as this life is spiritual, incorruptible and immortal, this testimony agrees with the testimony of Jesus to the Sadducees on the same subject of the resurrection, in which he says, that in the resurrection they are the children of God, equal unto the angels, and can die no more. In this debate with the Sadducees, Jesus gave no intimation that any would rise from the dead to a state of condemnation, but was particular in saying that all live unto God.

In our present light of this subject, we can plainly see, that by supposing that Jesus spake in our text of the same subject of which he spake in his reply to the Sadducees, we make him contradict himself. And by supposing that our text is a testimony of the same event of which St. Paul spake in his argument on the resurrection in the 15th of the 1st of Corinthians, we set the testimony of Je-. sus and St. Paul, at an irreconcilable, variance.

By applying, in an indiscriminate manner, those passages of scripture which specially belong to the temporal, mutable state of man in this life, and those which speak of an immortal state, all to the future existence of mankind, the greatest absurdities have been supported by the scriptures. In the same way the dispute between those who contend for salvation by the agency of the creature, and those who maintain that works are out of the question relative to salvation, has been protracted for ages in the christian church. And yet if the passages of scripture, which are quoted on both sides of the argument were applied to their res pective subjects, there would be no room for dispute or occasion for any difference of sentiment.

For instance, the account we have of the judg ment in the 25th of Matthew, proceeds according to the works of those who are judged; and those who are welcome to the kingdom, are justified according to their works, and those who are sentenced to punishment are so condemned according to their conduct..

3

Now as this passage is applied to the eternal state of the unseen world by both parties in the dispute just named, those who rest the final justification of the creature on his works, seem to have a decided advantage in the dispute. And it is all in vain for the opposer to try to reconcile this passage with his notion of justifying the creature to everlasting life in the eternal world, without any reference to his good works in this world. This he will not attempt to do; but in order to do away the force of this judgment, he quotes some passages which speak of grace to the exclusion of works; such as the following: "Who hath saved us and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace. Not by works of righteousness, which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us. By grace are ye saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. Not of works lest any man should boast. Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned of grace but of debt; but to him that worketh not, but believeth on him who justifieth the ungodly, his faith is accounted unto him for righteousness." As it is perfectly evident that these passages on the very face of them, were designed to set forth the grace and salvation of God in a way to exclude the works of

as this life is spiritual, incorruptible and immortal, this testimony agrees with the testimony of Jesus to the Sadducees on the same subject of the resurrection, in which he says, that in the resurrection they are the children of God, equal unto the angels, and can die no more. In this debate with the Sadducees, Jesus gave no intimation that any would rise from the dead to a state of condemnation, but was particular in saying that all live unto God.

In our present light of this subject, we can plainly see, that by supposing that Jesus spake in our text of the same subject of which he spake in his reply to the Sadducees, we make him contradict himself. And by supposing that our text is a testimony of the same event of which St. Paul spake in his argument on the resurrection in the 15th of the 1st of Corinthians, we set the testimony of Jesus and St. Paul, at an irreconcilable variance.

By applying, in an indiscriminate manner, those passages of scripture which specially belong to the temporal, mutable state of man in this life, and those which speak of an immortal state, all to the future existence of mankind, the greatest absurdities have been supported by the scriptures. In the same way the dispute between those who contend for salvation by the agency of the creature, and those who maintain that works are out of the question relative to salvation, has been protracted for ages in the christian church. And yet if the passages of scripture, which are quoted on both sides of the argument were applied to their respective subjects, there would be no room for dispute or occasion for any difference of sentiment.

actly as it did when began, and where it must stand until these disputants come to a determination to understand particular passages of the scriptures according to the particular subjects to which. they respectively belong.

in

All those passages which speak of judging and. rewarding men according to their works, have their true and just application to that divine economy which our heavenly Father administers to his mor tal offspring that discipline, which grows from his love and faithfulness, and which our imperfection requires.

On the other hand, all those passages, which speak of the abundant grace of God, of his great love to sinners, of his saving us, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, have their true and just application to that divinely and gracious economy of the Father of our spirits, in which he has made ample provision for the spiritual and eternal welfare of all mankind. And if we are careful to keep the different subjects of which the scriptures treat, as distinct from each other as the divine testimony requires, we shall never apply the passage under consideration to the immortal state of man; nor is it believed, by your servant, that any other passage can be found, which speaks of rewarding men for their good works, and of punishing others for their evil works, which can, with the least color of propriety be applied to the state of man, when this mortal shall have put on immortality, and this corruptible incorruption. To pretend that it is not convenient or proper for men to be rewarded in

the saved as the ground of such salvation, the argument now fairly turns in favor of the other side; for here are more passages than the one brought in favor of the contrary side..

What is the next thing to be done? Does he who predicates salvation on works, undertake to show that the passages last quoted do not indicate the fact for which they are adduced? No; for this would be labor lost; it would be as easy to prove that these passages mean nothing. What then does he do? He proceeds to quote some more scripture on the other side, such as the following: The willing and obedient shall eat the good of the land, but if ye rebel ye shall be devoured with the sword, for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it. The soul that sinneth it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Say ye to the righteous that it shall be well with him; for they shall eat the fruit of their doings. Woe unto the wicked! it shall be ill with him; for the reward of his hands shall be given him. 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. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in the body according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad." As it is perfectly evident that these last quoted passages do not indicate that men are justified without good works, but in consequence of them, the dispute stands ex