No; for they must be righteous, and no rightcous man will mourn for the loss of his faults. Will wickedness, separated from the sinner, wail, because it is cast into the furnace of fire? It cannot; for separate from the sinner, it cannot exist. The subject must therefore be clear in favor of future punishment.

The next passage to be considered, Matt. xviii. 6, if it be not accounted direct in favor of punishment in future life; yet it must be acknowledged, it imposes a restraint against offences which no disbeliever of future punishment was ever known to use. Were it given to offenders to choose whether they would suffer the usual consequences arising in this life from offending those little ones that believe in Christ, or suffer the exemplary death of sinking in the sea, by the pondrous load of a millstone, it is believed they would readily prefer the former. But Christ has told them, they are in danger of something worse than the latter.

5.

The scripture next following is, Luke xii. 4,

Here we are faithfully exhorted not to fear them that kill the body, because after killing the body they can do no more. But we are forewarned to fear him who after he hath killed the body, hath power to cast into hell. There must be then a power to cast into hell, after the killing of the body. Such a power being proved, it proves the power of future misery and punishment. It no longer re

mains in the light of scripture to say it cannot be, when we find a plain allusion to one that is able to execute it.

But perhaps it will be said the ability of our Maker to cast into hell after the killing of the body does not prove that there is any danger of future punishment strictly speaking ;or that any will be punished in hell after the body is killed. But it must be acknowledg ed Christ forewarned to fear God through the medium of this motive. The question then is, whether he used imaginary ideas to terrify and induce to the fear of God, or whether be dealt in simplicity and honesty. Was he like those parents that tell their children, the bears will catch them, when they believe no bears are nigh? Experience has taught the most wise and prudent among men, that it is best in all persuasives to virtue, or dissuasives from vice, which are delivered as precepts that men have opportunity to examine, not to urge them on false and imaginary prin ciples, but on such as are founded in fact.Will they then attribute that to the Savior of men, of which they would not be guilty themselves? It seems they must, to avoid the idea of punishment in future life, from the passage under consideration.

The doctrine of restraint from vice through fear of impending evil, by some is considered useless and absurd. But it is evident it must have its proper use to restrain and deter, as

"A

well as the influence of filial regard. prudent man," says Solomon, "foreseeth the evil and hideth himself." Why? Evidently because he is afraid of its pernicious effects, St. Paul said, "if thou do that which is evil, be afraid." Likewise in the preceding verse, "for rulers are not a terror to good works but to evil." Wilt thou not then be afraid of the power? If the fear of punishment have no force to restrain men from vice, why did Christ and his apostles urge it in the manner in which we find they have? But those very men that are so much opposed to the idea of the fear of punishment having any use to restrain, could not be persuaded to hold their hands in flaming fire, for no other reason than the fear of being burned; nor would they like to take a potion of arsenic, because they fear it would poison them.

In view of the subject of future punishment we will turn to Rom. ii. 3, 6, 16. The intervening verses between these serve to explain the doctrine they contain. In the 3d verse the question is asked concerning him who judges and condemns another, and yet perpetrates the same offences himself, "And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?" The plain import of this question is, he will not escape. But should we consider the judg ment to be nothing but wha men experience

as they pass the journey of life, should w not take away the whole force of the question? In the 4th verse, the apostle adds another in these words: "Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness, and forbearance, and long suffering; not knowing that the goodness of God teacheth thee to repentance ?" Misery and punishment in some measure may begin and be immediately connected with the crime; but if punishment always end with the crime, what could we understand by "the forbearance and long suffering" of God? Although he forbear, yet they are exposed to a due reward unless they repent, as we find in the next verses. "But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath, and revelation of the righteous judgment of God: Who will render to every man according to his deeds." Of the manner of this retribution, we are particularly informed. "Eternal life, to them who by patient continuance in well doing, seek for glory, and honor, and immortality. Glory, honor, and peace, to every man that worketh good: But to every soul of man that doeth evil, the recompence is tribulation and anguish. Indignation and wrath are to them who are contentious, and disregarding the truth, obey unrighteousness." The apostle has also in the 16th verse of the same chapter, after a parenthetical explanation of the subject, stated the time of this general retri

bution to be "in the day, when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to his gospel." Can there be any dispute but the day here noted is the day when we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ to give account for the deeds done in the body, whether they be good or bad? This day has been proved in a former Lecture to be in future life. It is, therefore, plain from this text, that St. Paul was a believer in future retribution; and consequently in future misery and punishment.

The passage in 2 Thess. i. 7, 8, 9, appears to me to refer to the same time of future punishment. St. Paul informed the brethren that were troubled, they should rest with them when the Lord Jesus should be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels. The time of his revelation, St. Paul then held to be future. If we are to understand the passage figuratively, the Lord Jesus' revelation from heaven with his mighty angels, to be the power of the gospel in demonstration of the spirit by the able ministers of the New Testament, why did he speak of it as being future? In what age was the gospel preached by more powerful ministers ? or Christ by his spirit more powerfully revealed than he had been before and at the time the apostle wrote this epistle? It is evident in none. Then according to this interpretation the text yet remains to be fulfilled; although it be not