the phrase occurs, that I may give it a thorough investigation, and thereby present it in its true signification.

Matth. x. 28.

And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (Gehenna.)

Luke XII. 4, 5. Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that, have no more that they can do.

But I forewarn you whom you shall fear; fear him, which after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell. (Gehenna.)

Respecting these texts it may be observed, 1. That they contain a most solemn warning, given by our Saviour, concerning the true object of fear. 2. Two objects of fear are mentioned-God and man. 3. God is to be feared as much above man, as the soul is superior to the body, and as the power of God is above that of man. 4. Man's power is limited; he can only kill the body, he cannot injure the soul. But God's power is unlimited, therefore he can not only kill the body, but cast both soul and body into hell at the day of judgment. Now I think nothing in all the world can be clearer, or prove more fully that Gehenna signifies future misery, than these texts. What man, or what temporal fire could affect, or injure an immortal soul? Certainly no man, no temporal fire. But the Almighty God, at the last day, can cast both soul and body into hell, which he has declar

ed he will do, to all the finally impenitent.— You leap over this text by saying that apokteino, "to kill," should be rendered to torture, to afflict. Who ever heard of such a translation of this word before! Parkhurst says the word is derived from apo, intensitive, and kteino, to kill, and signifies, to kill, murder, butcher.— Bass says it signifies, to kill, destroy, murder, butcher, consequently the present translation of the word is perfectly correct. The word psuche, rendered soul, you say means animal life. Parkhurst shows that it has nine significations in the scriptures, and refers to Matth. x. 28, one of the texts in question, where it signifies "the human soul or spirit, as distinguished from the body." Now, as I have cleared this text, by the authority of so great a man as Parkhurst, from the gloss you put upon it, to turn aside its force which is levelled directly against your system, I shall consider another error into which you have fallen, concerning the power of the Jews to take away life. You say the Jews had no power to take away life. This is true in a certain sense. They had no power to take away life for secular offences, or offences against the state; neither could they crucify, which was a Roman method of punishment. This political or kingly power was taken from them when Judea became a Roman province. But they retained the power to take away life by burning and stoning for ecclesiastical offences, or offences committed against the church. To this ecclesiastical power Pilate referred, when he said to the Jews, take him and judge him according to your law. The Jews replied, it is not lawful for us to put any man to death,

thereby indicating that they charged him with offences against the state, and not against the church. This accorded with the saying of Jesus, signifying what death he should die, when he said they would deliver him to the Gentiles to crucify him, Matth. xx. 19. That the Jews still retained the power of killing for ecclesiastical offences is evident from the fact of their killing several persons. They stoned Stephen to death, not in a riotous outrage, as some suppose, but by a regular mode of procedure, Acts VII. They stoned Ben Sarda at Lydda. Hieros, Sanhed, fol. 25, 4. They burned the priest's daughter alive that had been taken in the act of adultery, Rab. Sanhed, fol. 52, 1. These historical facts

show that the Jews retained the power of punishing ecclesiastical offences with burning and stoning. For a more detailed account of this matter the reader is referred to Dr. Clarke and Dr. Lightfoot, on John, xvIII. 32.

I wish it to be distinctly understood that I consider the use of Gehenna in the twelve places where it occurs in the New Testament, as an unanswerable argument against the doctrine of Universalism; however, I leave the reader to judge in this case.

Your saying that Gehenna was a place of punishment to which the Jews, and not the Gentiles, were exposed, reminds me of the law of retaliation. The Jews considered themselves the children of heaven, while they devoted the Gentiles to a total destruction.You being a Gentile, by way of retaliation, say the punishment of Gehenna was for Jews, and not for Gentiles. It was remarked, that the Europeans paint the devil black, while

the Ethiopeans, in return, paint him white.The Jews believe in the endless punishment of the wicked. Whence had they this information? Certainly from the prophets and the holy scriptures.

There is one palpable contradiction in your fourth letter. You say the Jews had no power to take away life; and you say the destruction in Gehenna is for Jews only. Now, I will give you your choice of two things; if you say the Jews had no power to kill, it is certain they could not burn any person in Gehenna-therefore the destruction in Gehenna is in a future state. If you say they had power to kill, then they are not to be feared as they can only kill the body; but God can cast both into Gehenna or endless misery in a future state. Take which side you please.

I am, your's, &c.

JOSEPH MCKEE.

LETTER No. VIII.

BALTIMORE, Jan. 17, 1835.

To Rev. Joseph McKee:

DEAR SIR,-Whitfield once remarked, while preaching, that if sinners would wander to the devil, he must wander after them. And as you in your historical remarks, have entirely wandered from the great point in dispute, I am compelled to wander after you, in order to correct some of your erroneous statements.

1. You say Origen was the first Universalist. This is a great mistake. The Basilidians, Carpocratians and Valentinians, held the sentiment; and though they were styled heretics, and their systems were often attacked by the orthodox, their sentiments respecting the restoration were never called in question. Universalism is advocated in the Sibyline Oracles, a work published about the year 150, to convert heathens to the Gospel. The renowned and illustrious Clemens Alexandrinus, the teacher of Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, and of the celebrated Origen, was a Universalist. He was distinguished for his extensive acquaintance with history, poetry, philosophy, mythology and the scriptures. He died in the year 217. Thus we find Universalism very prevalent, before the days of Origen; and before we find the eternity of misery advocated by a single writer. Tertullian, a man'severe, morose, superstitious and fanatical-a man who said he should admire, laugh, exult and rejoice, when he saw kings groaning in the lowest abyss of darkness, is supposed to have been the first christian who asserted that misery will be of equal duration with happiness. The first censure ever passed upon Universalism was in the year 394. And even this related not to the salvation of man, but of devils; and after it many advocated with impunity the salvation of all men. Indeed the doctrine continued to spread and to receive the undivided support of many of the bishops and ministers, and a large portion of the laity, until crushed by the bulls of popes. Controversy could not check