THE

CURSE OF THE DIVINE LAW:

A DISCOURSE

DELIVERED IN THE METHODIST CHURCH IN SPRINGfield, MASS. AFTER THE CLOSE OF THE PRECEDING DISCUSSION.

BY REV. W. FISK, A. M.

Principal of the Wesleyan Academy, Wilbraham, Mass.

ADVERTISEMENT.

BEFORE the commencement of the discussion which gave rise to the preceding lectures of the Rev. T. Merritt, Mr. Paige, the Universalist advocate, was informed that probably I should take some part in the controversy; and when the discussion between him and my worthy brother was closed, Mr. Paige was informed that I was about to deliver one or two discourses on the subject in the Methodist church in Springfield, and if he desired it, he might have the privilege of replying: but if he did reply he might expect an immediate answer, and that the disputed point should be discussed, and, if possible, settled one way or the other on the spot. This offer Mr. Paige, for reasons best known to himself, declined. Some reasons it is true were offered by him, but whether they were the

leading ones in his mind, remains a question on which those acquainted with the circumstances will undoubtedly form their own opinion. The discourses, however, were delivered, and at the request of the Methodist society in Springfield are now furnished for publication, together with the foregoing; and the public must judge whether they contain arguments of any weight in deciding the great question between Universalists and anti-Universalists. Some of the following arguments I have never before seen published; others have been urged before, and ought to be urged again and again, in all the various and possible forms that truth is capable of putting on; for they have never been answered, and it is believed never can be to the satisfaction of even their opposers themselves. For some of the arguments in the first discourse, and for the method of reasoning adopted in the second proposition, I acknowledge myself indebted to Dr. Edwards, in his reply to Dr. Chauncey; a work which ought to be more generally known and read. It is indeed true that many of his arguments are aimed against a modification of Universalism, materially different in its character from the form now more generally in vogue; still Universalism, in all its forms, depends upon certain fundamental principles, to destroy which is to destroy every form of the doctrine. Edwards has done, and done too in his own masterly manner.

This

The second discourse, containing objections against Universalism, might be easily enlarged

to a great extent. My collection of objections is small and imperfect; not because nothing more could be said, but because other important and pressing duties would not permit me to add more. There however are more, it is believed, than the advocates of this system can readily and fairly dispose of; and when they may think they have done this, they will but just have begun their work; for this system is so directly opposed to all that is rational and Scriptural, that objections may be raised against it, numerous and strong. Let the candid weigh them. W. FISK.

Wilbraham, Mass.

DISCOURSE I.

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us," Gal. iii, 13.

THE text which we have selected, as it contains the foundation and essence of the whole Gospel system, lies, of course, in direct opposition to all erroneous systems; and especially will a correct illustration of it wholly destroy, it is believed, that confused and dangerous system of error, which, under various aspects, and in a variety of forms, bears the name of Universalism.

And in the following discourse it is proposed to examine this system of Universalism under the several forms and mutations which it has put on, within these few years past, in our country. In attempting to do this we may inquire what that law is from which Christ hath redeemed us-what is the curse of the law, and how the redemption of Christ affects that law and its curse.

I. What is the law from which Christ hath redeemed us?

This can be no other than the moral law of God, that universal rule of righteousness which is binding on all men, in all ages of the world: it cannot mean the ceremonial or any other law peculiar to the Jews, or to our first parents;

because the verse immediately following our text goes on to show the extent of the blessing procured by redemption from that law," that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Christ." So that the law from which Christ redeemed us was a law that extended to the Gentiles also, otherwise a redemption from its curse would not profit them. But to decide this point at once it must be acknowledged that the law here spoken of is as extensive as the redemption itself. By whatever limitation, therefore, you restrict the law, by the same you limit the blessings and designs of the redemption. But the redemption relates to all mankind, to Jew and to Gentile, therefore the law, from the curse of which Christ hath redeemed man, extends to all men. what law can this be but that code of righteous and unchangeable principles that is universally binding upon the human family? There is no other universal law, and therefore this is the law here spoken of.

But

II. We are to inquire what is the curse of this law. The curse of God's law must mean loss, punishment, or suffering, of some kind and in some degree. This the word imports, and so the Scriptures represent it. It therefore follows that this curse must imply either the loss of existence itself, that is, annihilation; or it must imply existence affected, more or less, longer or shorter, with some kind of positive suffering or loss. We will spend a few moments in inquiring whether the idea of annihilation is