support of the endless wretchedness of the sinner. (See verse 20.)

SECTION

XI.

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die." Exekiel xviii. 4.

The Prophet in the use of this sentiment, was combatting the Jewish Proverb that "the fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge"; and Jehovah declared, that there should be no more occasion to use this proThe son shall not bear

verb in Israel, for all souls are his. the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son,-the soul that sinneth, it shall die.' What that death was, may be ascertained from our remarks on Gen. ii 17. and from the context of the passage under considera. tion.

SECTION XII.

"And many of them which sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. "Daniel, xii. 2.

The verse preceeding describes the time when the event here recorded was to take place :-'when Michael should stand up, the great Prince which standeth for the children of thy people.' It will be conceded, that the Prophet had reference here, to Christ. The allusion to the 'taking away of the daily sacrifice,' in the 11th verse of the same chapter, proves that reference; and the quotation, by our Saviour, in Mat. xxiv. 23, of the language of Daniel, and his pointed application of this prophecy to the calamities then about to fall upon Jerusalem, in the 15th, 16th, and succeeding verses, where he says, "then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains," &c. will settle, beyond the shadow of a doubt, the meaning of the text. A moral resurrection to a life of faith in the Gospel of Christ, and to the condemnation of unbelief, (see John v. 25, 28, & 29,) was certainly intended by the inspired penman.

SECTION XIII,

"O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the w.ath to come." Math. iii. 7.

This language was addressed by John the Baptist to the

Pharisees aud Saducees, and is supposed by the most eminent Commentators, to refer to the destruction coming upon the Jews. Rishop Pearce says, the 'wrath to come' means the 'punishment to come in the destruction of the Jewish state.' Kenrick-the impending punishment in the destruction of the Jewish state'. Dr. A. Clarke.-'the desolation which was about to full on the Jewish nation.' Such is the testimony of the standard authorities of the Limitarian Churches.

SECTION XIV.

"He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” Math. iii. 12. Luke, iii. 17.

It is supposed by many that the righteous are here intended by the wheat and the wicked by the chaff-the former to be gathered into the garner of heaven, at the last day, and the latter to be burned up with unquenchable fire, in the prison. house of hell. And suppose we admit the idea, for a mo. ment. What advantage will it give the opponents of univer. sal grace? None truly, for it will then be hard to prove, from this or any other passage, that the wicked being burned up in unquenchable flames, even as chaff, will continue to exist, in a consuming yet unconsumed state, throughout eterni. ty! Similar language, moreover, is applied to temporal things, as will appear by a reference to the sixth section of this chapter. By the chaff, Dr. Clarke understands the 're. bellious Jews,' and by 'unquenchable fire', one that 'cannot be extinguished by man.' And this view is entertained by other commentators, of the endless punishment school.

SECTION XV.

"Therefore I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause, shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, thou fool, shall be in danger of hell-fire." Mat. v. 22.

Here are three different degrees of punishment, for as ma. ny offences, differing but little in their nature, only one of which is supposed, however, to relate to a future world. This, of itself, ought to be sufficient to show the inconsistency between the creeds of men and the teachings of Christ, for it

is commonly supposed, that 'hell-fire' is the appropriate doom of the little as well as the great sinner, if they die impenitent. But here there is an infinite distinction in the punishment of actions, which seem to us to vary but little, in moral turpitude! How is this? The matter cannot be explained satisfactorily on the supposition, that 'hell-fire,' in the text, refers to the future world. But in view of the fact, that the phrase hell is a translation of Gehenna-a proper noun which means the Valley of Hinnom,' the difficulty vanishes at once. The whole matter is then seen to apply to the different punish. ments among the Jews, as thus correctly described by Dr. Clarke, in his notes on this passage:

"Shall be in danger of hell-fire-shall be liable to the hell of fire. Our Lord here alludes to the valley of the Son of Hinnom. This place was near Jerusalem, and had been for. merly used for those abominable sacrifices, in which the idolatrous Jews has caused their children to pass through the fire to Moloch. A particular place in this valley was called Tophet, the fire-stove, in which some suppose they burnt their children alive to the above idol.". He further says, after speaking of the three offences noted in the text"now, proportioned to these three offences were three dif ferent degrees of punishment, each exceeding the other in its severity, as the offences exceeded each other in their different degrees of guilt. 1. The Judgment, the council of twenty-three,which could inflict the punishment of strangling.f 2. The Sanhedrin, or great council, which could inflict the punishment of stoning. And 3, the being burnt alive in the valley of the Son of Hinnom. This appears to be the meaning of our Lord."

Dr. Parkhurst, the author of a Greek Lexicon, says that the phrase translated hell-fire, literally Gehenna of fire, does, in in its outward and primary sense, relate to that dreadful doom of being burnt alive in the valley of Hinnom'; and Dr. Macknight says, "the valley of Hinnom, called also Tophet, was the scene of the detestable worship of Moloch, that hor. rid idol, to whom the Israelites burnt their children alive, as

sacrifices. In after times, continual fires were kept in this valley for burning the unburied carcasses and filth of the city, that being thus polluted, it might be unfit for the like religious abominations.' So also Rosenmuller, Wakefield and others. Notwithstanding this explicit testimony, we find these very same commentators understand the word Gehenna figu. ratively to denote the doom of the damned in a future world. That it is used figuratively we doubt not, but that it is ever applied to the retributions of eternity cannot be made to appear. No figure can ever be of stronger signification than the reality from which it is taken. Hence an endles hell can never be figuratively set forth by a word, which all admit to be of local application in its primary signification.

SECTION XVI.

"And if thy right eye offend thee pluck it out and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee, that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell." Math. v. 29, 30. xviii. 8, 9. Mark ix. 43, 48.

Understanding this passage in a literal sense, and as referring to a future and immortal life, it would teach that pluck. ing out a right eye or cutting off a right hand might be the means of saving the whole body from being cast into hell, an idea which none will admit, for a moment. To interpret it as referring to some cherished sin, which ought rather to be cut off than to endanger the soul, would imply that a man may enter heaven with some sins, (or members) if he only cuts off the offending one. Or, as the parallel passages have it—a man may enter into the resurrection state halt or maim. ed-that is, with one eye, hand, or foot! The phrase, “It is better to enter into life halt or maimed," certainly teaches this absurdity, if the word life means heaven. Again, if plucking out the eye, and cutting off the hand or foot, signifies parting with some possession, dear as those members, and this is necessary to secure endless life, then it would seem that we can reach the eternal world, having with us other posses. sions equally dear to us as those we have parted with-for the

remaining hand, foot, and eye, would bear the same interpre tation! Furthermore, by parting with an offending member (or possession) and retaining its counterpart, it is represented that a man may have possessions both in heaven and in hell! And if it be true, that where a man's treasure is, there will his heart be also,' there will, we opine, be many an anxious look from the battlements of heaven after the lost possessions in the regions below!

All these ridiculous conclusions can however be obviated by confining the text to its proper reference-which is, that it were better to give up all earthly possessions rather than fail of an entrance into the enjoyments of that everlasting life' which is the present result of faith in the Gospel of Christ, or, in other words, it were better to part with every thing which would interfere with the duties of a Christian disciple, rather than, by keeping any cherished possession, to expose themselves to the signal destruction threatened against the re bellious. The fact that the early Christians heeded the signs of danger given to them, and escaped the calamities (set forth by the phrase Gehenna, translated hell) in which Judea was involved, corroborates this view of the subject.

SECTION XVII.

"Enter ye in at the srait rate: for wide is the gate, broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: because strait is the gate and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." Math. vii. 13, 14. Luke xiii. 23, 24.

This instruction, as recorded by Luke, was in reply to the interrogatory of one of the hearers of the Saviour-Lord, are there few that be saved?' And hence, the supposition that the salvation spoken of was the salvation of a future world, and the inference from the answer of Christ, that there were many who would never reach the abodes of bliss. This conclusion is, however, based on the popular mistake, that in every place, in the Bible, where the words saved and salvation occur, they relate to a deliverance from an endless hell, when the truth is, they never have any such idea attach. ed to them in a single instance!