by preventing it as the moments (.m can wo prevent it for the eternal ages. Now, If beeause God can therclore He will pre- vent sufleriug, thus our race is, has been, and ever will be exempt from suffering. My friends, 14 that statument truc to the facts in ‘the case 1t it 1a, then this argument is goods §2 it ia not, then there Is some thaw In the logicof thuse who present it. An_carthly parent would not allow bis ¢hild to suffer for'n day with the rack- ing paln, the scorching fever, or the choking death-rattle §f hic had power.to prevent 1. But God, who 18 Infin{tely more kind thon earthiy Enmnt can be, could ‘prevent it and does not, For 6,000 yours, ut least, our race Las preseuted one continuous sccue of sufferiog,—blinduess aud dealness, coldness ant weakness, hungers and famincs, excrucinting ;mlu- and buraing fuveps. ‘These oro facts of sternest character fnpur oxperience, and auch terrible facts that we canuot ignore them in this discussion, We - cannot beeause. thess facts, belug facts, 1t does not appear that God will prevent suffer- ingz, elther nresent or eternal, shnply because 1l has the power to prevent It, and if God does not. preveut sulfering, Lecouss Tie hus the poiver 10 (o 8o, then this fiue urcument, four points of which nlf admis to bo correct, Is worthless upon this subject. It Is worthicss because it fnils at the very paint where those who present (L most want to hiold wood. God o His ndministration over the children of men to-day docs not act olone upon the prompting of symvathy or parental affcetion with regard to the permis- slou of aullering. e belug the ssme God for- uver, und Ills adninlstration the eatie, it {8 not lozleal or ratlonal to assert that e will not al- low sius to produca its natural fruit In the world to come, God’s powerdocs not prevent such frultago here and now, suulogy says 1t will uot prevent It in the great hercateer. If this argu. ment of the doubters were good mow, then we mizht “belleve it would be good In the future, but when it is so utterly faiso ‘when applied to thls life, thus 1t is arguing nat only without fact, but nzainst all facts, and the only ovidence fn the case, to plead that fhat which Is false in tho diviue adminlstration hern und now, will be truc In the divine adininlstra- tlon In tho world to come. It must bo clear to theman who stops to think that there is suine other principle or something more than sympa- lhf' In God’s plan of governent, . t will not ddo to plead thot GGod s not good, I Iledoes not net solely upon the emotion of. pity. It wlll not do for men ol thought, becanss such pleading sssumes that men understaud the relation of ail things nnd all men as well us God docs, _Aud, because they understand as well as Uod, therefore they ure compotent Lo proounce with unerring securaey upon diving admivistra- tion, For pll theso reasous we pronounce this argument,—~so often pr ed, and pre- sented with s0 much ussuranco—we must pro- nounce ft an utter fallure when men attempt with it the demolitlon or the destruction of an eternal hell, Lt us turn to another statement which eavors more of theory than of argument. Men have sald that the doctrine of uu cternal hell represents (iod as u vindietive tyrant, cruel monster, or enthroned satanic power, ‘Thiat {3 stroug language und un Jmpetuous declarations hutisit all the result of sober thought aud ratioual fuvestigation? Mt who bellevo this declaration of vJesus Chrlst oflivin the goodness of God as stroogly uud an constantly os do those who oppoge "it, Bince both parties wieert the goudness ol Uod, wo joay counlder this fuct settled. God Is good. Go belng fiwd, ll His laws are ordalned for a r\ood and wlss purpose, If (God's laws are !umd then abedience to them ust be promotive of poud to the obedicut; and us surely us obedi- chee brings blessing to the obedicnt, so surely must disobedience bring disaster to the dlsobo. dient, We bave uo reason to supuose that any ol God's laws lu the morsl world any more than 0 the physical world will bLe reversed to prevent tho suffering violation has oceasloued. It 18 the luw of lire to buri, No mun will dispute tte utility of this law. It con- tributes in a thousand ways to the promotion of Luman fnterest aud weltare, Bub §f o man apply the torch to hls housy It is consuwed ; if he thrust big hand futo the flame be §s burned. Dolng these things, sball he then complaln that (iud 18 @ cruel monater to allow him thus to sul- ferloss and palot .11 he should, uther men would think bl eitbier I Jest or Insane. Were the tman our own brother, were bo thy beloved Juseph of vur houseliold, we would not roverse the luw of fire, If we could, to oase bis swmart- {ug or to save hils _house. We would not do ity much less will Gud. It 8 wan is vuwlse enough to ruch futo the fire, be must buru; it hio leaps Into the watcr, ho must drown; over the preciplee, he must ah I be plucks out the eyes, e must ko blind; If he drives the dageer to hls own Lcart, orblows the bullet futo Lis'own; bralp, why then ho must die. I nous of these cases 13 CJod @ mouster ol cruelty, Lbecause the man 13 lefe 10 suflcr the result of Lis own dolugs. Mo fs 1o Llume for not keeplng away fromn tho tire, out of the water, or bis band from destroylog weapous. As firc hurns in the muterlul world 20 olu burns inthe mordl world. As other agencies disorder and destroy fu the plysical mauu, su sl disorders aud destroys iu the spir- ftual man. This bunlshweot of the wicked from God is not 88 vue bus suld by foree of armed pollee,” but fs the result of natural and neces- sury law. If God iy not cruel because He docs not 1everae the luw of gravitation to save the uian who leups from wountulu's erog, because He dows not ey the law of fire L0 save tho mwan who rushes (nto the fuwe, or the law of strungulation tu save the mau who casts him- self juto tho sew; thus God Ls not tyrunt of viu- dictive rate, or cmbodiwent of Bataule hute, because He does not reverse the law ol cterual right 10 save tho swner who dushes biv beadd and beart agalust the cteroal rock, Tosave such nen would uol add to, but would shadow the divive glory, darken divine admivstration, und throw doubs cternal upon the divino purity. Had God ordalned moral Iaw, and then forced men to it violation, that had been cruelty, But the supposition I3 monstrous: it eannot bo true. The reverse is trne. - Gol ordained the law that men might sce, obey, and live. Hat, it they will not, shall God compel them to live! To do 80 He must take awav the moral agency with which ITe has endowed them. He must contea- dict His own administration, change the law of providence as expressed in this life, annul Hia own threatenings, and reverse His own nature "8 revealed in His work and word. Since all this must be done bofore Hod can compel ain- ners to be sared, itis safa to say thero will meyer be such compulsion, Take another thought In this connection. It .God's plan for anving men were the work of compulsion, then surely He would compel them and ‘save them from infancy. He would uot permit gins to bite and blister, diccase corrupt and destroy .all along through and in the cnd of this life, before bringing to boar upon the race Iiis compelling grace. Because such compelling rflwur ia ot brought to bear upon men in this [fe, therefore we have no reason to belleve It wiil bo brought to bear upen thein [n the world to come. Now if God cannot consistently, -and there- fore will not, compel men to abandon thelr efu aud accept of purity, then will fe, or ought He, to take the minucr with all bis sins and love of sin into His Hoaven of I\urh. and Holylove! Let us tryacase. Wao will take tho efutton, and Theodore Parker shiall give us the descrip- tlou,—** 1o Is an old man now; hia desires have become habit; but tho instruments of his appe- tite inve become dull, broken, and worn out. He recollects tho wine and debauch In which he ohee refoleed. Now fvis true they have lost Lheir relish; his costly meat turns to gall svithin him: but he remembers nothing but his feast- ing, his rloting, and his debnuch. Opium drugs him to sleep; his old life comes before him once more; his fellow-sinners arc sbont Lhn: they oprepare the (cast, pour the wine, and sing the fithy ribald song. The lewd woman comes up in his dream, Now hc wakcs with his gout and his chagein.” Buppose thern had been sufticient aplum to kill him, and hls wakiug had heen in eternity, oueht God, in that casc, to have taken him to Henvend Tho man who expccis it has thrown away his renson, or elsc he refusca to employ it npon this subject. This charge of cruclty against Uod, unless ile compels men by soms ‘means to enter Heaven, is not sustained. It {s not cruel to ordain goo laws; it {s not cruel to endow man with the pawer ol choice; mot cruel to malntpin the vight; to refuse the roversal of eternal right, in order that God himself may do an eternal wrong; to refuse the wrecking of tlo moral universe to save aman who will not bo saved upon right principles—indeed, after such wreck there conld be no real salvation. Another class of men urge against ks doe- trine of Jesus Christ, that all of Qod's punish. ment {s corrective, and will, in the end, reforin and savc everf sinncr. Do tho drunkards after thirst and sickness, and shamy and poverty, reformi Do tho pangs of con- sclence or the shame of exposure reform all the Bm(nm.\ false, sensual, godless men In thidlife? 0 not thoueands upon thousands of men, not- withstaoding all of (od's punishments, and the additlonal nunishments of earthly enaztment, and notwithstanding all human calls and all di- vine calls to repentance nnd reformatlon, with their cyes open to the disastrous results of their sins inthis lite, and with God's most termble declarations with regard to its results in the future, with all these facts befors them and .« them, do not thousands upon thousands of men rush on growing warse and worse, until we see themn no tnorel " 1f God's plan Is to fir- reslstibly reform men by punishment, then such fact is not demonstrated, but vontradlcted, by His sdministrations bere. Such theory hus no warrant in Providence, analogy, or the Holy Bcriptures, Another class of philosophers clalms that there will Lo another probation for those who pass from this probatlon without reoentsuce. If so, thess men must have the power of cholee; utherwlse, it will not. be probation, It a second probation bo just 1ike, or leas favorablo thau the preacnt, then wo haveno reason to hope for better result. Should this sccond probation be under clrcumstances more fuvorable than the present, what thend Why, it presents a man who has Jived a life of sing who- hus een confirmed in the desires, af- tectlons, and habits of sin; who goes out of this world an impenitent rebel nealnst God, pow taken,—notwithstanding this confirmation of his character in evll, this pollution of his nature,— with every Impulss in the wroug_direction, is now taken by tho cverblessed God, and filnmd In o better conditlon thao when e started him (n infancy, under the remedial agencies and influences of the Gospel of Jesus Chirist. ‘Thio thing Is_impossible, whether wu Took to the buman or diviue side of thy subject. ‘The ressons that call for onc such probation after the present, in case that should fail, would bu equally salid for another and another. Wit man loving his sin, and conflrmed in his habits of zin, would abandon it if he found by experl- enco that cvery life wasted and every sin fne duiged vuly lusured hin a better start {n the worid to come, It thut be truo God's govern- ment isa farce, aud all representatius of 1lis purity false, Pleads another man, **Eternity {s so long," sald one to ma not long awo, *1 o not belleve 1t possible for ono to sin enough fn this lifo to deserve uncuding ruin.” Such men forget that the merit or demerit of ab act {s not meosured by the length of timerequired for its execution. It a momunt a man #ets flro in the City of Chi~ eago, half the ity s burned, millions of doll- ar's worth of property 18 destroyed, and huudreds lose their lives in the flaincs. The nian s arrested, convicted, and sent to the Pemtentiury for life; he lives for flity years fn rison for the Work done f s moment. “Should e live » thousand, or showld be become fm- mortal, his {nunortglity, accordlog to tho sen- tence, would bo spent fu prison, In the nuture of the case there could be no pardon, if it were positively known that his disposition to burn was unchanged, and that the moient of lia release would witneas n m{wu- tlon of hly act, "That Is tho condition of the suul inprisoned in the perditlon of Hell. Dur- ing thu day of his probation his opposition to God and his love for alu became o settied and flxed that thoy chiauge not in all the ages of the future, Menfurges that G unistics forever fu the phiysical lite. Thut Is for the violation of physieal law. punlshes white the body' fusts.” Analogy says He will punish forover in the moral aud spiritual world for the violation ol moral laws, thut s, whils tho soul lusts, Nishop Thompaon gives an {llustration gl the flvat kil 2 *Flicre 18 ono who, in an hotr of un- Jnwful indulgence, contractan disease that affects flrst tho lesh then the weneral health, then the yery bonea, 1 saw hitn after b lind bee under treatment six years, the bones of his Lead grad. ually sloughingout. Howasuwreck ullkein bady, mind, fortune, und reputstion. An bhour's illicie pleasure, o Hiv of shane, disappolntment, and unsvsiting regret, What takes the case strong. cr {8, thuit the sin was prompted by nutursl pus- slons, aud committed under the Influence of -sudden and strong temptatiou, by which, us ju were, the einner was {ovaded aud overcome. Aud {ustead of belng sccompanied by premonts tiuna of danger, was attcuded with storiny pleas- ure.' ‘That is the wu{ God deuls ln §lis provi- denee by His laws with some sinners here and now, 1T the humdn soul be diseased with sin whon the day of merey §s past, us this young wman's body was with fhe lust of the fcsh wien hisuct of “slu wus pust, will not this dlscase of tho soul continue its burnlug, blightiug, ana polluthg work forever! 1o a moment the feet are cut off, the munls mulmed forever; the olucked vut, uid the mun is bliuded forever, uriug the duy of prubation he rejocts Christ, the only Bavior for afuners, and he s lost. for- ever, Tho merit or deioerit of anact is uut mcasured by the length of thne required for ts exeeution, but by fte uwn uature agl the chars acter and purposs of him who perpetrates t. I know that awen will sull plead that Gud’s gooducss must fu suine woy avert this endless doom. Blahop Thompson hag ed and answered this argament of goud. 1 quote substantially: *Men sug God 1s Iutinitely good, atd f Infinitely good, Ho must dedlre the saivation of ull menj God s inflnite wise, und belig fntlnitely wise, He can dev means for the salvation ot all men, und bl iftlntely powerful, fe can exceuts the aic devised, and therelore oll en whl bo saved, That argument seeis quite satisfactory and vonclusive for o time. Butlet asseo #f 1L will L s vlearly that there fs no ain or itly ehanigo the ter, 1f God fs ntinitely holy, 1le uiust desirs to prevent sl wilwise, He and {utinite 1 devier incaus for it prevention, Powur can exceuto them; there- there I8 not und never hus been any u fu the world, I God (v futintte fo Juve, Me nust desire tho huppiucss of gl men; Infimts wisdom und power can exccute this deslre, aud, therefore, all men are, always bave been, au aliwaya Wil bey purtectly hupbs.? | Naw, It the tist arzutent proves that allineuwlll be saved, then the second sud thind prove that Lhe race {8 Loth slnless und perfect in bappiness, 1t these lust arguments are utterly fullaclous with Fegurd to purlty aud suffering, so fa the formee witn ragard to uutversnl sulvation. "Lhetruth is wy friends, God does desire Lo save men; Gml cmploys every tcan, proffers cvery belp, pre- seuts every posaille promise snd ‘motive to protwpt men o forsake tho slotul. But God will ot truwple upon right, will not violate his vu nature, will hot compel uny tun to be A, In order to salvation there must be tie coucurreuce of the humay will with the divine fuevery fudividual csav. Thers I provision for huwau beatiug aud sulvatlon fu Jesus Christ, But it thy stuncr will not be saved ouly thea thers (s no help in the case, be wust go loto the punlsfment which {3 ¢ternal. The wan who WL ot cuter Heavey will ub tho Jast biave the doors of Heaven tlosed azainst, him. That de- clalon In juat and right; 1t will rewnain just and right forever. DR. PARKIIURST. AELL A NECESMITY. The Rev. M. M. Parkhurat, of the First Meth-’ odist Church, preached last evening on the doc trine of Hell, his subject hetng * Mell a Neces- #ity." Tlis text was the favorite ono from Mat- thew xxv: 40, about sinners goinz away Into overlastiog punishment, but therighteous to jife etemal, Jt.-wonld be necessary to assume, first, that tbe soul was immortal, e did not propose to notice the nature of futare punishment, al- though he would speak, In passine, of its dura- tion, In twenty-fivo years his personal views had not changed; he taught now what he was taught then. Ho had nover been taught, as somie preacher: scemed to have been taught, aud now preactied, that a man could live a lite of sin and go to Heaven when he didu’t want to odhere. Ie had no apology to make for Jesus hrist and Iis Apostles using figures of specch in thefr teachings. In talking of spiritual things, it was necessary to use figures of speech in order to be understood. _ Comiog directly to the question of duration, Mr, Parkhurst went into the ctymology of tho Greek word, " afonins,” which ha proved, to his own satis- faction, to bo “‘everlasting” or * eternal.’ All the Greek loxicographers of whom he had ever heard were agreed as to that, and no rellglous teacher hiad ever had any trou- ble on this matter, provided he had the right kind of tralning tn his ymgh. The word wns used seveuty-one times in the Blble—forty-five times with roference to the blessed, fifteen timen with refercice to consolations. Nobody was ever troubled at that. But it also happened that it was used twelve times with reference to the punishment of tho wicked. Ah! there was where peaple were troubled, God had not given oue meaning of & word for the ealnt and un- otlier for the sinner, but fn all placed in the Bible it was intended fo mcan, and did mean, the same. 1t would be asked by some how God could ba mercifel and yet punish men everlastivgly who neulected Iia free grace and despised 1lis law., With all roverence, he would reply, because Qod couldn't belp ft. Why! Al would sdmit tho neccssity of borying a doad body. Now the condltion of the unholy in the slghi of the holy was perfectly analogous to the sight of ¢he dead body 1o the living. Hence, it must loggically follow that the burlal of the wicked ont of the sight of the Almighty was as neceasary 88 the burlal of tho dead body f(n tha comnetery. The burial of the dead body h{ the living was uo proof on their purt of hatred oy vindictivencss, and the burlal of the sinner _in Hell was no arcument against the merey of God, Still less was there any ground for the chargo of hatred and vindiclivencss on tho part of God. when ft was remembered how much worse were the uaturo aud etlects of sin compared with dlscase. ‘The confinrment of viclous men was anecessity for the safcty of the commuuity. Every Chrls- tlan gentlenian, every good citizen, would ad- mit that. Thore wos 10 vne thing that Ameriea necded more to-Uay than a wholesalo certainty in the miuds of ali viclous mon that crime would be punished, Tho possibility of the develop- ment of tho viclous powors of men thraughout all eternlty was sbundaotly revealed In the Berlptures,” The soul that developed lcro on earth was capabls of {llimitable development In the millions of years in the next world, If there was u neccasity to<lay for tho County Jall and Joliet Penitcntiary, "there was a neces- sity fora Hell. And yet it wds not God's wish topunbh men fn Hell. el was not cstab- lislied beeause God was hateful or vindictive, but because there wus n nccessity for the wicked to bo locked up. God had declared that It was not tis will that any should perish, but that all should have cverlasting Jife, Hell was God’s great graveyard to bury dead souls; 1lis penitentlary whereln to forever im- prison the viclous, impenitent, and lost. Eoml man did not dresd the prison's cells, but 0 pltfed the, wretchies fuside. 8o, a Christian did not fear Hell, but pitled the Jost who were to suffer thera forever. If mien went there it was their own cholce, The Methodist Church preached o free cholee toall, Tho consequences wore on o man's own shoulder, und tho nccessi- ty in God. If nainner remained in his sins ho d{fl g0 on his own rnnpmlslblllt&. in despite of God's free grace, and muat suffer the punish- ment, while {f a man lived a live of purity and hotiness through Christ ho should forever liva with Him, DR. GOODWIN. A _BORIPTUBAL ANGUMENT, Tho Rov. E. P Goodwin preached a. sermon yesterday morning in the First Congregutional Churctron +“ha, Beripture Doetrin Pdnishment,” takiug the followin; And theso shall Tn away into cverls ment; but the rigl are., 40, Tho speaker sald that ho would be compelled to divido the subject into two parts, for it was finpossible to compresa oll ho had to eay within tho limita of onc address. He would guoto the passagzes bearfuz on this queation at this time, and In tho evenlng would conslder ths objec- tlons which could bo made to them. Referring to the text, he sald tbat "tbe Great Teacher never uttered moro meaning words. ‘They were tho last public uttorauces of Iis minlstry, and were glven on the fourth day of that final week so svon to end in agony and blood. It scemed that the heart of Chrlst was 20 surcharged with this tremendous trutk that e apoko of nothing else, The question was not ona of liberalism or anti-liberalism, Calvin- ism or Armintantsm, High Church or Luw Churely, but ot Scriptural truth, The polnt was whether the words uscd by our Lord beye, and read with other passazes ‘of Seripture, taught the uncndinge punlshment of the wicked, and the unendiug Ulessing of the xodl{. The Heriptures atforded the ouly Iufallible rule of faith and practico In this as in all other cases. Ife was not discussing natural or sclentific the- olotry, but the theuloeyof the Bible, and nssumed that that book was tfio divincly fspired Word of (jod, and that its authority was supreme, It the doctrine of eterual punishmont was clearly st forth In the -~ Bible, they were bound to belleve ft, uud if the Berip- tures were not tiod-given and abeolutely binding, thuy might as well dlscuss the teachlags of Jo- sephus or Plato. For those who could not ac- cept this startin int—the supramo authorit of the Word of (jod—he bad no argumeat. 1o get rid of Jonah and the whale, of Lot's wifo and the pillar of salt, was to get rid of Chriat, of Heil, snd of Uod. Thera were two clusses who denled that Berfpt ure taught thia doctrine—thoe sunibilatfonists and the perfectionlsts. J1e would contine him- se)l tothe New Testument teachin aod af- tirmed, fully, that Jesus Christ unquestionably Indursed the doctrine ot eudless future punlsh- ment. At the time le began to prewch, tho ting panish. iteous'fnto 1ifo mmnl.‘—n.ila... ew ith the exception of a few Sadducees, belicyed in an eternily of punishment for the wicked, and rvowards for the good, Josoplius sald that the Pharisees believed thut the good shiould revive and live uuin, und that the wicked should be hanished under the carth, Philo, the Jew of Alexandria, Lore shintlar testimony, und satd that the I.n:ll:l in o punishment uiter death had a repressivo {ufluence vver had men, [t wos possible that the Jows ubtaiued thelr bellel from the Egyp- tiunys, who belleved that ull men were brought before Oskris to be judyed; that the good went futo o good place, aud thot the bad souls Juurneyed through various kinds of wild aud Vile beasts, There wers two clussgy of the late ter, one of which mibeit alter many transmigra- tlons rise to the level of the guod, while the very bad would go on slnking lower and lower, Hut it mattered not whero the Jews got thelr Delfef, 1t wos suflicient to know that they held ft. - Chirist’s mlssion upon carth was to clucidate fruth and to Luulh cregr, und if tuls doctrine hud been erroncous Tl Woukd as certainly have testified aguinst as Ho Jid suninst the erroucous ldeas us to tho Babbath, the divorce laws, und other corrupt nad foullsh teachings ot the Rab- bis, Heswept awoy all the pretentious form- ailsm of the Plarlsces, and taught tbat tue two commandments of consequence were ¢ Love the Lord thy God, und “thy wnelghbor us thyself,” © It wus fuconceivable | that Christ ° would have passed by this doc- triug without comment bad it been an fucorrect one, Supposlug that a statesimun of the highest reputv asan mlvocats of pold us wouey, should wake a tour through the West'in order'to teach tho ductrines of sound political veouony, sud duriug his three and ono-balt yesrs' journey, during which he mingled with 81l classes of ‘peovle anl spoko klways un polit- feal ceopumy, should never say ono single word in regurd to what be Kuew to be the pruvaillug bellef of the prople ou the currency question they would unt\'urnll{ hold etther that he did not believe fn the guld, or that he was a terrible cowsrd, Clirlat not m:Hl the doctripe, direct ai indorsed but cxpressly taught e Suripturcs were full of both ureutuatantiul evidence, but he would ooly quote thusu passages sboutl which there could no cuvil. Cirlat suid to Nicodemus, “Except » mun be born ageln hu caunos cuter tho Kiugdow of God,” and that *the Svo of Muu nust bo Wlted up thut whosvever believeth in iy should vot perfsh, but bave everlustlng Hte.” " Agaln, in Joho, v., 16-29, when tho Jews ralsed 8 guwujt because Christ bealed ‘upon the Babbath, e sald, *'Ihuy shall cowe lurLG—n(huy that Lave goud, unto resurcection uf Lo} and they that have done ovil, unto the resurrec- tlon of damuatlon. Tn Mstther, viil., 11-12, He said, Many ehall come from the cast aud the west, and shall sit down with Abratwm and feaac, and Jacob, in the Kingdom of Heaven; but the childron of the Kingdom shall be cast out into outer darknesa; there shall be weeping and goashing of teeth,’ All.tho parables— those of the tares, the foollah virgins, the wed- ding-guiest, and the servant who hid his talents lu the mn‘dn—-wmln the same lesson, Al taught that there was a lumit to the opportuni- ties of men to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, If they neglected these, they would find no other anawer than * Begone, [ know you not." In Matthew, xil., 8182, Christ snfd: ** Who- socver apeaketh mminat the IHoly Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in “this world nor in the world to come.” Mark spoko _with even greater authority on this point. In Luke, xvi,, 10-31, tho rlchs nian in torment asked for relief, and was told that it was {mpossible for ihat there was a pgreat Eulf fixed between them. Christ's object in this parable was 1o contrast {ho conditions of the good and the wicked atter death, Could any one belleve that thesc wero the utterances of One who meant todeny the cternity of punishment § It ho could he muat dn:n, cverything. In conclusion Mr. Goodwin aflirmed that the sposties taught the same doctrine, In Ronans, 1., 9, aul sald, * Aud thinkest thou thus, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and docst the samc, that thou ahalt escape thy Judgmont of God I Other quotations cited . Thesalonians, 1.,7-0; Hebrews, xx., o ad Jude,g-15. 8t ot came to’ wind up the dreadful vategory by scenes at the Last Dav to which ho made men witnesses, He sald: ¢ Aud Isaw a great white throne—and Isaw tle dead smallund grest stand befure God, and tho bouka were opened, and the sea gave up tho dead which were In it, and Death and Hell delivered up the dead which wero in them, and they were Judged evory man according to his woiks; and whosoever wus not found In the Book of Life was cast into the lakd of fire.)? These testimonies, the spesker held, made it clear boyond o peradyentute that the doctrine of eternal punisl.ment was estub- lished by the Scriptures. I it were not so establishied then hothing was, and he would rather give up the doctrine of the Trinity or of Christ's dlvinity than this. If the evidenco quuted could be galusald, then Christians bad 10 foundatfon vu which to rest thelr falth, A FRATERNAL INVITATION, PHOPOSED NEWSPAPER DISCUSSION OF FUTURE TUNISOMENT. Ta the Editor af The Tribune, Cntcago, Jan. 18.~Will you have the kind- ness to givo space to the following: To the editors of the Interlor, the Adcance, the Standard, and the NortAwestern Christian Adro- cate—~UnrrnueN: The public mind is now intense. 1y aaitated over the question of endless punishs ment. The denomiuntions you ropresent tesch that those who die nurepentant will experience un- ending suffering. The denomination I represent teaches t| all Jod's pnnishinents are means to the end of *mation, and that, fodicted by un- erring wisdom and jofinite love, they will be fol- lowed by universal holiness and hapbiness, You teach that it is essentinl to public and private morality, and conducive to Christian living to pro- claim tho ductrina 1n guestlon. 1 boileve that duce trino to be A bar to the hizhest love of Goid and the best Chrlstian lving. ‘Ilie question we are all deenly Intorested in is this: *‘Is pumshment cendless, or of limited duration!” Our minds are made up. thongh I traat they arc notimpervious to truth, but there are thousands now who are asking Pllate's question, **What la troth ™ 1f I am right, your readers ought to knuw the reasons for my hope, 1f you are right my readers um{lxno be able to welgh auch considerationa as gentivmen of your abhity and learning can present. For these ;‘nd other reasous I suggest the following proposi- one: You shall preparo and print in the columns of your paper, or papers, 8 certaln nuinber of articles of specified length, sotting forth such reunony ax you niny be able to give In defense of the doctrine’of endiess punishment, 1 will follow thom with an equal amount of watter reviewlug tho arguments given, When they shall have peen published I will give an equal number of articles of cqual length to yours fu defenwe of thu doctrine of “universal ealvation, rhich you ‘will revlow, and all the articles on both slica l’yull be inserted In the papers that entor into the ar- rangement, Should notsumothing like this be dona? Think! You cau thus address thousauds of read- ers who chierish what you are apt to call a fatdl error, who might, Ig your words of sisdom, bo converted and saved,” Can you conalstently turn Rway from a door of access to thefr mindeand hearts thus convenlontly ufencd for you? Canyon rofuse l!li! c&u \:ln.ll.\mn win o 7 a offer this proposition 1o you not In any mero love ulconlr&’vognv. bt wnn’n fervent dulr’m i I am_ wrony, to find the better way of truth, and with 8u equal desire to convince thoso who T belleve aro In the wrong, of the truth as taught In that book, which, 1 trust, wo all alike revorence, though we differ in our Interpretations of itateache ings. My regular readlng of your papors convinces mo that you would treat this great subject with ability: yet so confident am Ithat my vosition is tho trae one, that I nm fearicsn in undertaking to copo with you, a8 I remember that with_the truth ofvhis Mie**one can chaso o thousand, and two ‘put ten thoasand ta flight, " With an carncat desire that this Invitation may bo accepted by you, I am in Chrlstian love and pleturing the friendship, yours truly, J. W. Haxsox, New Cotenant uftice, MISCELLANEOUS, ELDER JAMES HEMENWAY, of Athol, Mass., preached last evening In tho Qreen Btreet Taberuuclo (Advontist), taking for his text: God has spaken once; twice have I heard this, that power belungeth unto God. Also unto Thee, O Lord, belongoth m“mi for Thou rendereth to ;VCIY wan according to his works,—Paaim betl,y Ho wished In tho first place to cstablish o law by which all theology should be triod, God was Inflnite fn Ilis wisdom, and just In sll His dealings with cteation. Was it a supposable caso that Infinite Wisdom should dovise a law which Almighty Power was unable to cxe- cute! Infinite justice was the cirele fnside in- finlte wisdom, and the two wero eqaal. Good- ness was an actlye attribute of the Almighty, and {0 harmony with His wisdom. It would Le impossiblo for God to call Into existenco a belng who would be worse off than before lils crea- tion. Tho skeptls asked why God did not make man so’ that he could not suf- fer, but the auswer was that Ho could not do 80 in harmony with Ilis infinlte justice,- When God “survoyed His work after the creation Ife prouounced it all good. He was nu more anawerable for the decline of man from his bigh estate than was the man who manufac. tured on ax suswerable for tho carelessngss of the man whio cut his foot with It. Guodness and power were cqual to every emergency, and God was not golng to lot the worly slip through His flugers. But man stuned, rojectod mercy, sug despised the phyaician, Thut was Just the eud for which "God created. Lim, In the Juw wae contaived positive prohibltion of sin, for God {otended to have the woila clean. Tho thne was coming when truth, and merey, and justice would unlte in carrviog out tho high purposo of Jehovah, Wheu God coin- wanded 1uan to love Him no hopeless task was fmposud. Chiristianity bad to besr crosses, but thy love of God in the hcart made it casy to bear all things amd to practics self-denful, Christiana ought to bo the most Joyuus peoplo on earth, for Christ diod for them. God had for G000 years given men tho choice of right- tousness © or -ein, aud tried to persunde thewm to Jove Him. o had filled the Tiible with rich sod elorous prownises. Wisdom Dadd wpuken and declared that sin should comu to an end. This vust cither be by sinncrs coasing their wickedness, or by thie destruction of sinucrs, It el were eternal God would bo under the ueccssity uf partitloning off a pare of lis Kingdom, and placing it under the con- trol of the Devil. Kebellton wiralust God would Do put down even us thoe Rebellon agalust the Uovernment was put down. Would they place od on the samue plans with the Roman ruler, who hiung tha 1aws so fur up that his sub- Jects could not read them, and then put them to death for nfringing them § There was noth- ing fu the Biblo to suteest that eternul puntshe ment eiguitied eternal torment. God's judg- ments were erernal, and i wicked would bo punbshed by uooihilation. God could not do auy man an cvil; it was impossible for inlinite ooduess to do baducss, Ho bas no pleasure In tbo doath of a siuser, and z'yz siuners must die. They have broken i s law and refused His cuvenant, and this bs the penalty, Ood had promised ol ghe uni- verst to His people, aud there was no room to soaro for the wicked, He creutod mun with the Lm\ver 10 chooso guod or evil, und if the created clur dsliberately choss evil L chose ite results, and God would put him buck whicre betook hism front. ‘Fhe conclusion to bo druwn wus tbat eternal punishment did not slunify eterual tor- wmeut, but a deprivation of exlstouce and Lan- Lshimeot from the preseuce of God sud trom His lutluite gooducas. THE HEV. D, R. MANSPISLD presched last night at the Mtssion Church, cor- nerof Fultun aud Muy strevts, conceruing the guestion of future consclous punisbivent, Tho reverend speaker aunounced uo text, and com- menced his aduress by stating that a great deal of work snd 1imu wus necessary to disprove bellef which the religious peopls of the world had for so Jong beld - dear. They bad believed that theiv ™ was, asud (s, an actusl Hell. Stuco the recent awakenlug of futerest fn that place of torimeut a new light had begun to shine. 4o ‘belicved in allowiug that light to conttuue to sbine aud grow brighter, so Shat I there was muy truth tu the watter upon ;vhlcb it ahone, that truth might be made mant- est. Taking tho Bible In hia hand, he turned to that passage of Hcripture which spoke of tho descent of Chrlst into Ilell, and sald that tha word which tranaiated ® el denoted only the grave. Ana that quotation which sald that David had prayed ngainst his enemics that they might bo cast down into hell, e renderal that those cnemics might ho cast into their graves. He sald that the Atmue Panl, In onc ol hia cpisties, had said that he had kept back nothing that was profitable In his rellgious teachinge. And Paul, he reald, uttercd not one word to stiow that there waas a fell where there was cndless torient. No Bible-writer had nd- vunced any sitch doctrine. And Paul had re. marked that any Gospel othee than that he preached should "be curacd. Peter had asked the questfon, **Whnat ahall the end be to those who belleve not the (fiospel?” And in the third chapter of his zccond e!rlsun he had him- sclfanswered thoquestion: **Butthe heavensand the carth, which are now, by the same word, nre Kept In store, reserved tnto fre againet the day of judgnent and perdition 0f ungodly men.! Neserved unto fire against the day of judament, *‘Wheni " asked the speaker. ~**Agaioat the day of judmnent.,” and uot until then, Again, in the forty-first verse of the twenty-iifth chan. ter of Matthew, was to horead: *Then shall 1o nay also unto them on the Jeft hiaud, Depart from me, ve cursed, into everlnsting fire pre. pared for the devil and his angels,” When was that to be saldl When Christ comes in_1ls glory, and not bofors that time, “Into evcrlasting fire prepared for the =~ devil and Dis angels.” Was not the dovil In that firc pow! It would seemn not. There was no wtatement that would an- swer that question. ‘The desll was repreacnted a8 golng nbout as a roaring 1on secking whom e might devour, and not 1n Hell at all. " Woulil it be falr, then, to conslgn tho wicked of past ages to a fire to which the devil, at whose sollci- tation the wicked had sinned, was not confined and obliged to rutfer? Would 1t be fafr to put Cain, for Instance, in Hell at the time of his death, and let hiin suffer 5,000 years of flery tor- ment, while the sinmer who might die to- day and go to the place of torment hud 5,000 yeara Ulie atart of Cainl % No,” auswered tho speaker. Tho siuners were all to start even in thelr punishment. When Christ mct the two men afllicted with devlls in the country of the Gndarines, the devlls in the men eried out to ‘hrist that He stould not destroy them vefore thefr time. They did not say, ** Nend us to Hell before our time," Lut they said, ** destroy us before our time” They used the word "de-lro¥," which meant toannibilate, not tocast fnto Hell. Those devlls know that a thne was set for thelr witimatedestruction, and thev crled out to be permitted to_live thelr aliotted tinse, Was Hell eternali Wo were told that fell was eternal fire for the * devil and his angels,’’— not for those who had einned in this world. ‘The spenker continucd his grgument, quoting ftmucnu‘y from the Scripturcs, and liolding that tha destruction of the ainners was not to take placo till the Day of Judgment, when the earth slrould be consumed b‘ five, that perfect purging agency that should burn the wicked up a8 stubble Is consumned by fire. For the angels that biad siuned there waa leld “In_reserve ' g fire, to bo pgiven them at the Day of Judgment, The Sodomites suftered **cternal " tire, ‘Thut firc was out, It was cternal n that it destroyed the City of S8odom for all time and eternity,” Tho fires which burned outside of Jerusalem were called cternal fires, and yet they were not burning to-day. Those tires were not queuched. ‘That s, they were sllowed to burn Ml their work of consumption had been completed. They serc oternol as far as con- cerned the matter which they consumesd. There wus a distluction between tiio words * cverloat- ing punishiment ” and “everlnsting punishinz," An cverlasting punishment meant a punish- ment that when completed was completed for all time. An ‘everlnsting punishinz? would mean a continuous and never-ending state of unishment, Christ had used the words evar- nating punishinent, In closing his address tho preacher referred tothe Beriptures, which repre- sent Christ as telling the Jews that whither Ho went they could not go, and He told His discl- nlcu the same thing, They could not go with {m then, Ho went to ¥prepare a placo for them which they should fuberit when Ifo cama in His glory, sltting upon the right hand of the throne. The speaker ‘then pictured out a Heaven upon this earth. The wicked were to bo cousumed ot the dn'vl of judgment, burned up, aunihilated, and the Devli and nis angels were to be conshgned to the Ilell prepared for thém, Those who died bofore tho day of juds- ment were to be unconscious of the lapse of timo s o sleeping man was unconsclous to the flight of the hours. THB REV, C. H. MOLMES preached ot the Fulton Btreet Methodlst Epis. copnl Church last evenlug to o lurge audicnce, from the followlng text: For wickedncss burneth as the fire.—Isainh, 'y 18, ‘The reverend gontleman sald, taking his text aloue, that the reasonjug was that sin was its own punishinent. 1t could not by taken alone, however, but its relation to other texts had to bo consllered It we almed to get at o falr foterpretation of it. If uny other rulo was udopted, texts could be found In the Bible that could be tortared Into tearing down or bullding up avy decirine, It would not do tako lsolated passages of the Bibls to reason {rom, but the book as o whole. What did 1t teach? in answer to this questlon he quoted from Matthew, Hi, 12; Romaus, IL,5 to 12; Romans, ix., 44; Luke, xvl. 24,aud Isafah, Ixvi., u, which treated of the buralng of the chafl In an unquenchablo flre, of cternal life, aud God's wrath, und geverally of the Biblical fdea of the punishment of ain. ‘The tenching of the passages quoted, tho speaker conlenaed, was that there waa a future punish- mcuz‘ and tho word “flre " bad been used to deseribo the nature of the punishment, whicn they also tnost emphatically taught waos to be forever and ever, ‘The next xfluenlan propounded was: Are the wicked—bodles of fleah, blood, and nerve—to be thrown Into a furnace and be burned for- evert Tho snswer, ho sald, depended upon what tho word **fire” meant, s used In the Bible, It was varlously used. In one pusssze 1t moant the justive and hiolluess of Gtod; In an- other it was cployed to describe the Savior, where 1lc was spoken of as o fire} aguin it wus used to describe the Holy Ghost: again His word was called fire i Jercwiah, xxill,y S0; and still again It was used to portray thesulleriug of thoss who died i sin as (u tho text, sud also In Deuteronowmy, xxil, %, and ‘1sufab, xxxlil,, 4. The text was pecullarly con- structed, it would be nutived, as were all the passuges quoted. It did not say that the wicked were toburn up v tho lire, but they were to burn as the fire burneth. 'Weo know nothing about the next world more than the ghimuwers fues culled from tho 8ible, nefther did wo kuow anythiug of the vondition or material of our bodies there, The Bible nowhera taught that wo would thera be flesh and bous as bere, but alnply that our existencs would be glorf- Aed, and all evidenco was wanting that’ fire conld burn the bady or soul, or even Inflics the lmlll thut we now experience by thrusting our hand futo it. The must emphatde languago of the Binlu (n roferenco to the boreater was s to what wo shuuld ot be~that in Hodven thero should be no suftering, pain, or night. Thery was sbsolut:ly nothing {i tho Bible upon which to base the ldea that the elorifled body should ever suffer phiysieal torture, or ot Jeast ho had not been uble to avert such a conclusion from its study, The next questlon nm‘a‘:lmdnd and answered was: What, then, {8 to be thosufferine? Fire, he sald, was used {n the Bibla aa tho unly and bost lunguage tu which God could describo ur sulferhye. Wo talked to ouv children i a lan- guazg they could understund, and so Christ spako to the Apostlcs of the flery furnace, cte, Bin was debastng and destructive, and fts ten- dency was to lead down the hearts and minds of men. It burned wherovor 6 touched, and the Bible taught that the’ sloner could not be at peace. 8in lived and burnod, and burned forever! If we dld a mesu thing, we felt wean for it. That was an infallibly rule, and it ecemed to Liu that when we laid oft this lifo und broke Into the splrit world, 1t our sins were with us, from the very nature of the dizease, the change would but sistensify our suflering. e had resd 0 great many serinous recently on the question of future puuishiuent, and ft wos o remarkable fuct that fn poue gf them had a sinele arzmnent been advanved agalnet “cternal ™ punishment. They all ade mitted the existence of & hell, sod that cach sin would ho justly punished. The fdea that there would bua Jimit o the punisb- ment cae from Augustine, but the idea that the soul would step vut and go to Heaven ut death was na longer tenaclously urged, even by the Univereallsts, They bad litile to say on tho aubjuct, but had cowe to coucede the neceseity of puriiylng the body here that the soul wight bo sputless berealter, It conciuston, the speaker sald he looked upon our wortdly lite us purely one of proba- tion, We would ultimately be condemned or upproved, und that fur all eternity, or clse chler o umew probativn at the end of thls hife. But there would b an end to the years sud cycles of probatiun, sud §f we were wudemued at tho oud 1t would Lo un eternal coudemuationt Biu was lts own punbshment. Guod did pot punlsh us, but we punished our- If o lad His way, we would ull bu saved: and il we were not saved it would be be- causy [le could pot save us,—becanse wu trod upon ki3 wercy, wud rejected sulvation! God tquk no pleasure fu the death of auy oue. He guve His Sou for us, aod that wesnt that He was ju carncst io trylng to save us. Sio wus our condeinnativn, aud God could not take I6 selves, JSorwed” Episcopat out of our hearts, bocaitse we wonld not |gy Him. 1t would be our punishment forever, TIB REV. C. L, THEMP30ON preached yesterday morning to a large congre. gatlon, taking for his text: And theso shall go away Into averlasting png. Istiment, but the righteous Into )ife etarnal. — jfaf. theie, zre., 40 The speaker nsked first what was the com.: monly-recaiyed statement of the docttine of cternnl punisnment, and, second, whether jt haq Beripturalsupport, Thescveral views heldonthg subject were the old-fashloned U“W!l’llllluu' which declared that men passeil Into Heaven gy fast ns they die; restorationtany, which thought there was punishment of some sort In the fq. tace; nud the doctrine of the annihfiationtats, The first was unnhllmofih(ml the sccond wey not sustafned by the Dible, which gave no hing of pardotr beyond the grave; and tho {hirg conld not be proved by auy method of reasop. ng. The fdea that the doctrine of tuturs punish. ment las mo basls for conviction, assumeq cither that the Blble safd nothing about it, whig wasnot true; that the Bible sueaks In lauguags too vague to prove anything, which was dis. proved from the Bibla casily; or that the worg of fiod Ia not the nuthority, + The essentlal idea of Ilell covered only twy points—that the wicked should be punishedang thal safd punishinent should be cternal, Noth. ing was kuown of the oature of this punish. ment, and it was merely knotking over o mag of straw to swear that one would not belfeve iy cndlcss fires In a red-hot fartace. The speaker did not bellove n materfal fires literal brimstone, Concerning the philosophy of the punishment nothing was afliemed, be. rause nothing was known. . To the objection that the Jmnulum.-nt was cxcessive, tho speaker auswered thac man was utterly incorupetent to interpret God's law, He shnply knew that God would do right. 2 Passing to discuss the question of Scriptur) support of the theory, the apeaker spent somg time in substantially the same arquments as to the meaning of tho Greek word forever that hare been used by other clergymen on tho same subject, his conclusion belng that the Evangell. cal creed aflirmed eudless punishment, and that the Bible supported that creed. In closing, the reverend gentloman sald that, i¢ the Bible clearly aflirmed thia doctrine, thy was to the bellever the endof all discussion, [f thera were no proof but the Bible, he wonlg throw that Into the scales against a world's ug. bellel. - 'The subject wos a solemn and awfol one, and should bo made an awful charge te the souls of the people. . MADISON, w1, Spectal Disbaleh to The Chleaan Tribuns, * Mapigon, Wis., Jan. 20.—The large Methodist Church ol this, city was jammed full of peopls te-night to hear the Rev. E. D. Huntley, its pa- tor, discourse on * Hellsfire and Brimstona Every seat, the alalcs, and avery avallabla placs wos filed with people eager to hear about the future resldence of the damned, My, Hugt ley commenced his discourss with a favorahls niention of the great dally newspapers of the Northwest for their enterpriso fn publishing scrnions, Ile severcly criticlsod Mr, Btory, of the Zimes, for prioting blusphemous editorlals, ndd, if tho truth were known, probably consfgned that gentle man to one of tho nottest parts of his satanie mnjesty's domain, - Mr, * Huntley's sermon showed much careful Iabor and thought. s started out with tho truth of the Scriptures asa scttled fact, and, with the fext that God Is love, Ilo 18 still afavengiog God to those wha disobey His colnmsnds.’ o punlahed ths Izruclites, tic punished tho wicked citles of thes plains, of whom scarccly a vestige now remains to toll ‘ot thelr former greatness, Many texts were quoted to show that God could punish the gullty, If- the rzood were to bhavo cternal happiness, tben the wicked must receive oternal punishe ment, He quoted extensively from Hadgo tef show that not only did Christ 1ail to contradict the old Jewish bellef fu Hell, but taught such creed fn the most forcible manuner. ‘There could be no succesaful vontrs. dlction of this matter. A Hell for the unpeni- tent was an established fact. *These shall go {o away futo everlasting punishment, bup ha righteous into life eterunl.” ‘The same term apolied to the righteous that was applied to tho ummcllty, and, it the righteous eujoyed llfe eternnl, tho une rightcous wero eternally damned. Mr, Hunt ley quoted extenslvely from Plato, showlng conclusively that thiero could be such o thing ss comnpounding - the moeaning of the words fetornal” apd “everlasting.” Mr, Huot- ley showed that tho niversalists, a century awgo, belioved that both the holy aid unholy would bo eaved. To-day this denomiuntion believe In future punishinent, coming to the orthodox standpoint, that to hare o Teaven they must havo u Hell. The dlscourss was listoned to swith rapt attentiog by the vas crowd preaent, oi IN GENERAL. MODERN DOUBT. TUR LRV, DR. THOMAS, The Rov. Dr. Thomss prepched esterday cvening In Centenary Church, taking as his text: Justice and judgment are the habitation of Thy throne; marcy andYruth shall go before Thy face. —Paalm, berriz., 1. An a religlous system, Romanism rests‘upon anthority; and' fts autbority rests upon the clatw of {nfallibllity—~an infallible Church and an lofaliible Pope. And ft has not scrupled In the past tq’rulefl. thia claim, but to matotaln It by force, 'The terriblo power of the Inquisition was brought to bear to exterminats beresy, or tho holding of opinlons cone trary, to thoso set forth by this infallible and nuthoritative church, The grest Protestant roformation was a bold protest against and doflance ot this breaklug down and crushing out of the rights of conscience nud fu- dividual judgment. It was a grand uprisiog and outbursting of individuallsm. Tho backs cround of this triumplant moyvement was Jald In tho long years of corruption and bloody per- sceutions—~persecutions not forconduct, but for opinfone—that had doowed thousands to the most cruel tortures ot the dungeon, andthe rack, and the stake, . Itmay ot first scem strange that those who united in this noblo protest should thenselves Lecome altmost as dogmatie and autboritative intho asscrtion of thoir opinlons as were those against whom they protested; and, in turm, themselves persecuted others for clalinlng the samo rights of conacionce and Judement. But it would perhiapa be expocting too mnuch to suppose that any sgo should all at onca riko up uuil frec ftself from the orrors and superstitions of a loug and dark past. Tho re formers wero not content to take the Bible for autlorjty, Instend of the Pope. ‘I'hey went fur- thor, und placed thelr own Intervretations upon the lllhlr, und souwht to make theso (nterprets tious nuthorltative. ‘Thus tho Church of Eng- Jaud adopted the Athanaslan crocd as lts state- ment ot Chrlstian doctrines, It is not known Just when, uor by whom, this ancient formula waa written. It lslexceedingly complicated and ) metaphysical {n fta statements of the Trin- Iy, whally be youul comprelicusion _of v sud phllosophie winds. And yet creed says {n the very openlng sentenco that: % Whosoover will be saved, before ail things I s vecessary that be hald the Catholle fuith; which fuih, cxcept every one do keep whole and undefled, without doubt bo shall perish uv:rlutlufly." I canuot repeat ] this ereed; but bere Is” a sample oo the Trinlty: * And the Catholic fajth fs this: that we worshlp one God in Trlnity, and Trin ity in Uhity, ueithier confounding the personk uor dividing the substance.” ‘e, afterelat- ruthiz—sowe nlglt think after confuslng—this statemnent, it goes on w0 suy: * Furtherninorn it 15 uecesaary to everlusting salvation that be also belicvy n‘,:huy the lucarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ.’! Then, sfter sciting forth this mysterfous doctrine, {t con- cludes by waying that: “This {s the Cuthollc 1aith, which except @ masu believe faitbfully he caunot be saved,” It is uul ins& Lu sy that tie Protestant Epficopal Churd! u the Unlted Stutes sought to free Itsclf nub only frou the Athunaslau creed, but also from the Niceus erewd, aud pussed an act In the Cou- ventlon of 1785 expunzing both from their pre- posed Book of Gownwon Prayer but the Euglsh ishops refused 1o conscerute the Ame Bhakops without these creeds. In the Couven: tion of 17y, the Nicene creed,—which contains uu guch statcient ui o to the necessity o afixed beliel In thess things in order to 2 saved,—fu 1730, [ suy. this Niceoe cr winitted without debate, b wholly refused to résl 1 mention thess thiugs Lo show that the exves: slve dogwiatisin of even Protestants uot ouly necessituted doudt fn the Chureh, und by L8 Church, but vecessitated a refluruiation of ll-‘; old Reformation, or o Protestantism inside o Protestuutlsm. And here again the doubterd bave been right, gud the downatists wrond. Aud beforo Jeaving this line of thougbt, ¢t me refer azainto’ what s still fresh L afl our winds, 1o the fuct of still suother refurmatiod by Hisbops Cuwmivgs sud Chency i tho Re- Church, all " over quf word, aod that word couyeying - e 0 Inuch s0 as to bo the grusp or but trained i [