bishops of Achia, Palestine, Phonecia and Arabia declared their highest displeasure against it. Furthermore, in one year from this Demetrius died, and with him all opposition to Origen. And after this Origen was again appointed to explain the scriptures at Cesarea and the bishops of Palestine often sat under his instructions as though he were their master." Thus is it evident that Origen's sentiments were no cause of his excommunication. I will only add, many of the doctrines which you have attributed to him, it is doubtful whether he ever held; others he held only as speculative opinions, as some partialists do the opinion, that hell is in one of the comets, and that its torments consist in changes from extreme heat to extreme cold, caused by the comet coming near the sun and then flying off into the unknown regions of space.

Your concluding remarks respecting our order are exceedingly illiberal, unjust and uncandid. Your hackneyed charge about diversity of opinion has twice been thrown back upon your own cause. That relative to my violent treatment of Chauncy is wholly incorrect. So also is the one which declares that no man among us holds the same opinions for one month together. As it respects the changes of Universalism, I fearlessly assert that they have neither been as numerous or great within sixty-five years, as those of partialism. For the infidelity of Kneeland, I could find a dozen offsetts among partialists; but such things are not proof, and my Master has forbidden me to render railing for railing.

Your postscript contains but a lame apology for your false statement respecting Mr. Whittemore's

opinion about angels. You must have a treacherous memory indeed, if you had read his notes on the Parables with any degree of attention, not to know, that the Christian Spectator asserted what was absolutely false. The error into which you have fallen in this instance, should teach you caution in quoting the testimony of bigoted, sectarian partialists against Universalism.

Mr. Whittemore's work on the Parables is one of great merit and utility, and it should be in the hands of every biblical student; for it contains a vast fund of useful matter, respecting the manners, customs and laws of our Saviour's day, besides copious extracts from standard orthodox commentators, showing that his explanations have their sanction. Whether your 'surprise and disgust, will outweigh their testimony, is not for me to say. Having pointed out in this, and in letter No. VIII. numerous other false statements, I will add nothing further.

I am, &c.

OTIS A. SKINNER.

LETTER No. XIII.

BALTIMORE, March 13, 1835.

To Rev. Otis A. Skinner:

Dear Sir--It is necessary that I should make some remarks on your eighth letter, and on that part of it in particular which relates to the term Gehenna. Every attentive reader must be aware that I have demonstrated the certainty of endless misery by the word

Gehenna, as used in the New Testament; but lest some doubts should remain on the mind of any one, I shall consider it more particularly. Your twelve facts, as you are pleased to call them, I consider to be nothing but twelve miserable subterfuges: the first four are founded on a falsehood, viz. that Gehenna is used in the Old Testament, and the other eight have no direct bearing on the subject. Your asserting that apokteino to kill,' in Matt. x. 28, means to 'torture,' 'torment,' and that in direct contradiction to Parkhurst, Bass, and Grove, is one of the most barefaced absurdities I have seen, and shows to what lengths a man will go, rather than acknowledge himself in error. Your pretended illustrations of the texts where Gehenna is used, I consider to be perversions and misapplications which go much farther to darken and confuse than to explain and elucidate. Your assertion, that the discourse attributed to Josephus is universally considered the work of some Christian of the second or third century, whether taken from a Boston or Baltimore or any other work, I consider to be an impudent forgery, carrying its own refutation in its front. This is one among the many lies and falsehoods invented and propagated by the Universalists to injure the truth and establish error. In confirmation of this, I shall observe that Mr. Whiston, the translator of Josephus's works, says of the discourse on Hades, in a note (Balt. edit. 1833, 8 vo. page 458 ) Of these Jewish or Essene, and indeed, Christian doctrines conceining souls, both good and bad, in Hades, see that excellent discourse or homily of Josephus,

concerning Hades, at the end of the work."This note proves that the translator attributes the discourse to Josephus, and that he considers it as containing the sentiments of the Jews respecting a future state of happiness and misery. Here then is direct testimony in favour of my sentiment, and as long as this one exists your position must be false.

Your saying that the Targums furnish no proof whatever, that Gehenna was used to sig nify endless woe, in the days of Christ, is another erroneous statement, and contrary to the opinion of the most learned men.

But the most absurd assertion, perhaps, n all your letters, is that wherein you declared that the opinion that the Targums of Jonathan and Onkelos were written in the second or third century, had the sanction of the most eminent writers. Whether you declared this, as a deliberate falsehood, which had been propagated by others to deceive, or through ignorance of the true state of the matter, I am unable to determine, but shall incline to the charitable side. As I consider it of the utmost importance to prove that the Targums, which use Gehenna as I do, were written before the time of Christ, I shall lay before you the following testimony on the subject, which settles the matter beyond dispute.

1. Luesden, in his 'Philologicus Hebreo-Mixtus' (p. 44, edit. 1673,) says that, 'In the time of Hercanus, about forty years before Christ, Onkelos, author of the Targum, became a proselyte to the Jewish religion.' Again, (p. 50,) Jonathan Ben Uzziel, the Targumist, was one

of the eighty renowned disciples of the celebrated Hillel. That Jonathan translated the prophets is believed and asserted by the Jews.'

2. Hattinger,in his Thesaurus Philologicus (p. 557, 558. ed. 1649,) says,‘Onkelos, whose Targum ou the Pentateuch was so celebrated, was contemporary with Gamaliel, who was the instructor of Paul.' •And again, (p. 259) ‘Jonathan Ben Uzziel, author of the Targum on the prophets, was a disciple of the renowned Hillel.'

3. Brewster, in his Encyclopædia (Phil. ed. 1832, Art. Theology) says, 'But, the most deci ded evidence on this subject (the doctrine of the Trinity) is to be found in the Targums of Jonathan and Onkelos, the one being a commentary on the prophets, the other on the books of Moses. They are both written in Chaldee; that of Jonathan, according to Calmet, about thirty years before Christ; that of Onkelos not long after it, and they are both, till this day, held in the highest estimate among the Jews.

4. The Edinburg Encyclopædia, (Phil. ed. 1798. Art. Targum,) states that, 'the Hebrews had no written paraphrases or Targums before the era of Onkelos and Jonathan, who lived about the time of our Saviour. Jonathan is placed about thirty years before Christ, under the reign of Herod the Great. Onkelos is the most of all esteemed, and copies are to be found, in which it is inserted verse for verse with the Hebrew. * * *These Targums are of great use for the better understanding not only of the Old Testament, on which they are written, but also of the New.'

5, Hartwell Horne, in his introduction to 'A