Let us regard Him

fall into the hands of the living God." who has spoken from heaven, and not forget that he has threatened the destruction of the soul and body, after the death of the body, in hell. He will not be trifled with, but demands obedience of the mightiest spirit that burns before his terrible throne. "The Lord God omnipotent reigns." [Time expired.]

MR. MANFORD'S CLOSING SPEECH.

RESPECTED AUDITORS:

There is perhaps no better evidence that Mr. Franklin cannot answer my last speech, than the fact that he, in the outset, pronounced it destitute of argument! Surely the gentleman will never suffer any from excessive modesty! He is one of those men who can make up in boasting, what they lack in argument. In this respect, I confess that he has the advantage of me; and were the assertions true, which he made in his last speech, or even a respectable portion of them, I might well begin to fear he also had the advan tage of me, in point of argument! But I flatter myself that this intelligent audience possesses discrimination enough to distinguish between argument and bare assertion.

I must confess there is quite a difference between the gentleman and myself, in our way of thinking and feeling! He flatters himself with the delusive idea, that he has taken from me my main proof-texts, and seems to imagine that I feel very bad under the circumstances. Now, I must assure you that I consider my proof-texts very safe, even after hearing the gentleman's last speech; and that I have not the least consciousness of feeling bad, perplexed, or in any difficulty whatever, on account of what he has done, nor even in anticipation of what he may yet do. Though I

do not wish to boast, yet this is precisely my situation; and if it will do my friend, Mr. Franklin, any good thus to talk and boast and console himself, why I am willing for him to do it; for the Lord knows he has a hard enough time of it, and needs all the consolation he can get. I am not disposed "to cry" for the gentleman, but really after hearing his last speech, I can but feel to pity him-not so much for his inability to defend his doctrine, with its errors and absurdities-for this I expected before hand; but for, I hardly know what to say, but I will say for either his foolhardiness, or his ignorance! I allude to his still persisting in his stupid criticism on the idea of being "in Christ,' and being "saved from sin in the future world!" In regard to the phrase "in Christ," I referred to Gal. 3: 27, where persons are said to be "baptized into Christ," and to "put on Christ;" and to the saying: "he that is in Christ is a new creature," (2 Cor. 5: 17,) to show that there is such a thing as being in Christ, in this world. This I did, in order to refute the gentleman's absurd idea that in Christ meant place! Believers are said to be in Christ in this life--that is, in a certain qualified sense, they are in his image; and being in this state or condition, they are justified. Now, I have not said to be in Christ, in the resurrection, means simply "justification"-it means to be in his image-in a state or condition, which also implies or includes "justification." As those who are "in Christ," in this world are in a "justified' state, so also, will those who are "in Christ" in the resurrection, be in a "justified" state; and I have triumphantly shown that all mankind, or all who die in Adam, will be "in Christ" in the resurrection. This, I affirm 1 have proved, if language can be framed that will prove it. It is not those who are "in Christ" in this world, in the figurative sense of being in him by "baptism," or by "faith," that are to be made alive in him, in the resurrection; but all who die in Adam, are to be made alive in Christ. This is the point, and the gentleman cannot avoid it, although he has tried hard to do so! He sometimes affects to misunderstand me; but whether he understands me or not, I am inclined to think this audience understands me. Mr. Franklin, no doubt, feels the argument if he don't understand it!

The gentleman allows that the passage, "As in Adam

"In the waters of In the 2d chapter of

all die, even so, in Christ shall all be made alive," should read, “As by Adam all die, even so, by Christ shall all be made alive." Then, instead of saying, "If any man be in Christ he is a new creature," it should read. “If any man be by Christ," &c. And "Blessed are the dead that die by the Lord"-"So also is the resurrection of the dead : It is sown by corruption, it is raised by incorruption; it is sown by dishonor, it is raised by glory; it is sown by weakness, it is raised by power;" "always abounding by the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not by vain by the Lord!" Thus, you see what kind of theology our friend would teach, by changing the preposition in to by! But let us notice a few more examples, beginning with the first word in the Bible, or as Mr F. would say, by the Bible. "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth," i. e., by the beginning. "Let there be lights in the firmament," i. e. by the firmament. the sea," i. e. by the waters of the sea. Genesis, we read: "In the seventh day, in it he rested,” i. e. by the seventh day, by it he rested. "He planted a garden in Eden,” i. e. by Eden; "in the midst of the garden,” i. e. by the midst of it! The Greek word in all these places, as in the text under consideration, is en; and if it does not primarially and definitely mean in, then our first parents were never in the garden of Eden-Noah and his family were never in the Ark-Pharoah and his host were not drowned in the Red sea-the children of Israel were never in the wilderness, and John did not come crying in the wilderness and "baptising in Jordan," but came "crying by the wilderness" and "baptizing by Jordan!" Jonah was not three days and nights in the whale's belly, but only by the whale's belly! Lazarus was not in the grave, but only by it; the rich man was not in hell, but only by hell! Murderers, fornicators, thieves, liars, &c., shall not have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, but only by it! Neither Christ nor any body else was ever baptized in the river Jordan, or in any other water, but but only by it! The controversy between the Campbellites and the Pedo-baptists, for the last twenty years, has been on this very little word-the former contending for the first and primary meaning of the word, viz: IN, while the others claimed that it might sometimes mean at, near to, by,

66

&c. And I will venture to say that were Mr. Franklin to get into a debate with a "sprinkler," on the subject of baptism, he would manfully contend that en means in, now and forever, and he would probably say as did Mr. Campbell, in his debate with Mr. Maccalla, after showing some of the absurdities of his opponent's translation of the word, "These and ten thousand new discoveries, originate from this new translation of en, made for the relief, and by the talents of, infant sprinklers."

I deny the gentleman's criticism. The primary meaning of the Greek word en, is in; while the corresponding word, for by, is the Greek did. And although en is sometimes translated by other words than that of in, yet, as Mr. Campbell says in a note, page 313, in his debate with Maccalla; "Ev. ery meaning ascribed to en, can be resolved into in." The first and primary meaning of the word, therefore, is IN, and is correctly translated in the passage : "As in Adam all die, i. c. in his image or nature, even so, (the same all) shall be made alive in Christ, i. e. in his image or nature."

My friend may labor till the day of his death, and he can never make en, mean by; and I only alluded to the matter, to expose his unwarrantable assumption—not that his translation would in the least affect the completeness of the argument in favor of the final holiness and happiness of all; for whether made alive in Christ or by Christ, they are to be immortal, incorruptible, glorious, and heavenly, and, as in this life they "bear the image of the earthy," so in that life shall they "hear the image of the heavenly."

Now in regard to salvation from sin in a world where there is no sin. This the gentleman thinks a paradox. I thought I made this matter so plain in my last, that even he who runs might read! I tell you, my friends, there are none so blind as those who won't see. I perceive I shall have to use more plainness of speech. This question was raised by MrFranklin himself, by saying that men could not be saved in the future world, for there would be no sin there to be saved from. Now, notwithstanding all that has been said on this subject, the only difference between us is, that while he believes that a part of mankind will be saved from sin in the future world, I believe that all will be. I presume I am not mistaken in this assertion. Does Mr. F. believe that any

If he does, he believes a

are saved from sin" in this life? great deal more than I do-and a great deal more than he can prove! I presume the gentleman will allow that people are no better now than they were in the days of the primitive church; and that if any body were ever "saved from sin" in this life, it was the apostles and early christians.-But hear what the beloved apostle John says, in writing to his christian brethren. "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us," 1 Jno. 1: 8. "For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not," Eccl. 7: 20. Here it is emphatically declared that there is not even a just man on earth that does not sin. Again: "If they sin against thee, for there is no man that sinneth not," 1 Kings 8: 46. The truth is, my friends, no man is entirely saved from sin in this life; that were an impossibility. True, the scriptures sometimes speak of being "saved from sin," "without sin," "free from sin," &c., in this life; but such expressions must be understood in a comparative sense. No man, I care not how good he was, ever lived in the flesh who was entirely free, or saved from sin, while in the flesh. All are subject-are liable to sin.Hear Paul, in speaking of himself: "Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me; for I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing; for to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I find not," Rom. 7: 18, 19. What mean all those commandments of the Savior and the apostles-"if a brother sin, forgive him," yea to "seventy times seven ?"--and those repeated exhortation to the christians--to the saved-to sin not, to avoid sin, &c.? Do they not imply that the best were not entirely free from sin that they were not, and could not be, entirely and completely "saved from sin" in this mortal life? Most assuredly. No man, I repeat, can be fully and completely saved from sin in this world-there is not such thing, in the strict sense of the phrase, as being saved from sin in this life. And how could there be? "How then can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean that is born of a woman? Behold even to the moon, and it shineth not; yea the stars are not pure in his sight: How much less man, that is a worm, and the son of man, which is a worm ?"-Job,