tures lead us to believe that all the operations of the Divine Providence are with a view to promote the happiness of humanity, both in heaven and on earth. Such an event then does not comport with such a Providence; and no one can suppose that God would do it for His own pleasure or caprice. The earth is what the Lord has created it to be: can He become dissatisfied with the work of His own hands, or will He in the course of ages, discover some imperfection in the wisdom by which it was created? Ideas like these cannot be entertained for a moment. Why then should it be supposed that He will withdraw His preserving care, and provide for the overthrow of that which has required the activity of infinite love and wisdom to produce? We feel assured that every act of the Divine Providence is an act of mercy intended to confer some advantage upon mankind: to think otherwise would compel us to believe that God is not a Being of infinite love; how then can this advantage be promoted by an act which is to involve the universe in flames? Surely if those arguments be duly weighed, the notion must be relinquished. It cannot be maintained without abandoning all consideration of use; closing the eyes against the benevolence of Providence; denying express statements of the Word; regarding God as the destroyer of that which He creates; and charging Him with change, notwithstanding He changes not, and is the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever. The same love which led to the creation of the world, has superintended its preservation; and, as there is no reason to believe that this love will ever be diminished or withdrawn, the conclusion is evident that it must endure for ever.
We might pursue this argument to a greater length, but it is hoped enough has been said to induce some reflection on the subject. We therefore commend the whole argu-
