Search -
A Discussion of the Doctrines of Endless Misery and Universal Salvation; In an Epistolary Correspondence
A Discussion of the Doctrines of Endless Misery and Universal Salvation In an Epistolary Correspondence Author:Alexander Campbell General Books publication date: 2009 Original publication date: 1840 Original Publisher: C.C.P. Grosh Subjects: Future punishment Religion / Christian Theology / General Religion / Christian Theology / Soteriology Religion / Christian Theology / Systematic Religion / Eschatology Notes: This is a black and white OCR reprint of the... more » original. It has no illustrations and there may be typos or missing text. When you buy the General Books edition of this book you get free trial access to Million-Books.com where you can select from more than a million books for free. Excerpt: PREFACE. In presenting the following theological discussion to a reading and inquiring public, we do not deem it necessary to burden the reader with a long and unmeaning preface. We would simply say that the discussion was commenced in the " Millennial Harbinger," in 1835, by a writer over the signature of " Spencer," probably without any anticipations of the extent to which it has ultimately been carried. Mr. Campbell's Reply accompanied the publication of Spencer's letter. Some months having elapsed without any further notice of the matter, Mr. Montgomery, of Auburn, N. Y., took up the subject, and addressed a letter, partly in reply, and partly of inquiry, to Mr. CM who published the letter, together with his own rejoinder, in February, 1836. Here the matter rested till the June following, when Mr. C., on his way to Boston, Mass., visited Auburn, and Mr. Mi held an interview with him. Mr. M. proposed to continue the discussion in a friendly manner with Mr. C., which had already been begun in the Harbinger. Mr. C. objected to it on the alleged grounds of Mr. M.'s youth and want of notoriety, saying that, should he triumphantly refute all that Mr. M. might advance, it would, for these reasons, be little regarded by the public. Mr. M. then proposed choosing a substitute to whom such objections would not apply, and mentioned the name of Mr. Skinner, into whose hands he would like to resign...« less