(I Tim. 4: 10). The "alls" and the "many" of Rom. 5:, and such statements as, "In those

days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth

are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the

sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge" (Jer. 31: 29, 20); the omission of the tribe of

Dan from Rev. 7:, yet its inclusion in Ezek. 48:; the promise that Sodom shall be

restored (Ezek. 16: 53); that Egypt and Assyria are to be blessed (Isa. 19: 24, 25);

these, and many more passages must be dealt with.  But this could not be undertaken

with any fairness so long as the mind is obsessed with the idea that whatever the

Scripture may say, yet finally there is to be a universal reconciliation which necessitates a

revival from the lake of fire and sets us on the search to find a passage which may be

taken as teaching it.

Our study of the Word has made us repudiate the Pagan teaching of man's inherent

immortality, and likewise the orthodox teaching concerning eternal conscious torment.

We have been led to see that the Bible has not eternity as its theme, but the ages. We

find that the vast majority of earth's teeming myriads have been allowed to die with the

same carnal mind with which they were born, and that the natural man is utterly

incapable of performing the slightest act that will in any sense procure his salvation. We

have been compelled to see that no one has received life and salvation except he has been

already elected, but we have learned sufficient truth to avoid the error of Calvinism

(though rejoicing in much that is true therein), that the non-elect are necessarily

reprobated and predestined to irrevocable condemnation. We believe that the Word

teaches that all men are dead in trespasses and sins, and that the elect only receive life

now, but that as surely as Adam brought death upon all, so surely does Christ bring life to

all. What we do not believe, however, is that this life given to all is synonymous with the

life given to believers, and that it is equivalent to justification and glory.

Until the reconciliation is seen in its true light it will be impossible to approach such

subjects as these unbiased. The reconciliation being dispensational in character, and past

in time, cannot have any effect upon these themes, and consequently we shall be free to

consider each passage on its own merits, and not feel compelled to interpret it according

to some prior conclusion.

We have been asked why it is we have not adopted the translation "conciliation," and

"reconciliation," for katalassõ and apokatalassõ.  While we appreciate the manifest

desire to exhibit the different words used, yet as the suggested translation gives colour to

the idea that the "reconciliation" grows out of, or is the development of "conciliation,"

we cannot accept it. The reconciliation of the epistles before Acts 28: has no

necessary connection with that of Ephesians and Colossians.  It would have been

complete, and have fulfilled its purpose, had the dispensation of the mystery never been

revealed. We still feel the need of some translation that will point out the difference, but

which will, at the same time, prevent the mind from concluding that the fuller word is but

the lesser word received and enjoyed. Those who "received the reconciliation" (Rom. 5:)

were not enjoying the reconciliation of Eph. 2: or Col. 1: We shall welcome help from

any reader relative to a good translation of katalassõ and apokatalassõ.