The Wyandot pioneer. (Upper Sandusky, Ohio) 1853-1868, 1864-03-18
MIR. NYE TO MIR. WEBSTER,
LETTER II.

DEAR SIR: Il have never yet been en-
gagged in but one written, and one oral
debate, but this brief experience has
shown the wisdom Of dropping minor is
sues and rigidly sdhering' to the main
proposition in all discussions of this
kind.
In affirming my proposition, the ques-
ton Of future punishment has no proper
place. Under our second question the
points will legitimaely come before us
In stating my belief that God "will
render unto every man according to his
Deeds it is not incumbent on me to har.
monlze that belief, or testimony, with
your doctrine concerning forgivness. II
you deny that God will render unto eve
ry man according TO his deeds. you must
reconcile your position with the Bi
BILE in your'own time and way.
Nor does our question hinge. on the
conditionality of salvation. In the Gov
ernment Of God, cannot result be Ger
tain, and yet means be indispensable to
work out that result? An end, foreseen
and revealed, must be absolutely sure, no
matter what conditions are involved.
In treating the argument from the con-
test, between Evil and Good, you allow
that the conflict exists and that some Fl
nal result will be reached. But what re-
suit Why non-committal on that point :?
But 'evil sometimes predominales and
sometimes good" 80 error seems
sometimes to vanquish truth, and slavery
win temporary power. But does God
ever lose bsttle, or order a retreat And
five concede that liberty will uproot slave
ry, and truth conquer error, must we not
grant Righteousness will conquer in,and
good overcome Evil, and God finally
reign supreme in every heart ?
But" Goodness triumphs sometimes not
by the reformation, but the destruction
Of the evil doer'' The statement is OBJ
scure- Do you mean The annihilation Of
the evil doer? Or his physical death If
the latter, you assume that he who dies an
evil doer, ''is destroyed" Besides. does
goodness triumph by removing him from
a world where reformation is possible, to
a world where it is not, and where he
must not only remain in evil. but grow
worse aud worse forever =?
l have shown that God has undertaken
to put "the rebellion" down, and, for
this purpose clothed Christ with pow
er "to subdue all things unto himself"
You ask. "1s he to do this absolutely,
or upon conditions % He is to do it GER
tainly, l respond; not by coercive force,
but moral power, not without means, bul
by the abundant means which God has
appointed will Christ drow all men unto
himself.
You counsel an adherence to "Lh9
loric of fact" rather than "Lhe logic OF
lancy,' lin treating this point, Here, there,
are two plain facts t. Sin is in the world
and men are involved in guilt and wo.
2. God has sent His Son to save the
world !; given Him wisdom aud power to
accomplish that work. viii God effect
what he has undertaken Will Christ
reconcile the world unto God Instead
OF looking. steadily at these facts, you i'm
dulge your fancy with such enquiries as
these: Gould God have prevented sin
in the first place - "Has he more power
to subdue il, than he had to prevent il r
"Will his foes become weaker, and he
stronger, until He is able to conquer the
rebellion now growing upon his hands ?"
From an Atheist, or a free thinker,
such questions might be expected, but
do they not come with an i'll grace from q
Christian Preacher, and indicate very