/ v-^'y ^'^V \'^'l o > ■ ■ -*• 0* ..< a?** ^ :» * * -28 DEMONOLOGY. honour and happiness, or attain to equal dignity, en- deavoured to prevent and hinder them in the pursuit of virtue. Accordingly it became the opinion of phi- losophers, that part of the demons were wicked and malignant. Josephus, Wars, B. 7. C. 6. says, these evil demons were no other than the spirits of the wicked, who enter into the bodies of the living and kill them, unless they obtain help against them. 1 ' Hence the demonology of the later philosophers and the Pharisaic Jews, was perfectly analogous to the modern doctrine of good and bad angels. The whole system of Demonology, as also that of the Chaldean and Jewish Angelology, is founded on the fanciful supposition of separate slates of spirits, being freed from the body, but possessing its propensities, they as- sist or torment the living, accordingly as they are be- nevolently or malevolently disposed towards them. Nothing in all the reveries of a lawless imagination can exceed the wildness of the supposition that souls can subsist after death without a body, and notwithstand- ing, retain the corporeal passions of that body, from which they are disentangled ! Daimonion appears synonymous with Daimon. It is used by Zenophon and Plutarch to denote the De- ity : but it signifies generally, deified spirits, adored as mediators. When we compare 1 Cor. 8 t 4 — 7, and 10 : 14, 20, 21. 1 Tim. 2 : 5. Rev. 9 : 20, we cannot fail to see that the daimonia were the objects of reli- gious adoration, and certainly were not considered as devils. Diabolos and Daimonion, are not once con- founded, though the first occurs above thirty, and the latter about sixty times, in the New Testament. The word devil is, therefore, a very improper translation of Daimon in the above texts of scripture. We admit that the word Daimonion, in Matt. 12: 24 — 27, and the parallel passage, Luke 11:1 4 — 20, is to be un- derstood in the evil sense according to the definition DEMONOLOGY. 29 of Josephus ; and implies, that agreeably to the Jew- ish notions, some dead men's spirits had the power of annoying the living: but by no just rule of interpreta- tion can the word ever be rendered by the term devil. Demoniacs were insane or epileptic persons, who were incurable in those days of medical ignorance ; and therefore, from the violence of the symptoms, were regarded by the superstitious, as possessed by diaboli- cal agents. This view of the subject has been success- fully maintained by the. learned Joseph Mede, in his discourse on John 10 : 20, and by Lardner and Far- mer, on the demoniacs of the New Testament. The Jews mostly learned their notions of demons and an- gels, during the Babylonian captivity, where they be- came acquainted with the Persian philosophy. Being ignorant of physiology and pathology, they attributed every disease, of whose symptoms they were ignorant, to the influence of demons ; and from the prevalence of the opinion, and the credulity of the patients, the subjects of these sore diseases, believed themselves to be possessed of demons, just as the deluded creatures of modern times, have admitted themselves to be witches* Justin Martyr urges it as an argument for a future state of existence, that demons, whom he calls the spirits of the dead, seized and tormented men.— Chrysostom mentions it as a vulgar opinion, in his days, that all who died a violent death, became de- mons. He also tells us, that some demoniacs would affirm that they were possessed of the soul of such a monk. Homer, speaking of a man, whom a violent disease had wasted, says, a hateful demon had entered into him. From this general opinion, epilepsy obtain- ed the name of sacred disease. Like the Jews, the Romans believed in possession, but used different names, calling the ghosts, Larvoz, and the men pos- sessed, Larvati; even to the present day, the Turks retain similar notions of insane persons^ 3* 30 DEMONOLOGY. Probably the greater part of these silly stories about demoniacs, were fabricated by the Pharisees, who seiz- ed on every idle rumour to support their dogmas, con- cerning spirits, against the objections of the Saddu- cees. From Matt. 17 : 14 — 18, and the parallel pas- sages in Mark and Luke, it appears the Evangelists considered the demoniacs as persons affected with lu- nacy, or epilepsy. The Jews also identify insanity and possession, John 10: 20. Indeed, it is highly probable, that the notions of demons were rather the vulgar opinion, than the sober sentiment of the enlight- ened part of society, even in the days of Christ. Origen says, the physicians endeavoured to account for these cases in a natural way, calling them bodily diseases, not admitting the agency of impure spirits, Plotinus, a celebrated philosopher of the third century, blames those who ascribes to demons, diseases which, he says^arise from excess, indigestion, and other natu- ral causes, and are often cured by medicine. Hippo- crates, the father of medicine, whose knowledge of the animal economy greatly surpassed that of all others in his time, wrote expressly to prove that there was nothing supernatural in the case of supposed demoni- acs ; but that all the symptoms arose from natural causes. " When a man (says he) becomes incapable of speech, suffocated, foams, gnashes his teeth, shuts his hands close, his eyes being distorted, and falling down, kicks with his feet, that man has the Epilepsy.' 1 How absurd and inconsistent with the superintending providence of God, to admit that the universal parent would allow evil spirits to take possession of his own children, and torment the creatures of his care, the object of his ceaseless love !" DEMONOLQGY, 31 Definition of the Greek teim, — Diabolos — Remarks of Dr. S. Clark on personification, — of the number of Angels and Devils — A Devil the popular god of Superstition. Diabolos, from diaballo, to dart or to strike through, or to calumniate, strictly signifies, an accuser, and is constantly used in the Septuagint as the translation of Salan,&n adversary, and Zar, an enemy. If therefore we translate the word Diabolos into English, according to its proper meaning, we shall never be at a loss to know the devil and his occupation, nor the means of successful resistance. We shall be perfectly qualified to understand the language of Christ to the Jews and his apostles, John 6 : 70, and-7 : 14. Dr. S. Clark well observes on the last passage, that personification was very frequent in the language of the Jews, and nothing was more common than to call men by the appellation of that abstract quality, which principally predominates in their character. The phrases, chil-. dren of wisdom, of the devil, of God, of a murderer, are easily analyzed by changing the abstract for con- crete terms ; and reading wise, godly, persecuting or malevolent, children. We now clearly perceive the propriety of calling Judas a devil, John 6 : 70. Pe- ter Satan, Matt. 16 : 23. Simon Magus, a child of the devil, Acts 13 : 10. And slanderous women, devils, Titus, 2 : 3 — and how such devils go about as roaring lions, seeking whom they may devour* From the doctrine of demonology arose the Jewish notions of angels. The Jews in their degeneracy adopted many of the Heathen dogmas concerning de- mons, yet preferred the name of angel, to demon, as they did the word Paradise, to the Greek Elysium. They learned the names and grades of angels during their captivity in Babylon, and afterwards amalgama- ted their religion with the Platonic philosophy, in 32 DEMONOLOGY. ' Egypt, during the reign of the Ptolemies. The wis^ dom of Solomon, and works of Philo, are standing evidences of this assertion. The Christians, in the first age of Christianity having embraced the same fanciful opinions, arranged them all under nine classes, angels, archangels, virtues, pow- ers, principalities, dominions, thrones, cherubim, and seraphim. The Talmudists multiplied the good an- gels to more than 300,000,000,000, and the bad to a number beyond all computation. Isidore and others, say, the number of the elect, exactly equals that of the fallen angels, being chosen from men to fill the places vacated by their rebellion. But Daillon affirms, there is only one devil, and the Christians borrowed a plu- rality from the heathen ; whilst Averroes maintains, there is no devil at all ! ! ! Here then we come to the Scriptures to decide the controversy. From Matt. 18: 12. and Heb. 2 : 16, Hilary determines that angels, are to men, as a hundred to one. Fallen angels, cries another, must be more than five thousand, for a demoniac said, my name is legion, Luke 8 : 30. One third exactly of the angels fell, exclaims another, for the dragon's tail drew a third part of the stars from heaven, Rev. 12:3. It is certain, adds a fourth, that good angels are more numerous than the bad, for we read of twelve legions of the former, and only one of the latter. Matt. 16: 53. But while we disprove the existence of such fanci- ful beings, a thousand voices exclaim, we have seen them ! If so, why may we not also obtain a view ? Come forth, then, whatever ye are — shadows or sub- stances, spirits sublimated, or transmuted natures — ye who have left your clay to wither, and become the messengers of heaven, and tread the winds and the star-sown wilderness above us ! Come down from your stately heights, and stand visible before us ! Or, if in- deed ye live in the grave, or haunt on Purgatorial shores* DEMONOLOGY. 33 pale tenants of the dim Elysium — Arise, and be mani- fest ! No, they appear not, but to their deluded vota- ries, to the believers of such fables, and no unbeliever can ever obtain a glimpse, even though it were by the pale light of the moon ! ! How deplorable is the state of the human mind, de- graded by superstition ! Fear being the mother of su- perstition, we may reasonably expect her god to be hi- deous and terrific. Hence an imaginary devil has ob- tained the greatest veneration in many countries of Asia and Africa : and even at this time, however in- credible, his worship is very prevalent throughout all Christendom. Being the popular god of modern super- stition, if any independent man, who dares to think 5 or express a doubt of his existence, the alarm is sound- ed, and fearing that the empire of the god of this world is about to be upset, all who wonder after the beasts, hasten to cry out for whole hours, Great is the Devil we adore ! Be not surprised, the existence and influ- ence of the devil are as necessary to the creeds of modern times, as the honours of Diana were to the craftsmen of Ephesus. From what has been already said, it is fully mani- fest, that among the various objects of blinded nations 9 fear, the ghosts of departed heroes were admitted at a very early period. It was imagined by weak and perverted minds, that men who had distinguished them- selves, in this world, by either good or evil actions, would retain their dispositions in the next ; and be actively engaged in promoting the welfare of mankind, or plotting their ruin, as far as those propensities exci- ted, or their influence extended. Therefore, men be- came naturally inclined to honour the good spirits for their services, and offer sacrifices to the evil, to placate their malevolence ! We have also seen that Plato and many other eminent philosophers, taught that all intercourse between the Deity and mankind was car- 34 DEMONOLOGY. ried on by means of demons, who ought on that ac- count to receive divine homage ; and that this doctrine was received by ma-.iy of the heathen nations, and even by many of the Jews, especially the Essens, who believed that thousands of these demons officiated as mediators with Jehovah, a. id therefore ought to be worshipped. That it was also a general opinion, that acute diseases, plagues, apoplexies, epilepsies, were operated by demons, or ghosts of wicked men, who entered human bodies and destroyed those who were not powerfully supported by the good demons. Ac- cordingly we find, that in ail the passages of scripture, which speak of persons possessed of devils, the origin- al word is daimonion, and not diabolos, which should not therefore have been translated devil, nor devils. But it appears to have been an early and much agitated question among the ancient philosophers, whence sprang that moral and physical evil, which so often weakens the enjoyment and destroys the happi- ness of mankind. Being unwilling to abase humaa pride, by charging it on man, or to attribute malevo- lence to the Deity, they imagined the existence of a wicked spirit to be absolutely necessary to the exist- ence and continuance of disorder and'pain in the world. But the quantum of evil being so great, they supposed that the evil spirit must nearly equal the Deity himself in wisdom and power. This doctrine of devilism was derived from the Persian theology, which taught the co-existence and nearly co-equality of two great first causes ; the one the author of all good, the other the source of all evil. This absurd opinion was the inven- tion of their Magi, who were unable to account for the origin of evil, on any other principles. Very dif- ferent from this wild fancy, was the message of Jeho- vah to Cyrus, by the prophet Isaiah, which reproves the foolish sentiment, and declares Jehovah to be the author of light and darkness, and the Creator of both DEMONOLOGY. So good and evil. Indeed it is altogether impossible that good or evil could exist otherwise ; for that God who iills the immensity of space, must enclose in his very nature beings to whom he gave existence, and by whose fatherly care they are preserved. Hence it fol- lows that the notion of the existence and influence of the devil, is altogether inconsistent with correct and scriptural views of the divine nature and character. If a devil exist, he must be the rival or servant of the AJmighty. The first supposition is atheistic ; for if there be a God, he is without a rival ; nor would he suffer his designs to be frustrated, nor employ a servant to violate his laws, nor disturb the peace of his empire. But, says the objector, if there be no devil, then there is no God, no hell, no need of preaching ! I would not have noticed such manifest puerilities, were they not proclaimed by the doctors of divinity and theolo- gical professors of our day, who sound the watchword of heresy, and lead the van of persecution. Is there no proof of God's existence but that the devil needs an opposer ? O fie ! Must God exist, and we preach for the devil's sake ? Shame on those men, who sacri- fice truth, and insult good sense to fan the fire of fanat- icism ! Is the devil the maker and governor of the infernal regions ? Then certainly he will take good care not to torment himself nor his friends. The wicked have nothing to fear, for if any suffer, they must be the pious servants of God, who have rebelled against his satanic majesty. Moreover, if the devil be the director of hell, and fallen angels the inflictors of its punishments, can these unfortunate sufferers be the tormentors of men who have been equally unfortunate as themselves ? Then surely the devil and his angels are God's servants, and must receive the reward of their services. But are God's servants unhappy, and will virtue and misery be long connected ? If not, then it follows that devils will become saints, and hell a field of liberty ! 36 DEMONOLOGY. The term Satan, indicates no more than that pro~ pensity to evil so frequently observable in human con- duct, and which, like the chemical doctrines of phlo- giston and caloric, is of great utility for the explana- tion of difficulties. All classical readers know that the most beautiful writings abound with bold, figura- tive, and hyperbolical descriptions. That nothing is more ornamental in poetry, than prosopopoeia, or the representation of good and evil qualities, virtues and vices, by personal characters. The word Satan, sig- nifies an adversary, and sometimes it only denotes the abstract quality, calumny. Our translators have ren- dered it, accordingly, throughout the Bible. Though the term Satan occurs frequently in the scriptures, yet generally some human being is intended. David is so called, 1 Sam. 29 : 4. Hadad is denominated Sol- omon's devil or satan, 1 Kings, 11 : 14. David de- scribes those who rendered him evil for good as his satans ; and prays that his satans might be clothed with shame. Ps. 109 : 20, 29. Jesus calls Peter satan, and Judas a devil, Matt. 16 : 23. John 6 : 70. In the New-Testament, treacherous men, slanderous women, and opponents of every kind, are called sa- ta.is or devils ; and these words signify no more than adverse propensities. Indeed it would be an impious reflection on the character of the Deity, to suppose he had formed and let loose myriads of malevolent spirits to destroy the happiness of mankind. If it be demanded, Whence arise those inducements to evil, which so often disturb the peace of society, and ruin man's happiness ? the answer is both easy and scriptural. The heart is deceitful, and every man is tempted when he is drawn aside, or enticed by ani- mal passions or bodily appetites. These expose us to innumerable trials and temptations. Intemperance, avarice, ambition, envy, and discontentment beset us in their turns, and without the utmost vigilance and DEMONOLOGY. 37 circumspection, we are in danger of being overcome. Now can the just and merciful Cod, the father of man- kind, and moral governor of the world, think these propensities to evil so insufficient for the trial of our vittues, that he must superadd the agency of an evil being, so subtle, so malicious, and so powerful as the devil ? What a desperate chance have we of succeed- ing against such an adversary ! Shall we say, good is the will of the Lord, and that in all this he has done all things in wisdom ! Banished for ever be the thought from all rational and serious persons. God could no more act thus than cease to exist. Every principle of his nature holds such conduct in eternal abhor- rence ! ! Let the believers in a devil consider, 1 . That the belief of his existence constitutes no fundamental ar- ticle of the christian faith ; no part of the New Testa- ment states the necessity of believing such an unrea- sonable doctrine. If particular passages seem to im- ply it, or cannot be clearly explained or understood, yet no inference should be drawn from a few passages that would contradict the decisions of reason, and the general tenor of scripture. 2. It is perfectly consist- ent with the mission of Jesus to adopt the language of the country on all subjects, which did not constitute the main objects of that mission. Christ came not to teach men philosophy, neither to spend his time in combating the Jewish demonology. Every reasona- ble person, on whose mind the rays of science have shined, will readily admit that neither the astronomy nor cosmogony of Moses will stand the test of modern experience : and might not our Lord as consistently use the foolish language of the Jews about Demons, Demoniacs, and Devils, as Moses the absurd and fan- ciful opinions of the ancients concerning astronomy ? 3. There is no passage that can be adduced to support the doctrine of a devil, which does not contradict some 4 38 DEMONOLOGY. part of the received opinions on that dogma — but ev- ery text in all the scriptures which speaks of the devil or satan,can be fairly interpreted or explained, con- sistently with the whole tenor of scripture, on the sup- position that there is no such being, but that these words universally mean an adversary, or something adverse. We might have expected that the most pertinacious believers in a devil, would have rejoiced to find, that reason, scripture, and common sense, are equally op- posed to the terrifying dogma. But, alas ! such are the religious infatuation and credulity of mankind, that an opinion once admitted is seldom rejected, how- ever palpably absurd or monstrously ridiculous. — Hence we find christians cling as close to this doc- trine, as if their present and future happiness depend- ed on the existence and influence of an infernal fiend ! Atheism and the disbelief of a devil, vibrate the same feelings of horror in the superstitious mind ; and, perhaps, atheism itself is deemed by some to be less impious. But if a devil there be, possessing those powers and attributes generally ascribed to him, athe- ism becomes acceptable, and loses all its hideou3 forms, for the existence of such a being proves the non-existence of God, or that he is deficient in wis- dom, goodness, and power. Why then should men be alarmed, when this doctrine is attacked or disputed.; and why should the war-whoop of party be sounded, when we attempt to disprove and explode this injuri- ous and unreasonable opinion ? Has the devil created the universe, and filled it with inhabitants ? Is he the author of all good, on whom our present and future happiness depends ? Did all being start into existence at his command, or is it supported by his power ? Is his dominion unbounded and perpetual, and shall his au- thoritative voice awake the myriads of the dead, de- termine their doom, appoint heaven as a reward for DEMONOLOGY. 38 his enemies, and people the Tartarian gulf with his allies and friends ? What impious absurdity ! Jehovah alone holds the reins of universal empire, and all that can excite our hopes in this world, or our perfect feli- city in the next, is unconnected with a satanic being. If the doctrine that teaches the existence and influ- ence of a devil, involves serious consequences, if it be anti-scriptural and unphilosophical, if it be fatal to man's moral improvement, if it poison the stream of religious knowledge at the fonntain head, by supposing that God has a powerful antagonist, whose designs he has been unable to frustrate, and whose rebellion shall be as durable as the Divine existence, — in short, if correct notions of the Divine character and govern- ment be inconsistent with the belief in such a being — for the honour of God and religion, let the infamous doctrine be for ever rejected. Those who believe in the existence of a devil, sup- pose that the evil, which prevails in this world, re- sults from his infernal agency; and also expect that evil to become still greater in another and future state of being. There they look 'for a hell, crowded with inhabitants, through the resistless powers of diaboli- cal influence : and this reign of misery, this triumph of the devil, they expect to be so complete and signal, as to undergo no change through the revolution of eter- nal ages ! ! How can persons who expect such a ca- tastrophe of human affairs, have correct notions of that God, who is all benevolence ; whose plans are conceived in wisdom and executed in mercy ; whose power cannot be resisted, and whose very name and nature are Love ! Those who think God has a compet- itor, must deny the absolute will of the Deity, and his general providence. They derogate from his suprem- acy, and eclipse his glory. They dishonour him, and perplex themselves with wild and embarrassing con- clusions. In a word, they conjure up a devil to their 40 DEMONOLOGY. own confusion, to the injury of christian truth, and the $erious mischief of morality. The fear of a devil may perhaps keep some men of weak minds from ex- cessive vice, and make them slavishly religious, and hypocritically moral. But the love of God alone, pro- ceeding from a grateful recollection of his goodness and providential care, can produce genuine piety and virtue. It is somewhat outrageous to suppose, that the devil will punish wicked men who sinned by his instigation, and performed all their wicked deeds, in obedience to his desires. Can the punishment of sinners be inflict- ed by that being whom they never offended ; and God, whose laws have been violated, have no concern in their sufferings ? The belief in the existence of a devil is equally injurious to virtue, simplicity, and christian truth. It affords a palliative for crimes, and induces men to believe that wicked thoughts and evil actions, have not been fomented in their own hearts, but spring from the suggestions of a wicked one. Sometimes men are hurried into enormities, conceiving them- selves particularly tempted, at which their mild na- tures would shudder, were they not influenced by this deceitful doctrine. If the belief in a devil did not obtain, men must ei- ther trace their sins to God as the author, or admit they originate with themselves ; and as they could not presume to charge God directly with sin, they would of necessity, acknowledge their own accountability ; and repentance producing reformation, might justly be expected to result from such a happy conviction. An- other serious evil arising from a belief in the existence of a devil, is the continual alarm and terror that reigns in the weak mind tinctured with superstition, by the apprehension of satanic machination and artifice. Ev- ery inclination to enjoyment, every expostulation on religious faith, and even every suggestion of truth, DEMONOLOGY. 41 though in the very words of scripture, if it seems to contradict long received opinions, are all attributed to the seduction of Satan ; and thus the perpetual dread of an imaginary being, keeps the mind in darkness, and the heart in palpitation. Wild enthusiasm, gloomy superstition, and a long train of delusive thoughts, suc- cessively distract the serious mind which is unfortu- nately beclouded by a belief in the devil. And what is worse, men suppose him to be so refined in subtlety, and so resistless in power, that vigilance is almost use- less, and the strongest heart cannot feel subjection to his will without horror and dismay. Hence a belief in the existence of the devil, has driven many weak persons to despair, which most assuredly is the natural consequence of such a wild doctrine. What idea must those men have of God, who believe he has placed his feeble creatures in a situation so hopeless and cru- el ? Must they not conclude that God created man for the purpose of making him miserable ? And can the Creator be an object of love, veneration, and grati- tude, while he is viewed in connexion with a malig- nant devil ? If the account we have given of the devil be just, then all notions of witchcraft, or of being possessed by the devil, are vain and groundless. 'Tis all deceit and imposition on the weakness and credulity of man- kind ! For shame! Let us entertain more honourable sentiments of the moral government of God. Let us. think ourselves safe under the protection of his provi- dence ; safe from the malice both of devils and wick- ed men. Let us learn, not to disturb ourselves with any vain or superstitious fears of evil spirits, for we are not subject to any malicious powerful beings.. The Lord God Omnipotent reigns alone, whose tender mercies are over all his works. This consideration should fill us with ease and tranquillity, otherwise we do not give God the honour due to him ; we do not re- 4* 42 DEMONOLOGY. pose that confidence in his providence, which his wis- dom and goodness require, and the security of our own happiness demands. Ohow different from the doc- trines of devils, are the views of God exhibited in the gospel of Jesus ! There we read of one God and Fa- ther of all, who is above all, through all, and in us all. That it is his gracious intention to save and render eternally happy all his intelligent offspring. There we behold no mighty devil to blacken the moral hori- zon, or frustrate and baffle the designs of the Deity. But on the contrary, a religion all mild and beautiful, that breathes nothing but pure benevolence, and evi- dently indicates the approximation of a period, in which truth will completely triumph over error, and happi- ness be universal. Amen ! SECTION V. Observations relative to the Hebrew word Shailan, called Sa- tan, in our common version. — An extract from Pndeaux, on the Magian philosophy, as revived by Zoroaster. The most eminent lexicographers agree in the mean- ing of the term Satan. They uniformly allow that it signifies an adversary. The first passage in which we find it, is Gen. 26 : 21 . " And they digged anoth- er well, and strove for that also : and he called the name of it Sitnah." Very little attention to the context will convince any man, why the well was called Sitnah, or Satan, in the sense of an adversary. The herdmen of Gerar strove with, or more proper* ly against, the herdmen of Isaac, and were adversa- ries, therefore the name was called Satan, signifying adversary. But this is further made evident by verse 27, where Isaac says to Abimelech, who went from Gerar to make a treaty with him — " Wherefore come ye to me, seeing ye hate me, and have sent me away DEMONOLOGY. 43 from you '? And in the margin of the 21st verse, we find hatred given as the signification of Satan, or ad- versary. The comment on this passage is then very plain, without referring to any supernatural agency. The well was called Satan, hecause the hatred of the men of Gerar had deprived Isaac of its possession. The first time we find it in Scripture, then, it is applied as a noun feminine, to an insensible object. In this place, therefore, we look in vain for a personal devil. The next use of this term is to an angel of the Lord, Num. 22 : 22, 32. where the writer, alluding to Ba- laam, says — " And the angel of the Lord stood in the way for an adversary [satan] against him. Behold I went out to withstand thee [or to be a satan to thee] because thy way is perverse before me." The word satan occurs here twice in the original ; in one case it is rendered adversary, and in the other, to withstand thee. The marginal reading to the last verse, is, " to be an adversary unto thee." Whether common opinion of the word satan, or that which is here men- tioned, on the authority of Scripture, and with the sanction of the greatest scholars in the orthodox ranks, you are permitted to judge for yourselves. When the princes of the Philistines remonstrated with the king against permitting David to go with them to battle against the Israelites, 1 Sam. 29 : 4. David is called a satan, translated adversary in the common version. In 2 Sam. 19 : 22. the sons of Zeruiah are expressly called satans in the original, and adversaries in the translation. In 1 Kings, 5 : 4. king Solomon, adverting to his having peace on every side, and of the favourable opportunity which this circumstance afforded, of fulfilling the word of the Lord to his father, respecting the building of a temple, says, there is u neither adversary nor evil oc- 44 DEMONOLOGY. current." In the original, the word here rendered adversary is satan. The believers in a personal dev- il, who existed in a state of beatitude long anterior to the race of man, and finally fell from heaven, by sin- ning, are welcome to this text if they fancy it favour,* their views. But notwithstanding Solomon congratulated him- self at this time on the non-existence of a satan, he was afterwards troubled by a number of them. For we find in the 11th chapter of the same book, 14, 23, 25. thatHadad the Edomite, Rezon the son of Elia- dah, and Hadadezer, king of Zobah, had become his adversaries, or satans. The first place where satan appears in our common Bible, is 1 Chron. 21 : 1. " And satan stood up against Tsrael and provoked David to number Israel." Had the word satan been translated adversary, as in form- er instances, who would think of imputing to this pas- sage a meaning which involves the whole history in the most ridiculous absurdity ? What — did an infernal being, in propria persona, stand up before David to tempt him, and did the king of Israel listen to his ad- vice ? Let the confession of David in the 17th verse, give the answer. " Even I it is that have sinned^ and done evil indeed." He imputes nothing to any satan but himself, nor do we read of any punishment inflicted on satan for the evil deed. Let us impute this to the pride of David's heart, the lust of con- quest and dominion, or the honour of commanding a numerous and warlike host, and we shall be little lia- ble to go wrong. We have looked, but looked in vain, for any infor- mation relative the the orthodox devil. The satans of the Old Testament were in no wise connected with the schemes of modern divinity. A well, an angel of the Lord, David, and various others, bear that appel- lation in Scripture, and in Ezra, 4 : 6, a piece of BEMONOLOGY. 45 writing is termed a satan, and is translated accusation! With all these facts before us, where shall we look for the origin of the idea generally attached to this word? We must look for it in the principles of the Magian philosophers, as given by Prideaux, and recollect that his testimony is that of an advocate for orthodoxy. This able writer, speaking of the popular opinions of the age and country of Job, in his Connexions, vol. 1. pp. 185 — 6. as quoted by Mr. Balfour, says : "Di- rectly opposite to these were the Magians, another sect, who had their original in the same eastern coun- tries ; for they, abominating all images, worshipped God only by lire. They began first in Persia, and there, and in India, were the only places where this ?ect was propagated ; and there they remain even to this day. Their chief doctrine was, that there were two principles, one which was the cause of all good, and the other the cause of all evil, that is to say, God and the devil ; that the former is represented by light, and the other by darkness, as their truest symbols ; and that, of the composition of these two, all things are made : the good god they name Yazdan, and also Ormudz, and the evil god, Ahraman : the former is by the Greeks called Oramasdez, and the latter Ari- manius. And therefore, when Xerxes prayed for that evil upon his enemies, that it might be put into the minds of all of them to drive their best and bravest men from them, as the Athenians had Themistocles, he addressed his prayer to Arimanius, the evil god of the Persians, and not to Oramasdez, their good god. And concerning these two gods there was this differ- ence of opinion among them, that whereas some held both of them to have been from all eternity, there were others that contended, that the good s;od only was eternal, and that the other was created. But they both agreed in this, that there will be a continual op- position between these two till the end of the world : 46 DEMONOLOGY. that then the good god shall overcome the evil god, and that from thenceforward each of them shall have his world to himself, that is, the good god his world with all good men with him, and the evil god his world with all evil men with him ; that darkness is the truest symbol of the evil god, and light the truest symbol of the good god. And therefore they always worship- ped him with fire, as being the cause of light, and es- pecially before the sun, as being in their opinion the perfectest tire, and causing the perfectest light. And for this reason, in all their temples, they had lire con- tinually burning on altars erected in them for that pur- pose. And before these sacred fires they offered up all their public devotions, as likewise they did all their private devotions before their private fires in their own houses. Thus did they pay the highest honour to light, as being in their opinion the truest representa- tive of the good god ; but always hated darkness, as being, what they thought, the truest representative of the evil god, whom they ever had in the utmost de- testation, as we now have the devil : and,*for an in- stance hereof, whenever they had an occasion in any of their writings to mention his name, they always wrote it backward, and inverted, as thus, ireuie.iiry." Here Mr. Balfour, arguing on the subject of Job's troubles, and the imputed agency of an evil spirit as the cause of them, thus speaks : — But what shows such opinions prevailed where Job lived, are the facts and circumstances mentioned in the account itself. These we shall notice presently. Here T would only say, that it is evident satan is in- troduced as an evil being, and it is generally contend- ed that he was the author of all Job's afflictions. This perfectly agrees to the opinions of the Magians, as stated by Prideaux. Besides, previous Scripture usage of the term satan, forbids us thinking, that the sacred writers recognized either an evil god or a fallen DEMONOLOGY. 47 angel under this name. Where, let me ask, do any of them intimate, that an evil being, such as the Per- sian evil god, or the Christian's devil, existed as a rival to Jehovah ? To what else then could the writer refer, but to such heathen opinions ? If such a being as the Christian's devil existed, how is it accounted for, that he remained so quiet until the days of Job ? Job appears to have been the first man he ever troubled, from the creation of the world. Noah, Abra- ham, Isaac, and Jacob, with many others were good men, and rich men, but he never attempted to injure them in their property, or smite them with a single boil in their whole lifetime. From any thing which appears to the contrary, they had no fear of such a being nor knew of his existence. Had satan just fallen from heaven, in the days of Job, and began his depredations on mankind ? Admitting this true, how is it, that as Job was the first, so he was the last man he ever so tormented ? The case of the woman, whom he is said to have bound eighteen years, is no exception to this, as we shall show, Section 5. Let it be accounted for then, why satan had such a partic- ular hatred against Job, above all other men before or since. It is easily perceived, that these things are rationally accounted for, on the presumption, that in this account there is a reference to the evil god of the people among whom Job lived. Allowing this, the account is just what might be expected. The cha- racter given to satan, answers to that of their god, whom they believed to be the author and director of all evil. The question which now comes forward for con- sideration is — Was this account of satan introduced for the purpose of establishing, or was it introduced to refute such opinions 1 Let satan here be consider- ed, either the evil principle deified, or the devil of Christians, were such opinions intended to be sane- 48 DEMONOLOGY. tioned by the writer, or does he introduce them, to expose their fallacy, and establish the supremacy of the one living and true God in opposition to them ? All 1 think will agree, that the whole must stand ap- proved or condemned. No middle path can be here taken, for no ground is afforded for it. It is then a matter of no consequence, whether we consider satan in this account the principle of evil deified, or, that he was the Christian's devil. Whether the same or dif- ferent, I shall proceed to show, by direct, and I think conclusive evidence, that neither of them had any in- fluence in producing Job's afflictions. That they were all sent by the one living and true God, whom Job feared and obeyed, is evident, - 1st. From Job's own testimony concerning his af- flictions. Job's heathen neighbours supposed their evil god Ahraman was the cause of them. Christians believe their satan or devil was the cause of them. But does Job ascribe them to either ? No, when one messenger after another is represented as announcing to him the loss of his property, and at last the death of his children, he says — " The Lord gave and the Lord taketh away ; blessed be the name of the Lord." chap. 1 : 21. He does not for a moment admit that either Ahraman or the devil had any kind of * ncern in his afflictions. He no more admits their influence in taking away his property and children, than in the bestowment of them. The giving and taking them away are alike ascribed to Jehovah. Similar were his views and feelings, when afflicted with sore boils. His wife desired him to curse God and die. But he says to her — " Thou speakcst as one of the foolish women speaketh. What ! shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil?" Job 2 : 9, 10. Does this look like acknowledging the Persian evil god or the Christian's devil ? Notwith- standing the popular opinions, that Ahraman was the DEMONOLOGY, 49 cause of all evil, the severe bodily pain he suffered^ and the taunts of his wife, he holds fast his integrity in the true God. Now, permit me to ask, if Job had be- lieved, that either Ahraman or the devil brought his afflictions upon him, why did he ascribe them all to the true God without reservation ? And why did he not correct his wife's mistake, by telling her, that Ahraman or the devil ought to be cursed ? But Job had no faith in either, hence he told her, that she spoke as one of the foolish or heathen women speaketh. Job allowed of but one God, and it is evident, that his ad- versity and prosperity are both alike ascribed to him. See chap. 42 : 10—12. and 1 : 21. 2d. The speech of Job's wife, and his reply to her, shows, that neither Ahraman nor the devil was the cause of his afflictions. She no doubt heard what he said, chap. 1:21. Upon seeing him still persisting in his integrity under his affliction of the boils, she was provoked at him, and in taunting language says to him, — "dost thou still regain thy integrity? Curse God and die." On the word rendered to curse, Parkhurst thus Writes : " The Lexicons have absurdly, and con- trary to the authority of the ancient versions given to this verb the sense of cursing in the six following pas- sages— 1 Kings, 21 : 10, 13. Job 1 : 5, 11. And 2 : 5- 9. As to the two first the Seventy render Berek, m both, by eulogeo, and so the Vulgate by benedico, to bless. And though Jezebel was herself an abominable idola- tress, yet as the law of Moses still continued in force, she seems to have been wicked enough to have des- troyed Naboth upon the false accusation of blessing the heathen aleim and Moloch, which subjected him to death, by Deut. 13: 6. and 17: 2—7. Job's fear, chap. 1 : 5. was, lest his sons should have blessed the false akim ; and verse 11. he says ought to be render- ed — ( And indeed stretch forth thy hand now, and touch all that he hath, surely he hath blessed thee to 5 50 DEMONOLOGY. thy face,' i. e. hypocritically ; the verb being used in a past tense. The Seventy render it, truly he will bless thee to thy face. And the Vulgate— unless he hath blessed thee to thy face, Comp. verses 5,7. And 1 Kings 20 : 23. Satan brings the same charge of hypocrisy against Job, chap. 2: 5. which the Seventy, Theodotian and Vulgate rendered in the same man- ner. And at verse 9. his wife says to him, dost thou yet retain thy integrity, thy regard for the true God, blessing the aleim and dying, or even to death V — Thus far Parkhnrst, whose remarks shed additional light on this account. They agree with the usage of the word, which is rendered to bless, in other texts : they also accord, with the charge of hypocrisy, which is brought against Job by his friends throughout the book. But what deserves particular notice, these re- marks show, that Job lived among a people who had a false aleim or god, and a contrast if not a contest between this god aud Jehovah is set forth in the ac- count. The false god is spoken of as one, and not many, and what god could this be but Ahraman ? For the Persians had only two, their good god and their evil god. That a contrast is set forth betwixt the false god and the true, is evident from Job's fear, chap. 1 : 5. lest his children should have blessed the false aleim or god, instead of cursing the true God as in the common version. It is also plain from the speech of his wife, who, instead of desiring Job to curse the true God, expresses her surprise, that he should continue to bless him though at the point of death in suffering from his hands. It is apparent, that she believed in Ahraman, and entertained the opin- ions concerning him as stated above by Prideaux. She was displeased with her husband, for continuing to trust in the true God at the gates of death, and even blessing him for his afflictions. In desiring him to renounce his confidence in the true God, did she DEMONOLOGY. 51 mean that he should become an atheist, or live with- out any God? No ; she impliedly wished him to trust in Ahraman, the evil god, the author of all evil, and the cause of all his afflictions. Job had despised him, and continued to trust in the true God to the last. She therefore wished him to abandon this confidence, and trust in the evil god, the true author of his afflic- tions. By doing so, he would become his friend, re- move his afflictions, or terminate them by death. 3d. That this account of satan, is introduced to be condemned, and not sanctioned, appears from the reasonings of Job and his friends throughout the whole book. Job's friends, like himself, did not believe in Ahraman, for they maintain, that Jehovah, on account of his hypocrisy and wickedness, had sent such afflic* tions upon him. But I ask, does any one of them ev- er intimate that satan, whether Persian god or Chris- tian devil, had produced his afflictions ? No ; they are to a man agreed, that they were the doings of Jeho- vah, nor do they insinuate, that he used satan as a tool in producing them. As a specimen of their sentiments on this subject, let the reader consult chap. 4 : 9. and v. 17, 18. and 8 : 3, 4. Job defends himself against the charge of hypocrisy and wickedness brought by his friends. See as examples chap. 6 : 4, 5. 7 : 20, 21. 9: 16—18. 10: 2. 16: 11—15. and 19, 21. We may then appeal to every candid man, whether Job's friends, would have been silent about satan pro- ducing his afflictions, if they believed so. And had they believed 'satan or Ahraman the author of all evil, would they have ascribed his afflictions to Jehovah ? Besides ; had Job or his friends believed, that Jeho- vah used satan as an instrument in inflicting them, why is nothing said about it, either in their charge or his defence? In repelling their accusations, would Job have failed to urge that his afflictions arose from satan's great enmity against him, had he but suspected 32 demonology; that this was true. All know, that people are ndt very scrupulous now in blaming the devil. Nothing could have been easier or more natural, than for Job to repel the charges against him by saying, that satan hated him and had thus afflicted him. Can any man then believe, that this account was introduced to es- tablish the existence of such an evil being, yet this be contradicted by Job and his friends throughout the book ? If true, why not rather go on to confirm such a doctrine ? Is it objected — " if false why introduce it at all ?" I answer ; for the very purpose of refuting such an opinion, and for establishing the unity and supremacy of the one living and true God. It is well known, that false gods are often introduced in Scrip- ture, in contrast with the true, for the very purpose of exposing their absurdity. But I ask, is any false god ever allowed to be able to do good or evil ? No 5 they are challenged to do either, to prove that they are gods. It is admitted by every intelligent man, that in the after parts of the Old Testament, and in the New, there are allusions to the evil principle deified, or the evil god of the Persians. And to darkness as the symbol of this god. See a specimen of these, and how the sacred writers expose such a doctrine, Isai. 45 : 5—7. 2 Cor. 6 : 15. 10: 3. and 11: 13. Eph. G: 10. 4th. Job's afflictions are referred to, James 5 : 11. and his patience under them, is set forth as an ex- ample to us, but not ascribed to satan, but to Jeho- vah. Indeed no sacred writer, these' two chapters excepted, say or insinuate that Ahraman or satan had any influence in producing them. But I have a right to demand, why no sacred writer has done this, if they believe as most people do now that satan was the author of Job's afflictions ? If they had the same view of those two chapters as most people now have, is it possible that they would have been silent on such a subject? . DEMONOLOGY, 53 5th. However prone the Jews were to idolary, and the superstitions of the nations around them, it was a truth obviously taught in their Scriptures, that their God was good, and that he had no evil being as a riv- al to him. So far from giving any countenance to an evil being called Ahraman, Satan, Devil, or by any other name, all witchcraft, necromancy, or appeals to any other being or power stand condemned, and the Jews were solemnly charged to have no concern with them. Jehovah, and he alone, is declared to be the creator, preserver, and ruler of all things, and all be- ings in the universe. Life and death, sickness and health, prosperity and adversity, are all ascribed to him. See Gen. 1:1. Dan. 4 : 35. 1 Sam. 2 : 6, 7. Isai. 45 : 7. Amos 3 : 6. Micah 1 : 12. Psalm 33 : 14 — 15. Prov. 16 : 4, 9. and 21 : 30. The idea of an evil being, which Christians call the devil and satan, and other nations have designated by a variety of names, found no place in the Jewish Scriptures. That the Jews learnt such opinions from the heathen, we shall see in the next Section. In concluding our remarks on this account of satan in the book of Job, let us com- pare what is said in it, with the above quotation from Prideaux, and we shall see all that has been advanced strongly confirmed. Let us begin with the term satan ? We have seen that this word signifies an adversary. That person or thing, is called a satan to another, which stands in his way, or in any shape opposes him. Thus, the angel of Jehovah, was a satan to Baalam, and the writing sent to Ahasuerus, was a satan to the Jews. Satan, in this account, is represented as opposed both to God and Job. He was their adversary or satan. Prideaux, in the above quotation, informs us, that Ahraman, the evil god, was opposed to the good God, and that this opposition would continue to the end of the world. He also informs us that the evil god was considered 5* 54 DEMONOLOGY, the author and director of all evil. This, is precise- ly the representation, which is given of satan in the book of Job. All Job's afflictions are supposed to be the doings of satan. Orthodox people contend, that this was the case, and that satan is their devil. They have then got only an evil heathen god, or the principle of evil deified, a mere nonenity, for a devil. But is this very honourable to Christianity ? And is it like persons, who reverence the word of God, flatly to contradict Job, in ascribing afflictions to satan which he ascribes to Jehovah ? Job contends, that the good God was the author of his afflictions, as well as his prosperity. Those who believed in the evil god, did not deny, but the good God was the author of his pros- perity, but would not admit him to be the author of his adversity. Job maintained that Jehovah was the author of both, blessing his name when he took away, as well as when he gave. By this the excellency of his eharacter was made manifest. But again ; in the above quotation from Prideaux, it is not alleged, that the good and evil gods always produced good and evil by their own immediate agen- cy, but that these were brought about by the instru- mentality of second causes. Though Job ascribes his prosperity and adversity to Jehovah, yet he, and all the scripture writers represent him, as accomplishing both by human means. Looking at the two first chap- ters of Job, the agents by which Job's afflictions were produced, are distinctly mentioned. For example, the Sabean and Chaldean freebooters carried away his flocks. Were not they then a satan to Job, in the common scripture usage of this term ? And does not their very manner of life, exactly agree to what satan says, chap. 1:7.? " And the Lord said unto satan, whence comest thou ?'' Well, what answer does he make ? He says, " from going to and fro in the earth, and froiA walking up and down in it." Just such an BEMONOLOGY 56 answer as those freebooters would have given, for it was their mode of life to roam about committing such depredations. Yea, satan is the very name given to such persons in the East to this day. Messrs. Fisk and King, two of the Palestine missionaries, thus write : "For two hours, however, as we moved along our at- tendants were engaged in loud and violent disputes with these and other companies of Bedouins, who came up after they went away. They extorted a few dol- lars from the Armenians and Greeks, and at last took an ass from one of the Arabs; Our Shekh knew all these freebooters, and it is probably owing to his ac- quaintance with them, and his faithfulness to us, that they were so easily satisfied, and we met with so little trouble from them. He says, most of the Bedouins are much worse than these, and yet he called these sa- (ans (shaitan.") See Christian Spectator, vol. 7, p. 222. Such is the account given us by two orthodox missionaries. If the writer of the book of Job, did not include the Sabean and Chaldean freebooters in the term satan, all will allow, that the ancient and present usage of this word in the East fully warranted him. We see then, that there was no need for the as- sistance of a fallen angel, to produce this part of Job's afflictions. The agent by which he lost his children, is as distinctly mentioned. We are told, chap. 1 : 18, 19. " That a great wind from the wilderness, smote the four corners of the house, and it fell upon them and killed them." Such was the cause, which pro- duced this effect, nor do we perceive, that the aid of any evil being was required to accomplish it. We may just as well accuse satan of blowing down every house which is destroyed by a tornado. Job's sheep were killed by lightning, and it and the wind are agents in the natural world by which God accomplishes his pleasure, over which Ahraman, or the Christian's dev- il, have no control. 56 DEMONOLOGY. Again ; looking at this account, and comparing it with the quotation from Prideaux, we see why Job's boils are expressly ascribed to satan, without any other agent being concerned in their production. All evil indiscriminately, was ascribed to the evil god or satan, as all good was to the good god. But, as there was no visible agent to which the boils could be as- cribed, no agent in this case is mentioned. Satan, or the evil god, has to father this affliction himself, with- out the assistance of any agent. Hence it is said, sa- tan smote Job with the boils, which is not said re- specting his other afflictions, though the whole aspect of the account, is in agreement with considering him the author and director of all evil. I shall only add, that it has always appeared strange, that in this ac- count, satan should be represented as conversing free- ly and familiarly with God. But if the account be as I have stated, the good and evil gods are here only re- presented as conversing together. It was in unison with the popular opinions concerning them. In concluding our remarks, let us briefly notice some points of similiarity in the Magian creed, to those of Christian creeds in the present day. The Persians then had one good being or god, and also one evil being. Or, as Prideaux observes, " that is to say God and the devil." Christians in this are perfectly agreed with them, for they believe in one God, and also one devil. Again ; the Persians be- lieved, that these two gods were the authors of all good and evil in the world. In this also Christians agree with them, for all good they ascribe to God, and impute all evil to satan, or the devil. Further ; the Persians made darkness the symbol of their evil god. So do Christians. When they speak of the devil he is described as black, dark, and hideous, and as lov- ing darkness, and dwelling in darkness, and keeping men in darkness, and will lead them at last into eter- DEMONOLOGY. 57 nal darkness. Again ; the Persians believed that their good god was eternal. Some believed also, that their evil god was eternal. About this, there was a diversi- ty of opinion. So all Christians believe their good god to be eternal, but about the devil there is a differ- ence of opinion. Though none of them believe him to have been from all eternity, yet some of them be- lieve that he is to live for ever, and shall remain eter- nally the same wicked being. Others of them think that, after a long period of punishment, he will be either struck out of existence, or be redeemed and made eternally happy. But again, the Persians be- lieved, that there was a continual opposition between their good god and evil god, and that this should con- tinue to the end of the world. Then, the good god shall overcome the evil god, and thenceforward each of them shall have his world to himself, that is, the good god his world with all good men with him, and the evil god his world with all evil men with him. All Chris- tians contend, that there is a continual opposition be- tween their God and the devil, and that this opposi- tion shall continue to the end of the world. Then, God is to overcome the devil, and from that time thenceforward, God is to have his world and all good men with him, and the devil is to have his world, and all wicked men with him. Such are a few of the lead- ing points of similarity, between the ancient Magiaa faith and Christians in our day, respecting God, the devil, and future punishment. It is but proper and fair to notice 2d. Some of the points of dissimilarity between them. The Magians then believed, that their good and evil gods were only " two principles." These princi- ples they not only personified, but deified and wor- shipped. When Xerxes prayed for evil on his ene- mies, " he addressed his prayer to Arimanius, the evil god, and not to Ormasdes, their good god." Chris- 58 DEMONOLOGY. tians, believe their God and the devil, to be, not two principles, but two beings. Their devil is not only a being, but was once an angelic being, but for his sin and rebellion was cast out of heaven. Christians do not worship their devil. But alas, too many who pro- fess to be Christians, like Xerxes, when they wish evil on their enemies, pray to the devil. Christians have a great nnmber of names for their devil. But it is ap- parent, that whether such a being is called Ahraman, Arimanius, satan, or devil, the leading features of his character among all nations are the same. The evil god has become the Christians' devil. In fact they make their devil the worst being, for though it was believed that their evil god, should at the end of the world have a world to himself with all wicked men, yet it does not appear, that they believed he was to be the eternal tormentor of men. But it is well known, that this is a principal article in most orthodox creeds, and no man would be deemed orthodox, who denied it. I shall only add, that though the Persians and Christians agree in hating Ahraman or the devil, yet the latter have not carried their hatred so far as to write the devil's name inverted. In the next Section we shall see, that the Magian creed was much improv- ed by Zoroaster, and that Christians have not only adopted his sentiments, but the very language in which he expressed them. BEMONOLOGY. 59 SECTION VI. Of witches anil witchci aft. — The Magian religion, as revived and reformed by Zoroaster, a supposed Jew. — Zoroaster's day of judg- ment. — Concluding remarks, [This section, and a portion of the former, are principally extracted from Balfour's Second Inquiry, a work which ought to be in every family.] The concluding remarks are by the editor. 1st. In the early stages of the Jewish history, we read of witches and witchcraft. Injunctions are giv- en against these, before we hear any thing about satan or the devil. But notice, that nothing is said to them about witchcraft until they were about to enter Ca- naan. Many of the injunctions delivered to the Jew- ish nation, were for the purpose of fortifying them against such heathen notions, and preserving them in the fear and service of the one living and true God. See the following among other passages concerning this. Levit. 19: 26,31. 20: 6, 27. Deut. 18: 9, 12. Exod. 22: 18. comp. Isai. 47: 12, 13. 1 Sam. chap. 28. The inhabitants of Canaan were given to idolatry, and- witchcraft with similar superstitions were its effects on the minds of the people. But such a being as Christians call the devil, was neither wor- shipped, feared, nor known among them. They had abundance of idols, but no devil or satan, nor are the Jews cautioned to beware of imbibing from them such an opinion. It is then a very great mistake, which many good people have made, in calling witchcraft the devil's art, and in thinking witches and wizzards were in league with him. Concerning this, Michaelis, on the laws of Moses, thus writes, vol. iv. page 89. " We must however entertain very different sentiments on this point, in reference to the time of Moses. For in the Biblical writings prior to the Babylonish cap- tivity, we meet with very little notice of the devil, 60 DEMONOLOGY. and it would seem, that the effects which he could produce on the material world, were considered as but very trifling. The wizzards of those days rather ascribed the efficacy of their conjurations to other gods *, and therefore, in the Israelitish polity, witch- craft was commonly accounted a species of idolatry, and of course, most severely punishable. Hence or- thodox theology, in the time of Moses, could look upon it in no other light, than an imposture : for no one could maintain, that it operated preternaturally, without admitting the existence of other gods, and their power over the material world." — The Jews, before they entered Canaan, knew nothing about the devil. Nor did its idolatrous inhabitants, for he was not known in that part of the world. If then, as now, he walked about seeking whom he might devour, it is very unaccountable he should not be familiarly known in Canaan, a land full of idols, and witches, and all manner of wickedness. It seems all these could exist in those days without any devil to produce them. — Nor is Moses, or rather God, under any apprehension, that he would visit that country. We shall see that the Jews were obliged to go to a foreign land to find the devil. 2d. The Jews were carried to Babylon, and spent seventy years in captivity. Here, the Magian reli- gion, revived and improved by Zoroaster, prevailed, and here we shall find that they became acquainted with the doctrine of the devil, and with other religious opinions not found in their Scriptures. To this point I shall now turn the attention of the reader. Pri- deaux, vol. i. p. 219 — 240. gives us an account of Zoroaster, his religion, and its success, a few brief extracts from which I shall only make. He says : — " In the time of his (Darius Hystaspis) reign first ap- peared in Persia the famous prophet of the Magians, whom the Persians call Zerdusht, or Zaratush. and the Greeks, Zoroaster. BEMONOLOGY* Gt " He was the greatest impostor, except Mahomet, that ever appeared in the world, and had all the craft and enterprising boldness of that Arab, but much more knowledge ; for he was excellently skilled in all the learning of the East that was in his time ; whereas the other could neither write nor read ; and particu- larly he was thoroughly versed in the Jewish religion, and in all the sacred writings of the Old Testament that were then extant, which makes it most likely, that he was, as to his origin, a Jew. And it is gene- rally said of him, that he had been a servant to one of the prophets of Israel, and that it was by this means that he came to be so well skilled in the holy scriptures, and all other Jewish knowledge ; which is a farther proof, that he was of that people ; it not being likely, that a prophet of Israel should entertain him as a servant, or instruct him as a disciple, if he were not of the same seed of Israel, as well as of the same religion with him ; and that especially since it was the usage of that people, by principle of religion, as well as by long received custom among them, to separate themselves from all other nations, as far as they were able. And it is farther to be taken notice of, that most of those who speak of his original, say, that he was of Palestine, within which country the land of J udea was. And all this put together, amounts with me to a convincing proof, that he" was first a Jew, and that by birth, as well as religion, before he took upon him to be prophet of the Magian sect. " He did not found a new religion, as his successor in imposture Mahomet did, but only took upon him to revive and reform an old one, that of the Magians, which had been for many ages past, the ancient na- tional religion of the Medes, as well as of the Per- sians : for it having fallen under disgrace on the death of those ringleaders of that sect, who had usurped the sovereignty after the death of Cambyses, and the 6 62 DEMONOLOGY. slaughter which was then made of all the chief men among them, it sunk so low, that it became almost ex- tinct, and Sabianism every where prevailed against it, Darius and most of his followers on that occasion going over to it. But the affection which the people had for the religion of their forefathers, and which they had all been brought up in, not being easily to be rooted out, Zoroaster saw, that the revival of this was the best game of imposture that he could then play ; and, having so good an old stock to graft upon, he did with the greater ease make all his new scions to grow, which he inserted into it. " The chief reformation which he made in the Ma- gian religion was in the first principle of it : for where- as before they had held the being of two first causes, the first light, or the good god, who was the author of all good ; and the other darkness, or the evil god, who was the author of all evil ; and that of the mixture of these two, as they were in a continual struggle with each other, all things were made ; he introduced a principle superior to them both, one supreme, God, who created light and darkness, and out of these two, according to the alone pleasure of his own will, made all things else that are, according to what is said in the 45th chapter of Isaiah, 5, 6, 7. " 1 am the Lord, and there is none else : there is no God besides me ; I girded thee, though thou hast not known me, that, they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none besides me. I am the Lord, and there is none else. I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and create evil, I the Lord do all these things.' ' For these words being directed to Cyrus, king of Persia, must be understood as spoken in reference to the Persian sect of the Ma- gians, who then held light and darkness, or good and evil, to be the supreme beings, without acknowledging the great God who is superior to both. And I doubt DEMONOLOGY. 63 not it was from hence that Zoroaster had the hint of mending this great absurdity in their theology. But to avoid making God the author of evil, his doctrine was, that God originally and directly created only right or good, and that darkness or evil followed it by consequence, as the shadow doth the person ; that light or good had only a real production from God, and the other afterwards resulted from it, as the defect thereof. In sum, his doctrine as to this particular was. that there was one supreme Being, independent and self-existing from all eternity. That under him there were two angels, one the angel of light, who is the au- thor and director of all good; and the other the an- gel of darknesss, who is the author and director of all evil ; and that these two, out of the mixture of light and darkness, made all things that are ; that they are in a perpetual struggle with each other ; and that where the angel of light prevails, there the most is good, and where the angel of darkness prevails, there the most is evil ; that this struggle shall continue to the end of the world ; that then there shall be a gen- eral reserrection, and a day of judgment, wherein just retribution shall be rendered to all according to their works ; after which the angel of darkness, and his disciples, shall go into a world of their own, where they shall suffer in everlasting darkness the punish- ments of their evil deeds : and the angel of light, and his disciples, shall also go into a world of their own, where they shall receive in everlasting light, the re- ward due unto their good deeds ; and that after this they shall remain separated for ever, and light and darkness be no more mixed together to all eternity. — And all this the remainder of that sect, which is now in Persia and India, do without any variation, after so many ages, still hold even to this day." Let us now consider, what Zoroaster says shall take place at the end of the world, and compare it 64 DEMONOLOGY. with the creeds of most Christians. He says--*" then there shall be a general resurrection." This article Zoroaster no doubt learned from his acquaintance with the Jewish Scriptures, for the resurrection from the dead, was the ultimate hope of believers in Christ, who was promised to the fathers. At this resurrec- tion, he says there shall be u a day of judgment" — This, Zoroaster could not learn from the Old Testa- ment, for it does not teach such a doctrine, and when he made his creed, the New was not in existence. The phrase u day of judgment,'" used by him, is that now used by Christians, and in the same sense as he used it. In my answer to Mr. Sabine, I examined every text in which this phrase is found, and showed, that it is not once used in the Bible, in the sense which Zoro- aster and Christians have attached to it. To it I bee; leave to refer the reader, who inclines to examine this subject. Christians must have borrowed the sense they attach to the phrase " day of judgment 1 ' from his creed, for he could not borrow it from theirs, as the chronology of the cases show. But let us hear Zo- roaster, about what shall take place at the day of judg- ment? He says — "just retribution shall be rendered to all according to their works." It cannot be denied., that this is the very sentiment and language of Chris- tian creeds. Bat I ask, how Zoroaster could learn ei- ther this sentiment or its phraseology from the Old Testament? If he did, intelligent and orthodox men have erred greatly in admitting that this doctrine is not taught at all, or at least very doubtful in the Old Testament. Jahn, in his Archaeology, thus writes, p. 398.—" We have not authority, therefore, decided- ly to say, that any other motives were held out to the ancient Hebrews to pursue the good and avoid the evil, than those, which were derived from the rewards and punishments of this life. That these were the motives which were presented to their minds in order DEMONOLOGY. 6fe to influence them to pursue a right course of conduct* is expressly asserted, Isai. 26 : 9, 10. and may be learnt also from the imprecations, which are met with, in many parts of the Old Testament. Every orthodox man must believe that the devil with his disciples, or all wicked men, are to suffer in a world of their own "in everlasting darkness the pun- ishment of their evil deeds," and that "the angel of light, and his disciples, shall also go into a world of their own, where they shall receive in everlasting light the reward due unto their good deeds : and that after this they shall remain separated for ever, and light and darkness be no more mixed together to all eternity." What man would be deemed orthodox, who refused to believe these things ? And why not allow, that Zoroaster, the greatest impostor that ever arose, Ma- homet excepted, was in these things as orthodox as they are ? In these things he was orthodox long before them. There is only one of the above articles about which they differ from him in opinion. To the hon- our of our orthodox brethren be it spoken, they do not say, that the disciples of the angel of light receive future blessedness as a reward for good deeds done by them here. No, they say, it is not of works but of grace, lest any man should boast. It is true, the grace whereby they save men, is rather a purchased grace, than free grace, but on this we forbear re- marking. But it is added by Prideaux — " and all this the re- mainder of that sect which is now in Persia and India, do without any variation, after so many ages still hold even to this day." If they hold all the above articles, " without any variation to this day," and if they are all true, as Dean Prideaux asserts, why be at so much trouble and expense to send them missionaries ? The chief articles in modern Christian creeds were propa- gated there many ages before the Christian religion 6* 66 DEMONOLOGY. existed. If these tenets were taken from the New Testament, "it is certain Zoroaster taught them long before, and Jesus Christ and his apostles had not the honour of revealing such articles of faith to the world. For example, " they believe in one Supreme God, and in Jesus Christ under the name of 4 an angel of light." They believe also in the Christian's devil, un- der the name of 4 an angel of darkness.' They be- lieve in the opposition of these two to each other, and which is to continue to the end of the world. They further believe in a resurrection of all the dead, a day of judgment and future retribution. And they believe in the everlasting happiness of all the good, and everlasting punishment of all the wicked." Pray, what more do orthodox people wish them to believe, to be as orthodox as themselves ? What more could missionaries teach them, to perfect their Christian creed, which they received from Zoroaster ? It is true, there are some articles in the Christian creeds of which they must be ignorant as they were not taught by Zoroaster. It does not appear that he knew any thing about hell-fire, as the place of everlasting pun- ishment for his angel of darkness and his disciples. Nor had he learned that his angel of darkness was to be the everlasting tormentor of the wicked in this place. He was also ignorant that hell was paved with the skulls of infants a span long. His creed does not recognize, neither, that it is necessary for people to be willing to be damned for the glory of God, in order to their being saved. As to his making God the author of evil or sin, he framed his system so as to avoid this absurdity. Being damned for Adam's transgression, divine retribution, three persons in one God, and other articles of modern theological discussion, Zoroaster seems to have known no more about, than about cap- tain Symmes' theory of the earth. It deserves the serious consideration of the whole orthodox body, DEMONOLOGY. 67 whether missionaries ought not to come from Persia and India here, to examine into the innovations and additions made in the creed of their founder, the great Zoroaster. concluding- remarks. We have now seen that the personality of the dev- il, and other tenets of the Magian religion are not taught in the Scriptures of the Old Testament. That Zoroaster did not learn them from this source is evi- dent, by the fact that the orthodox, who still hold the same tenets, cannot find them there. That Zoroaster did not obtain them from the New Testament, is set- tled by the fact, that it was not written within 600 years of the time in which he flourished. Were they given to him by special revelation from God ? No one will affirm this, for he is allowed to be a great im- poster. Are they then of his invention, and did Jesus Christ and his apostles sanction these sentiments by adopting them ? If they did, why do we still call him an impostor who introduced them, while Jesus is term- ed the high priest of our profession ? As it is admit- ted by those who are best able to judge in these mat- ters, that the writings of the Old Testament do not contain these sentiments, to what shall we attribute them ? Shall we say that Jesus Christ and his apos- tles taught them by direction of God ? If so, why was not Zoroaster, who taught the same six hundred years prior to the Christian dispensation, a true prophet ? if the prophets of the Lord advocated these tenets, let us have chapter and verse for it. If not, and they are a part of the Christian system, then Zoroaster, and not Christ, is their promulgator. Christ, then, mere- ly revived the Magian religion, as improved by that 63 DEMONOLOGY. arch impostor, and the moderns who hold these senti- ments, are indebted to the greatest impostor that ev- er lived, excepting Mahomet, for the articles of the orthodox creed, and not to Christ. But will our ortho- dox friends allow this ? And yet how will they avoid it ? If Zoroaster did teach these tenets, and if the prophets in the Old Testament did not teach them, while they are considered as parts of the Christian theology, then are we indebted to Zoroaster, and not to those who came after him, for the sentiments which they merely revived. " Let it now be remembered, that while the Jews dwelt in Canaan they knew nothing about the devil. If they did it was merely by report, that the Persians and other nations believed in such a being. They had precepts, guarding them against witchcraft, idolatry, and all the abominations of the Canaanites, but not one guarding them against that almost infinite being whom Christians call the devil. How our orthodox brethren account for this I am unable to say. On my views, it is easily and rationally accounted for. The devil was the principle of evil deified, transformed by Zoroaster into an angel of darkness, and the Jews go to Babylon to get acquainted with him. That the Jews spent seventy years in captivity there, is a fact disputed by no one." How likely the Jews were to imbibe the principles of the Babylonians during their captivity of seventy years, is not very problematical. The time of their captivity, was while the Magian religion was in its zenith. They were always prone to go a whoring af- ter strange gods, whom their fathers knew not. The manner of their captivity led in a great measure to this result, for they were scattered through that immense territory. Zoroaster's religion recognized one God, and so did theirs. The religion of Zoroaster was popular, and they had many inducements to embrace" DEMONOLOGY. 69 it. A great similitude existed between the two reli- gions in respect to idols, which were discountenanced by both ; and this makes it very probable, that Zo- roaster was indeed a Jew, as has already been hinted. As we have now seen that the similarity between the principles of Zoroaster and those professed at the present time by men who claim to be Christians, is very striking, why are not the moderns as properly called Mehestani, as were the followers of Zoroaster, and not after Christ, the mere servant of Zoroaster. Jf, as a master, Zoroaster taught what are now called the principles of the Christian religion, we see no pro- priety in naming men after him who merely kept in countenance doctrines which had been taught for half a dozen centuries. That the Jews did embrace the religion of the Per- sians, viz. the worship of the sun, is evident from Ezck. 8 ; where the prophet saw in vision certain men " standing between the porch and the altar, with their backs towards the temple of the Lord, and their faces towards the east ; and they worshipped the sun," But this is not the only source whence they derived superstitious ideas. The Grecian philosophy of the pre-existence and transmigration of souls, had evident- ly made some considerable advances, as may be seen in John 9 : 2. " And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was BORtf blind?" The disciples, or others who could ask such a question, must be deeply imbued with the Pythagorian philosophy of metempsychosis. On no other principle can we account for a question which seems to set common sense at defiance. The highly figurative language of the Orientals, has led the more prosing moderns to regard the figures used, as facts, and the frequency of prosopepeia, as proof of real existences. But is any thing we read of AiafoXos of the New Testament, or the ttarwas oi 70 DEMONOLOGY. either the Old or New, more clearly applied to per- sonal existences, than the personification of demons, or wisdom, or death ? Wisdom is represented as speaking, as sitting, as acting, and yet every one may know by the context, that this is but a personification of an attribute. Very superficial people have indeed mistaken this personification in certain 'instances, but their mistakes are not binding on us. Death, wheth- er moral or natural, cannot be a real existence, a per- son having identity, and of course consciousness ; and yet it is personified as riding, as having a sling, and as being destroyed by a victorious conqueror. An apos- tle represents death as a king, reigning in majesty, from Adam to Moses, and the prophet represents God as saying, O death I will be thy plagues. But who be- lieves death to be a real entity ? But why should we not with as much propriety believe this, as to credit the personality of the cause of diseases, which, being more than a match for the skill of physicians in those days, was imputed to the influence of demons, or the spirits of departed men ? Missionaries in those eas- tern countries represent people as now using incan- tations over those diseased as were the demoniacs of old, and it is evident that the same belief still contin- ues. Yet, in this country, a person who should im- pute epilepsy to a devil, or the devil, considered as the spirit of a deified dead man, or an infernal agent, would be " laughed to scorn,' ■ even in this devil-believing age. But we need look no further back than to the fathers of New England for the mania of believing in witches and witchcraft, and real possessions by infernal spirits. The chronicles of those times exhibit a delusion in this respeet, almost unaccountable. So strong was the predilection for these vagaries, that the colony of Massachusetts was in a fair way to be depopulated. The minister in his desk, and the judge on the bench, DEMONOLOGY. 71 were liable to accusation, and accusation amounted to proof. Judicial proceedings were trammeled by the fetters of superstition, and nothing but a prospect of annihilating the settlement, seemed to awaken them to a just sense of their situation. No man's liberty, or even life, was safe from this monster of fanaticism. Every injury, every insult, or supposed one, and every hatred without a cause existing in the person hated, was sufficient to drag the imputed to prison and to death. But who now, does not look back on these ridiculous and horrible phantasies, as the effect of de- luded minds, and who is not ashamed to " — Own our fathers have been fools so long ?** The translation of the terms <5>a§oXos, 6a^ov, 5a/juiov« ;ov, and tfarava, by the word devil, has not a lit- tle confounded the ideas of our ancestors, and indeed of our contemporaries. Having generally very imper- fect ideas of the distinction in language by the mis- translation, and not caring to venture a search into what a most critical scholar, (Dr. Campbell,) has called an endless subject, they have suffered themselves to be carried along the popular current, and rested content- ed with the vulgar error, vox populi, vox Dei ; or, the voice of the populace is the voice of God. - That this has been the case, is obvious from the fol- lowing facts ; 1 . The origin of the Devil, as commonly believed, is too preposterous an idea to bear one hour's investi- gation. He is represented in the common opinion, as having been an angel of light, of great knowledge and consequent power. That in the presence of God, where the scriptures represent joy and blessedness as perennial, he sinned. Pride is supposed to be his sin. On what his pride was founded, his biographers have not seen fit to inform us. How sin entered into a place of divine beatitude, we can no more imagine, than we can take a security that myriads of beatified 72 DEMONOLOGY. spirits of angels and men, shall not, at some future time, turn hell over into a pandemonium, and dethrone the Almighty. If sin could enter the mind of one dwel- ling in uncreated light, and perfectly pure from the lusts of the flesh, why may not those who have sojourn- ed here as tenants in common in the school of vanity, return like the dog to his vomit, and like the swine that had been washed to his wallowing in the mire. Or- thodoxy represents our very nature as polluted, and what warrants have we, that a recurrence of these evil propensities shall not at some future time visit us with power a thousandfold accumulated, and miseries a thousand fold aggravated ? None at all. All the future, on this supposition* is a blank, and those who harbour despair, do it with their eyes open to all these horrid, but legitimate deductions. 2. The unity, or oneness of the devil, grants him om- niscience, and omnipresence, two attributes of Jehovah. Thus the power of ubiquity is granted him at once, and he is supposed to be the spirit which now worketh in the children of disobedience, throughout the habitable world, and in the accumulated millions of those who have departed this state of existence. For, admitting that men sin without " being thereto instigated by the devil,'' and we iind no occasion for his existence. But if a personal devil is necessary to the existence of sin, and sin and suffering are to exist and accumulate ad infinitum, the ubiquity of the devil is as necessary to the works of misery, as is any given cause to pro- duce a specified effect. Hence the unity of the devil renders him equal in two respects, to Jehovah. 3. His existence is supposed to run parallel with Je- hovah? s. If one is in scripture represented as alone possessing immortality, the common opinion is made to clash with the declaration. It is of little account that we read, Heb. 2: 14, and 1 John 3 : 8, of his destruction, ^ind that of his works. The vox populi is DEMONOLOGY. 73 a ready evidence to the contrary fact, and obtains an implicit credence. 4. The devil is supposed to have tempted our first parents. Let this be once taken for granted, and all the remaining abominations follow in its train. Let this be disproved, and they all vanish. But are we required to prove the negative 1 If we are not, it may be done, and it shall be done. " By one man sin entered into the world." Paul is our author — Now prove by any other passage that sin entered by means of a personal devil, with as much clearness as this proves that man is the author of sin, and the Bible is neutral- ized ; for that which is equally an 1 ^ 1 ' able in proof of two opposites, is not testimor uer case. Thus then, a negative is proved, t uie scriptures cannot prove any thing relative to the subject — Need we seek any further for the origin of evil ? If then we find a personal, omniscient, omnipresent devil, was not originally wanted to deceive, and lead into sin, our first parents, what motive can call for his assistance at the present day 1 We think the exam- ples set before the infants of our race more than suffi- cient to produce the effects imputed to the devil. If we are made subject to vanity, as the scriptures abun- dantly testify, no supernataral agency can be requisite to effect our moral degradation. But let us be thank- ful, that though we are thus subjected, it is through the wisdom of him who hath thus subjected us in the glorious hope, that the creature — the whole creation of God, shall yet be delivered from this bondage of corruption, into the glorious liberty of the children of God — Amen, 7 74 DEMONOLOGY. SUPPLEMENT. Since writing the above, the editor has read " the National Preacher, No. 9." containing two discourses, from Heb. 10 : 12. As the book of Job is allowed to contain the doctrine of a personal devil with as much clearness as any other in the whole scriptures, we should be thankful to the person who will show us in what respect Dr. Matthews is wrong in the following paragraph. If a personal devil had nothing to do with the matter, by what testimony shall we be satisfied that such a personality exists ? " You are to view and receive afflictions as coming from the hand of God ; — as sent by Him whose king- dom ruleth over all. You have only to open your Bi- ble, and this truth will meet your eye in almost every page. All those diseases to which you are liable, are most explicitly ascribed to divine agency. When na- tions, or individuals were to be chastised, the pesti- lence is called for, and its course is directed, until His purpose, who administers the correction, is fully ac- complished. It is stated in Scripture, that all the dis- eases of Egypt, also every sickness and every plague, though not mentioned in the book of the law, are sent and controlled by the hand of God. " 1 know, says the pious and afflicted Job, that thou wilt bring me to death. He killeth and he maketh alive." All other calamities with which you can possibly be afflicted are also his messengers. If the devouring flame consumes your property ; if the tempest or hurricane visits you with desolation ; this fire and this stormy wind are but his servants, fulfilling his pleasure." sjibieh ob 1 ffj&wnr. Hook Sctontr. Being the Substance of a Lecture on Hosea 12 : 14. By Rev. J. S, Thompson. O Hell, I will be thy destruction. SECTION Z. Examination of the Hebrew words Sheol and Gehenna ; and of the Greek word Hades, and the pagan Tartarus. Christian auditors : You may ask me, wherefore have you changed the common reading of the text, and used the term Hell, instead of the grave ? I reply, every person acquainted with the original languages, in which it hath pleased God to communicate to man the sacred intelligence of life and immortality, will readily admit, that the Hebrew word, translated grave, in the common version of the Text, is that very same term, which is translated Hell wherever the word oc- curs in the Old Testament. I am therefore justified in reading my Text as I have done in your hearing ; and the good sense of the passage, as well as the fulfil- ment of the prophecy, require this change in the mode of reading. But seeing the word Hell occurs in the sacred scriptures as the translation of three different words, Sheol, Gehenna, and Hades, I shall endeav- our, 1st. To give an explanatory history of these terms. 76 HELLOLOGY. 2d. To disprove the doctrine generally deduced from them. My hearers will be surprised by the declaration, that not one of the original words, which our translators have rendered HJl, conveys the idea of a place or state of punishment in another mode of existence ; and consequently their just indignation will be excited against that deceptious system of duplicity, which has so long abused mankind by the misuse of terms, and perversion of reason and religion. The word Hell, in its modern acceptation, excites in the mind a very dif- erent idea from that which the term formerly express- ed. To our notions of it the words of the Latin poet apply. " Tempora mutantur, et nos mtttamur ah illis,^ The word has lost its primitive signification, which, like the original words of which it is the translation in our Bibles, was perfectly innocent, and has acquired the modern and hideous idea of a place appropriated to the execution of interminable punishment. The word Hell, therefore, by the consent of the ablest com- mentators of all denominations, should be expunged from our Bibles ; and no longer used as the translation of the Greek or Hebrew terms ; for there is, confessed- ly, no word in the original scriptures to exp? % ess the modern idea of Hell ! The word, says Dr. A. Clarke, is derived from the Anglo-Saxon Helan, which signi- fies to cover, conceal, or hide ; and hence the tilings or covering of a house, and the covers of books are to this day called Heling, and the phrase to hell is still used as synonymous with to cover or hide, in several of the western counties of England, especially, Corn- wall and Lancaster. Thus the true and primitive meaning of the word hell, was perfectly accordant with the idea suggested by the Hebrew sheol, and the Greek Hades ; for as nouns, all the three words imply some- thing unseen, concealed, or invisible ; and have there- HELLOLOGY. 77 fore been employed with propriety to convey the no- tion of an unseen world, the grave, or state of the dead in general. Similar are the sentiments of the learned Archbishop Usher, expressed in his Treatise de Lim. Patr. — " We have no word in the French or English language to express the idea conveyed by the Hebrew sheol, the Greek hades, or the Latin inferni. Our Eng- lish word hell had anciently this meaning; being de- rived from the German hill, to hide. Hence the an- cient Irish used to say 4 hill the head? meaning to cov- er the head. So that our hell then answered to the Greek hades, which signifies an unseen place. " Drs. S. and A. Clarke, Campbell, Whitby, and others, ap- probate the above definition of hell, and harmonious- ly unite in opinion, that hell originally answered to the Greek and Hebrew terms, but ought not to be used m the modern sense, as the translation of sheol or hades. How strange then, that from the term hell, should have arisen those dreadful notions, which are so as- siduously progagated in the world, and which men of fruitful imaginations have so effectually made to ope- rate as the means of delusion and aggrandizement. It is not however surprising, that superstition should act most powerfully on the fears of her votaries, since the human fancy can paint with greater energy the misery than the bliss of a future state. — With the two simple ideas of darkness and fire, we can create a sensation of pain, which may be aggravated to an infinite degree, by adding the idea of endless duration. Hence from the greater facility of depicting the horrors which dis- tract the mind or ruin the peace of society r hell, which contained just as much happiness as misery, in its idea, came to be used by religious impostors of every de- scription, as a fit engine to awe the mind of the credu- lous into that pliability, necessary to favour the views of the avaricious priest or tyrannical monarch. Egypt, 7* 78 HELLOLOGY. the mother of gods, superstition, and mystery, gave origin to the whole doctrine of Hell ; if we lop off the exuberances of infuriated orthodoxy, during the dark ages of papal delusion. These happy plains, says Diodorus, extending from the Nile to the Pyramids, where once stood the famous Memphis, reported to be the abode of the just after death, are no other than the beautiful country in the vicinity of the lake Acherusia, near Memphis. It is not without founda- tion, that the dead have been said to reside here ; lor here terminate the funeral ceremonies of most of the Egyptians. Their bodies, having been conveyed across the Nile and the lake Acherusia, are finally de- posited in tombs constructed under the surface of these plains. The ceremonies yet practised in Egypt correspond with all the notions of the Greeks, con- cerning the infernal regions. SHEOL. This word, which is translated Hell in the scriptures of the Old Testament, signifies only the state of the dead indiscriminately. Thus Ps. 89 : 47, according to the translation of the common prayer, reads, what man is he that liveth, and shall not see death ; and shall he deliver his soul from the hand of hell ? What Solomon says, (Prov. 27 : 20,) hell and destruction are never full, is perfectly explained by chap. 30 : 1 5, there be three things which are never satisfied— Sheol or Hell, etc. The Hebrew word, sheol, is derived from shoal, to ask, pray, or hide. Kennicot, who compared the Bi- ble with above 1000 Mss. and thus became a practical Hebrician, affirms that the radical meaning of shual, is to ask or pray. In this sense our translators under- stood it, Gen. 32 : 29. Dcut. 4 : 32, and 37 : 7. Josh. 4: 6, Jud. 18: 5, etc. The Septuagint renders it aitesan, in Ex. 3 : 22, and every impartial inquirer will be satisfied by consulting Pool's Annotation or HELLOLOGY. 79 the passage, Whitby on Acts, 2 : 27, Kennicot's first dissertation, p. 390, and Shuckford's Connexions, vol. 2, p. 340. The learned Buxtorf defines sheol, the "general place of the dead;' 1 and another very competent judge and excellent Commentator, Dr. Whitby, says, accor- ding to the scriptures, the Jewish writers, the ancient Fathers and the still more ancient heathen, the He- brew Sheol, and the Greek Hades, which answers to it in the translation of the Seventy, signifies the place of reception of all the dead. In this sense alone can we understand the sacred writers. — In the first place where the word sheol as a noun occurs, Gen. 37: 35, we find the pious Patriarch, saying, " / will go down into Sheol, to my son mourning.^ How absurd to suppose that Jacob believed his beloved son to be in a place of torment ! And how desperately wicked the language both of the holy Jacob and the patient Job, if we attach to the word Hell the modern mean- ing. The former exclaims, " / shall go to Hell" and the latter prays, " Oh that thou wouldst hide me in Hell till thy wrath be past .'" Job 14:13. In the views of our modern evangelical preachers, Hell is the very focus of the Divine wrath, yet Job prays to be hid in it, in order to escape that wrath ! O how confounded is the language of Babel ! Our modern Babel-builders have long pretended to speak a holy, ancient, and Bib- lical language, but God Almighty, in respect for the truth, has manifested their character by the confusion of tongues. It is proper here to notify my readers, that in the Old Testament, the word Sheol, does not mean the place of separate spirits ; for the writers of the Jewish scriptures had no knowledge of a future mode of exist- ence. They neither feared nor hoped for any thing beyond the grave ! Sheol therefore only implies the state of the dead, or that chaos of noncnity that was SO HELLOLOGY. supposed to follow dissolution. Neither friend nor foe, learned nor unlearned can put his finger on a sin- gle passage in the Old Testament and say, here is in- formation, that man shall live again. Had the sacred writers ever thought that Sheol meant the abode of spirits, or had they believed in a separate state, they would not have declared, " there is no device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in Sheol. Eccl. 9 : 10. In death there is no remembrance of God, and none shall give him thanks in Sheol, Ps. 6 : 6. Sheol cannot praise God, Is, 38: 18. And that the dead know not any thing, Eccl. 9:5. A man hath no pre-em- inence above a beast : for all go into one place ; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. Eccl. 3 : 19, 20. As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood drieth up, so man lieth down and riseth not ! Job 14: 12. We have shown that sheol, as a verb, signifies to ask or inquire ; as a noun it conveys the idea of asking, or inquiry, and denotes that solicitous desire of man to know his fate or destiny after death. Hence we see that it differs radically from the hades of the Greeks, or the Hell of the moderns. Sheol, or Saul, was also a common appellative name in Israel. Their first king was so called, as also the great apostle of the Gentiles ; but surely none would have been so wild as to have called their dear children by the name of sheol, or hell, had they conceived it to mean the accursed region of the damned ! We therefore fairly and rationally con- clude, from a full investigation of the passages, that the sheol or hell of the Old Testament denoted inqui- ry, a request, or figuratively, the invisible world, great solicitude, anxiety, or trouble : and any person accus- tomed to etymological investigation, will readily per- ceive how easily and naturally the figurative sense arises from the literal. In the figurative sense we un- derstand it, Ps. 9 : 17 ; 30 : 3 ; 86 : 18 ; 116: 3 ; and HELLOLOGY. 81 similar passages. In some of the old English versions, the seventeenth verse of the ninth Psalm is thus ren- dered, " the wicked go hito liell^ — i. e. into anxiety and trouble. This 'translation is perfectly harmonious with the revelation of God, and the experience of man. There is no peace, saith pay God to the wick- ed ; they are like the troubled sea; Is. 51 : 20, 21 ; into this hell Jonah went, when he endeavoured to flee from the Lord. The pains of this hell took hold of David when he went into it, by the commission of those crimes, which tarnish his character, and blacken his memorial to all generations. O sinner, thou canst only keep out of this hell, by doing justly, loving mer- cy, and walking humbly with thy God. But my audience may demand what is implied in the text, O sheol,I will be thy destruction. I answer, the Lord God will swallow up death in victory ; and wipe away tears from all faces. Is. 25 : 8. God will dwell with men, and they shall be his people, and he will be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes ; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain. Rev. 21 : 3, 4. The Hell of the Bible is that anxiety and trouble which are the effects of sin ; and follow as a consequence that vanity to which the creature is subject. Rom. 8 : 20. But the creature shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption, into the glorious liberty of the children of God, at the res- titution, regeneration, or new creation of all things. The transgression shall be finished, sin terminate, death and hell be cast into the lake of fire to be destroyed; and evil be abolished from the empire of God ! HADES. Hades from «, not, and eido, to see — signifies unseen, invisible ; the invisible reception or mansion of the dead, where all departed spirits are supposed to reside, without any distinction whatever, — In the scriptures, 82 HELLOLOGY. it is often personified as a king of terrors, or destin- ing monster, having his basileion, or kingdom. — Wisd. 1 : 14. This is implied in the phrase, heos hadou, or doma hadou. Genesis 37 : 35. Num.15: 80. Is. 14: 11. Math. 11: 23. His puldi, or gates. Is. 38 : 10. Math. 16 : 18. His puloroi, or doorkeepers, Job 38 : 1 7. His cheir, or hand, Ps. 59 : 15. And his kentron, or sting. And notwithstanding the many have form- ed an unholy alliance, or covenant with him, to sup- port his iniquitous administration, Is. 28: 15, yet he will be cast eis ten limnen tou puros, into the lake of fire. Here, my auditors, is the fortunate event my text contemplates when death and hell will be destroyed, and golden years return again. Hades was generally considered by the ancients as a deep cavern, or dark region, located in the centre of the earth, by those who admitted the spherical form of the globe, but according to the vulgar notions of as- tronomy among the ancients, it was thought by the ma- jority to be as far beneath the earth as the heaven wa6 above it. — Hence Zophar, speaking to Job of the in- comprehensibility of the Deity, says, it is high as heaven, deeper than hell. Homer, Hesiod, and Virgil, describe Hades as being as far beneath the earth as heaven is above it. Tosson enerth' haicleo hoson ouranos est apo gaies. — 77. 8, 16. Tosson enerth' hupo ges, hoson ouranos est apo gaies. — Theog. 720 turn Tartarus ipse Bis patet in precepts tantum, tanditque sub umbra3 Quantus ad oethereum coeli suspectus Olympum. — JE*n. 7, 577. Josephus, who borrowed his views from the Grecian traditions, which had been lately adopted by the Phari- sees, tells us " hades is a subterraneous region, where the light never shines, and which must therefore be perpetual darkness. This region is appointed as a place of custody, in which the souls both of the righ- teous and unrighteous are detained. Into this region HELLOLOGY. 83 there is only one descent, at whose gate stands an archangel with a host. The souls which pass through the gate go not all one way. The just are guided to the right, and conducted to a luminous region, which we call Abraham's bosom. The unjust are dragged to the left hand by the angels allotted for punishment, who reproach and threaten them by their terrible looks. This is evidently the view of hades exhibited in the parable, Luke 16. From the time of the Pythagorean and Platonic Phi- losophy, the hell of the ancient heathen was divided into two mansions ; that on the right they called Ely- sium, from «, not, and luo, to dissolve, which they in- tended to signify eternal existence, and is derived from the same word which the apostle employs, Heb. 7:16, to express endless duration. The Elysium of the Greeks, called by the Jews the bosom of Abraham was believed to be a pleasant and delightful place, abound- ing in all manner of delicacies ; but its pleasures they supposed to be corporeal and sensual. The left hand department was appointed for the wicked. This man- sion they demoninated Tartarus, either from the verb tartarizo, to tremble, or tarasso, to disturb. This was the lowest and most dreadful place in hell, in the opin- ions of the Greeks and Romans, and is that to which the Psalmist alludes, Ps. 86 : 13. It is also mention- ed from an apocryphal work, 2 Peter, 2 : 4. The entrance or descent into this subterraneous region, the Latins supposed to be through the lake Avernus, in Campania, near the bay of Putelus, now called Lago d'Averno. The exhalation from this lake was be- lieved to be destructive to all birds ; hence called Aver- nus, from «, negatively, and ornis, a bird. This name, however, says Lucretius, was afterwards applied to all places or lakes possessing similar qualities.* * Nunc age Ave'rna tibi, quae saint locacunque lacusque. — L. 6, 788 84 HELLOLOGY Strabo describes the country around this lake as abounding with fountains of warm waters, mixed with salt, sulphur, alum, and bitumen, which gave origin to the names of Phlegethon and Pyriphlegethon, two riv- ers of hell — so called from these warm, sulphurous wa- ters. Of this passage to the infernal regions Virgil says,t the descent at Avernus is easy, and the gate of Pluto lies open night and day. The Greeks had a passage into hades at Taenaris. a promontory of Peloponnesus, now called Capo Mai- na. Of this Virgil also takes notice, when he tells us that Orpheus having entered the passage of Taenaris, and the lofty gates of Pluto, he visited the shades and their terrible king.* We cannot refrain from viewing with a mixture of pity and ridicule, the foolish fancies of the ancients and moderns on the local position of hell. When our modern pietists of much devotion, little learning and much less sense, address the Maker, they look up, supposing him a venerable old man, commodiously seated in some lofty region in the Zenith, whilst they believe his Satanic majesty holds a commanding po- sition in the Nadir, or regions directly beneath. Were these sages, who measure heaven and hell, and fix their stations in the vast empire of the Deity, to look into a book on astronomy, and there discover that the Ze- nith and Nadir changed places every twelve hours ; so that the point directly above at noon, would be per- pendicularly beneath at midnight, how would they be alarmed ! Surely that man who looks up to find God, believes as much in a local and tutelar deity as the Is- raelites, when they adored the calves at Dan and Bethel ! iM. 6,25. * Toenarias etiam fauces, alta ostia Ditis Ja^ressus, Maaesque adiit regemque tremendum.— Geor. A. 48? HELLOLOGY. 85 Though Hades has sometimes the signification of Sheol, and simply intimates the idea of an unknown and unseen state, or nonentity,jyet it more generally denotes the abode of spirits indiscriminately. In the Septuagint it answers to sheol, and cannot therefore communicate any other idea than that of the Hebrew term. Therefore by Hades, many have understood the grave ; and in that sense it is sometimes used by the Greek writers. Metros d' en hadou kai patros kekeuthotoin, Ouk est adelphos hostis an blastoi pote. — Sophocles Antig. 924. The Reformers generally maintained in their con- troversies with the Catholics, that hades simply deno- ted the grave, or state of the dead. Hence Corneil a Lapide, in Ephs. 4: 10. asserts that Calvin and Beza both denied the descent of Christ to hell ; believing hades to mean no more than the grave. Indeed our orthodox commentators, on Acts 2 : 27, are as stren- uous advocates of the innocent meaning of the term, as any Univcrsalist whatever : and the uniform testi- mony of competent judges, ancient and modern, af- fixes one meaning to the word hades, i. e. the invisi- ble world, or abode of spirits. The Greeks assigned one hades to all that die : hence they often say, " pan- tas homos thnetous haides dechetai. Hades receives all the dead." Caius, a Roman Presbyter, adopts similar language. " En hadou sunechontai psuchai dikaion te kai adikon. The souls of both the just and the unjust goto hades." Job exclaims, " Sheol Beth- ni, hades is my house, 17: 13. Thou wilt bring me to the house appointed for all living." — 30: 23. Both Homer and Euripides say of the dead in general, ka- telthein eis dom hadou — they go to the house of hades : and the learned Wingate says, haiden nekron chorion exponunt Geaeci, the Greeks call the place of the dead, hades. Homer describing the rage of Achilles, 8 86 HELLOLOGY. says, it sent prematurely to hades, the souls of many brave heroes. Tollas d 1 iphthimous psuchas Haidi proiapsen.— //. 1, 4. Dr. S. Clark, in his sermon on Ps. 16:10, says, " In the New Testament, the word hell sometimes denotes a place of punishment for the wicked, in other places, the state of the dead in general. But this ambiguity is only in the Translation, and not in the original ; for wherever a place of torment is mentioned, the word is always Gehennah in the ori- ginal. But when only the state of the dead is in- tended, it is expressed in the original by Hades, a quite different word, which though translated hell, sig- nifies only the invisible state. Accordingly the pre- diction, Mat. 11 : 23, thou Capernaum shalt be brought down to hell, means, that great and proud city should be leveled with the dust, and utterly disappear as those who are buried in the grave. When the rich man in hell, lift up his eyes, being in torment, Luke 16 : 23. The original only signifies that he was in the invisible world, wherein were Abraham and Lazarus ; to which went Christ and the thief, and all that die, both righteous and wicked. When our Lord promi- ses, Matt. 1G: 1 e^that the gates of Hefl should not pre- vail against his Church, the words pulai hadou. gates ofhel?. strictly rendered, signify the passage to the in- visible world,' i. e. death ; and the import of the prom- ise is, that death itself, the utmost extent of all perse- cution, should never be able to suppress his doctrine or extirpate his religion from this world. Lastly, prophecy intimates- that death and hell will dclr the dead, and be then cast into the lake of lire. Hence it-is very evident that hell cannot mean either the place or state of the damned, but on the contrary, the state of death, or death itself, including all human woe, which then shall be no more. So in Ps. 16: 10 — HELLOLOGY. 87 Acts 2:27; thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, plain- ly implies a solid faith on the resurrection of the body. From this explanation of all the texts which relates to this subject, concludes the Dr. it is clear the scriptures no where teach, that our Lord, by descending into hell, ever entered a place appointed for the punishment of wicked men, nor is there any thing in reason, from which it can, by any just consequence, be inferred.* 1 [As Mr. Thompson has evidently been less explicit in this paragraph than the subject requires, we think proper to add a few remarks. As the parable of the Rich man and Lazarus is highly figurative, the term hades, signifying unqualified darkness, is obviously em- ployed as an emblem of the spiritual darkness, which. as a veil, was covering the Jewish nation. As to pakti hadou,ihe gates of hell, used in Mat. 16 : 18, we fur- ther remark, that whatever signification this may bear in heathen, or Jewish-heathen mythology, we think this application of the phrase, is in this instance, very improper. The word gate, is not used in scripture exclusively, as the name of a door, or place of en- trance. It frequently signifies, court, power, dominion, and strength, and is so often thus used, that two or three examples must be sufficient. " Thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies.'' Gen. 22: 17. But- terworth, in his concordance, quotes this very passage, Mat. 16: 18, in the sense of power and dominion. Hence we infer, that the power of darkness, the strength of ignorance, shall not prevail against the king- dom of God, which is a kingdom of light. Light, and life, are opposed to darkness, and death, and "the for- mer will ultimately prevail. — Editor.] Hence we may fairly and reasonably conclude, from the unanimous testimony of the mostlearned and im- partial Commentators both ancient and modern, that Hades does not signify a place appropriated to the punishment of the wicked. 38 HELLOLOGY. GEHENNA. According to the testimony of the scriptures, and the best historians, Gehenna was the name of a valley, south-east of Mount Zion, which was the most souther- ly of those mountains, on which stood the once cele- brated city of Jerusalem. The most remarkable de- clivity of Mount Zion looks towards the south-west, being formed by a deep ravine, called in scripture Ge- Ben-Hinnom, or the valley of Hinnom. This valley running from west to east, met on the south-east, the valley of Jehoshaphat, or as it is sometimes called, the valley of Kedron, from the book of that name by which it was watered. Here the horrid rites of human sacrifices Were paid to Moloch and Beelphegor. The origin of the name is somewhat obscure. From Joshua 15:8, we should incline to think it obtained the name fron. some family called Hinnom, to whom it once be- longed. Some think it was so called from the facts noticed Is. 66 : 24. The dead bodies of apostates and malefactors being exposed as a public example, might induce men to call the valley Hinnom, there they are, implying, there lie or hang the bodies of those vile transgressors who forsook the God of their fathers, and followed the vanities of the nations. But others, with more accuracy, derive the word from the He- brew verb, Hannam, to yell, believing the valley to have obtained its name from the shrieks of the children sacrificed to Moloch. St. Jerome, a native of Palestine, informs us, that the valley of Hinnom, called Gehenna in the New- Testament, was a fine and beautiful place, adorned with gardens and well watered with fountains. The grandeur of the scenery first invited the idolatrous Amorites, and afterwards the Jews, to erect here the standard of superstition. Moloch signifies a king, and was, very probably, a brazen image, designed to rep- resent the sun, seeing fire was so much used in hi§ HELLOLOGY. 89 worship. This opinion receives support from what is said by the prophet Amos, 5 : 26. Selden, who has given us a prolix account of this idol and the rites by which he was worshipped, adduces several testimonies to prove that the Phenicians and other nations, in the vicinity of Judea, actually sacrificed their children in times of calamity, to this blood-thirsty Demon. Hence the phrase " to pass through the fire," signifies to burn in sacrifice. — See Deut. 13: 10, 2 Kings 23: 10. Lev. 18 : 21. 2 Chron. 28 : 3. Jer. 7 : 31, 19, 5, and 32 : 35. Ps. 106 : 37, and Ez. 19 : 20, 21. Bochart affirms, that all the people of the east, wor- shipped the sun, and consecrated to him horses which they believed to be nimble as the sun. And as it was a prevailing notion that the sun was carried about in a chariot — chariots were dedicated to him, and horses slain in sacrifice by the Armenians, Persians, and others: and for the same reason, the idolatrous kings of Judea, were drawn out at the eastern gate of the city, which looked towards Tophet, to salute the sun on his ap- pearance above the horizon. Accordingly, we find that when they worshipped, they turned their faces to- wards the east — Ez. 9 : 16. The sun, as an object of idolatrous worship, was adored under the names of Molech, Adrammelech, Baal, and Bethshemesh, 2 Kings 23: 5, 11. The following passage from Dio- dorus Siculus, L. 20, will show to what an enormous extent the fanatical reverence for this fiery god had prevailed among the people of the east. " When Agathocles, tyrant of Sicily, beseiged Carthage, the in- habitants imputing the calamity to the displeasure of Saturn, to whom they had lately sacrificed suppositi- tious children ; or such as they had privately purchas- ed, whereas formerly they had burnt to his honour the best of their oitspring : reflecting on these things, and seeing the enemy encamped at their very walls, they were seized with religious dread, for having profane^ 8* 90 ' HEIXOLOGY. the honours of the gods, and in haste to rectify their errors, they chose two hundred of the noblest children, and sacrificed them quickly. Many others, accused of irreligion, gave themselves up willingly, to the num- ber of no less than three hundred ! For they had a brazen statue, stretching out his hands towards the ground, in such a manner, that the child placed in them, tumbled down into a pit full of fire." The following extract from D. Kimchi on 2 Kings 23 : 10, will tend to explain the tabernacle of Moloch, mentioned Acts 7 : 43, " Our Rabbins of happy me- mory inform us, that although all other houses of idola- try were in Jerusalem, Moloch was without it. His image was made hollow, and sat within seven chapels. Whoever offered a flower, they opened to him the first of these; whoever offered turtles or pigeons, they opened to him the second ; to him that offered a lamb, they opened the third ; to him that offered a ram, they opened the fourth ; to him that offered a calf, they opened the fifth ; to him that offered an ox, they open- ed the sixth ; but whoever offered his son, to him they opened the seventh. 1 ' Fabius also informs us that " the image of Moloch was made of brass, curious- ly contrived with seven cells, probably to represent the seven planets ; and the offerings being put into these receptacles, they were shut, and all were burrjt to ashes, while the people danced about the idol, and beat timbrels or tabrets to drown the cries of the tor- mented.'" Who can fail to observe the striking simi- larity between those horrid monsters of antiquity, who burnt their children while they danced to the sound of the timbrel ; and those modern advocates of a still more horrible Moloch, who tell us they shall sing in heaven, while their children shriek in the unquenchable fire of an endless Hell ! Let not the reader be sur- prised, for all this is perfectly orthodox, and agreeable to the language of the holy fathers. " How shall i HELLOLOGY. 91 laugh, exclaims Tertuiiian, how rejoice, how exult, when I behold so many monarchs groaning in the low- est abyss of darkness ; so many magistrates. liquefying in fiercer fires than ever they kindled for christians ; so many sage philosophers blushing in red hot flames !" Tophet, like Gehenna, is somewhat of dubious sig- nification, In certain passages of scripture it clear- ly implies the name of a place ; and from what is said of it, Is. 30 : 33, many have supposed it to mean hell, or the ahode of the damned. Indeed, Dr. Camp- bell thought that in the latter age of Jewish history, the word Tophet, was exclusively used to denote the heli of the moderns. Of this opinion I was also, dur- ing the early part of my ministry.-— But how great was my surprise when I first read Jer. 19 : 14. *' Then came Jeremiah from Tophet, whither the Lord had sent him to prophesy !" What, said I, Jere- miah in hell ! and sent there to prophesy ! But on fur- ther inquiry, I found Tophet to be the name of a place in the valley of Hinnon, near the city of Jerusalem, 2 Kings 23 : 10, Jer. 7:31. The children of Judah built Tophei in the valley of Hinnon, for the express purpose of burning their infants to Moloch or Baal, when the good feelings of their nature had become extinct, by the baneful influence of superstition ; but the Jehovah of the Jews declares, the wicked thought never entered his heart to build a place for the burn- ing of his offspring, see Jer. 7:31, and 32 : 35. To- phet was a great image erected to Moloch, hollow within, and prepared for the reception of those inno- cent victims, which were committed to the flames, as expiatory sacrifices to appease the wrath of this sense- less god of consuming fire ! O ye worshippers of gods, whose very bowels emit columns of liquid flames, and whose breath is a stream of brimstone, think of hor- rid Moloch. Consider also, if the worshippers of the apocalyptic beast, be not tormented as the Jews were, by the slavish dread of a terrific monster ! 92 HELLOLOGY. Jewish writers in general are of opinion, that To* phet received its name from Toph, a drum, because that instrument was used to drown the cries of those infants, who were sacrificed to Moloch ; but Le Clerc objects to this etymology, because it does not appear that large drums were known to the ancients ; and the sound of the less, called taber, used in dances, was not sufficiently loud ; and for the large we are indebt- ed to the Arabians, who first brought them into Spain* Though this objection does not seem very forcible, yet it is more reasonable to believe that Tophet signi- fies a fire-stove, and that the large hollow image of Mo- loch was so called ; and probably that part of the val- ley of Hinnon, where the image stood, bore the same appellation. There is little pleasure in describing scenes of horror, but it may be useful to show us the evils of a false religion, and inspire us with grateful emotions for the enjoyment of the true. Be it known then, to the disgrace of the Jews, that although in possession of the knowledge of the one only true God, like modern Christians, they were too much in- clined to the worship of idols ; and having consecra- ted the solar fire as a deity, they erected Tophet as an altar to one of those agents, which God employs for the benefit of the world. An idol of brass, hav- ing the head of an ox, but the body of a man, was made to represent the fiery god ; and the idol se on a throne of brass, a crown was placed on its head, and its hands extended to receive their gifts. But what gifts were deemed most acceptable ? Ah ! the fruits of the field or herds of the stall suific< it would have been well, but cruel Moloch cried »r blood; and nothing less than the tender pi conjugal love, could glut the rapacity of this w :Ii- ful deity ! The hollow idol was heated io redness — the parent, by a refinement of c in order to ac- quire the summit of sanctity, must become the priest HELLOLOGY. 93 ; — himself must place his darling in its arms ! No be- witching smiles or mournful cries must drive him from his purpose. His heart must be steeled against every tender impression, and a most complete conquest ob- tained over the strongest feelings of humanity. For- tunately, the shocking scene was of short duration. The sacred drums, impiously so called, drowned the cries ; aad whilst the bodies of the innocent children became the victims of a merciless superstition, their souls reorganized, were received to the embraces of a kind and merciful God ! To prevent the continuance of this horrid prac- tice, Josiah defiled this valley, by making it a common depot for the filth of the city, and the bodies of those criminals which were refused the rites of burial. 2 Kings, 23 : 10. This valley was also made the place of execution for all who were condemned to be ston- ed or burnt to death by the supreme court at Jerusa- lem, called the Sanhedrim. According to the Jew- ish law there were nineteen offences, which subjected the criminal to suffer death by stoning ; and ten, which were punished by burning to death, in the fire of Gehenna. Many of those wlio were stoned io death, were also hanged, and their bodies left to be meajt to the fowls of heaven or the beasts of the field. Gen. 40 : 19, 2 Sam. 21 ; 9. Jer. 7 : 33, and 19:7. Burning was performed either by roasting in the fire, Jer. 29 : 22, or in a furnace, Dan. 3 : £ 3, or by pour- ing melted lead down their throats. Lightfoot, from the Talmuds, informs us, that this last punishment was performed in the following manner. " The crim- inal being made fast, a towel was put round his neck, and two men taking hold of the ends of the towel, one pulling one way, and the other the opposite, they for- ced him by strangling to open his mouth : then a third poured boiling lead down hii throat and burnt his bow- els." 94 HELLOLOGY. Some have thought from the peculiar use of the valley, Gehenna became proverbial to express any great punisment, or afflictive dispensation ; and might therefore he used by our Lord, to designate the tor- ments of Hell in another world. In favour of this supposition, they refer to the Targum on Gen. 3 : 24, and 15 : 17. But the Targums were not composed till long after the Jews had mixed in captivity, with the Pagan nations, and learned of them their fabulous ideas concerning the state of the Ghosts in Hades. Nothing can be more clear than what has been as- serted by Le Clerc and Gibbon, that from the time the Jews received the Sinai dispensation of the Law, till the Babylonian captivity, the hopes as well as the fears of the Jewish nation, were confined within the narrow compass of the present life. But after the Jews were restored by Cyrus, and became divided into sects, the Pharisees received under the name of traditions, the doctrine of future rewards and punishments, with seve- ral other speculative tenets from the Philosophy or re- ligion of the eastern nations. Gibbon's Rome, vol. 1. ch. 15. Plato, in Tim. et de Repub. uses such lan- guage as to manifest, that he and Socrates borrowed their ideas of future rewards and punishments from others ; and Suidas informs us they borrowed from the Egyptians. But notwithstanding all the influence of the Pythagorean and Platonic Philosophy, supported in this instance, by the combined interests of Priest- craft and King-craft, Cicero, a most consummate phi- losopher and statesman, who flourished about fifty years before Christ, declares, Tuscul. Quest. L. 1. S. 10. that the old fables of the Elysian fields and Pluto's kingdom, were grown ridicuious, and abandoned to the poets and painters ! Moreover, it is extremely fu- tile, to refer to Jewish Targums for support to a doc- trine denounced by the Jewish scriptures. Had the Targums taught the doctrine alleged, though it were HELLOLOGY. 59 only as a Jewish tradition, surely we would much more reasonably expect to find it in the Mishna, which was the grand repository of all their traditions. Yet so far from supporting the doctrine., the quotations of Dr. A. Clarke on Mat. 12: 32, show that both the Babylonian and Jerusalem Gemara assert, unequivocally, that death wipes off all stains, even the sin of blasphemy ! We are perfectly in accordance with Dr. S. Clark, and Dr. Campbell, in saying that Gehenna is the only word, in the New Testament, that signifies a place of punishment, but we deny that place of torment to have any longer an existence in the vast universe. In order to exhibit the sandy foundation on which these learned advocates of an invisible Gehenna, have built their chimerical palace for Pluto, I shall examine all the passages where the word Gehenna occurs in the New Testament. In reading the Greek Testament we meet with the word Gehenna just twelve times ; and the following are all the passages in which it is found. Mat. 5: 22, 29, 30—10: 28—18: 9—23: 15, 33. Mark 9 : 43, 45, 47. Luke 12:5, and James 3 : G. In two of these Mat. 33 : 15, and James 3 : 6, the Drs. accede that the word must be understood figura- tively. The other ten are divisible into three classes. The first class includes those passages where Christ cautions his disciples against the sin of apostaey, and refers to the mode of punishing such offenders among the Jews by burning them in Gehenna. This class includes Mat. 5 : 29, 30—10 : 28—1 8 : 9. Mark 9 : 43, 45, 47. Luke 12, 5. The second class includes only one passage. Mat. 5 : 22, where he describes the danger of him, who preferred a charge of aoostacy against another ; and the third or last contains only one, also, namely, Mat. 23 : 33, where our Lord de- mands of the scribes and Pharisees, how such serpents as they, could escape the punishment of Gehenna. Hence the illustration of one passage will sullice for the whole, with all intelligent and candid persons. 9(5 HELLOLOGY. In Mat. 5 : 22, Jesus, in allusion to the punishment of crimes in the vallev of Hinnom, speaks of the fire of Gehenna, which is very unwarrantably translated, hell fire. In this passage, three offences are noticed, and three degrees of punishment proportionate to the crimes 1 An^er and its consequences, lor which an appeal might be made to the judgment, or less Sanhedrin, consisting of twenty-three Magistrates who«e power extended to many capital offences, and the infliction of punishment even by strangling or be- heading. 2. Contempt, expressed by the oppiobri- oustitll ofRaka, or Shallowbrains ; for which the of- fender might be arraigned before the Council or Grand Sanhedrin, which consisted of seventy-two Elders, whose business was to take cognizance of capital of- fences only, and especially those committed against religion : and to receive appeals from the lower coun- cil for the Grand Sanhedrin alone had power to inflict the punishment of stoning or burning alive. 3. lne third offence consisted in mortal hatred or enmity, ex- pressed by the term, Moreh, or apostate. The crime of apostacy was generally punished by casting or burning alive in Gehenna ; and the force of our Lord • words will appear, more strikingly, when we reflect that every person, who accused another of apostacy, ifhe failed to prove the charge, suffered the punish- ment due by the law to the guilty, and was consequent- ly burned instead of the accused. ISo wonder then, that our master should say, whosoever shall call his brother moreh or apostate, shall be in danger of the fire of Gehenna. We also hence see the propriety ot the admonition in the 29th verse and collateral passa- ges, to abandon every thing, though dear as a right hand or eye, rather, than by apostacy expose the life to destruction, in the fire of Gehenna. I he common translation of Mat. 5: 22, and the doctrine generally deduced from it, are alike contemptible and ndicu- HELLOLOGY. 97 loas ! What ! our Lord sentence another to hell-fire, for an offence of which he himself was frequently guil- ty, see Mat. 23 : 17, 19. Luke 11 : 40, and 24 : 25. The word hell occurs twelve times in the New Testa- ment, as the translation of Gehenna : but surely no honest man would have used the former word to ex- press the idea of the latter. Hell means a concealed place ; but Gehenna was the valley of Hinnom, in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, well known to all the in- habitants of that city. There is, therefore, no amnity iri the terms, nor in the ideas suggested by them ; and accordingly the best versions retain the word Gehen- na, wherever it occurs in the Greek. Notwithstanding, as Gehenna is called the place where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not quench- ed, Mark 9 : 43 — 49, some farther explanation may be necessary. From this passage it has been argued, that " our Lord calls the fire, into which the wicked shall be cast, unquenchable ; and speaks of Hell as a place where the worm dieth not ; and that to show the perpetuity of the punishment of the wicked, he adds, every one shall be salted with fire.'' But " this argu- ment, says Newcome, is founded upon a false interpre- tation of the metaphors, which are here employed ; and is altogether fallacious. Jesus only speaks of the wicked being cast into the valley of Hinnom, into the unquenchable fire, where the worm dieth not. Yet in the valley of Hinnom, the worm died when its food failed, and the pile on which human sacrifices were burnt to Moloch, was often extinguished. Salt being a preservative of food, was among the Jews an em- blem of virtue and knowledge, by which the mind is purified, Col. 4 : 6.'' God says of the fire on the Le- vitical altar, it shall never go out. Lev. 6 : 13. That he would kindle a fire in the gates of Jerusalem that shall never be quenched. Jer. 17 : 27. Ez. 20 : 47, 48. The smoke of Idumea was to go up for ever, and 9 98 HELLOLOGY. its fire not to be quenched. Is. 34: 10. Yet these fires have all ceased to burn many hundreds of years ago. There were many circumstances which caused the valley of Hinnom to obtain the title of a place " where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." In Gehenna, 135,000 of the army of Sennccharib fell by a fiery pestilential disease, and thereby the prophe- cy, Is. 30: 33, was almost literally fulfilled. For this king of Assyria, Tophet was ordained, and the breath of the Lord like a stream of brimstone enkindled the fire for the destruction of his army. At the time Je- rusalem was taken by the Babylonians, thousands of slaughtered Jews were thrown in heaps in this valley, according to Jer. 7 : 33, and 19:7. It was the place of public execution for criminals, and a common depot for not only all bodies refused the rites of burial, but also for all manner of pollution. To prevent noxious vapours from proving injurious to the health of the city, a fire was kept continually burning to consume the bones, decayed bodies of the slain, hanged, gib- bited, and the common filth of the city, which being largely supplied, caused the fire to obtain the epithet, unquenchable. Dead bodies exposed to the influence of the atmospheric air, soon became putrid and cloth- en with worms ; hence the valley received the name of the place where the worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched, Is. 64 : 24, Mark 9 : 44. But how wild is it to suppose the existence of a place like Ge- henna, in another world ? Can fire and worms sub- sist together? Can worms eat spirits, and fire burn in- corruptible bodies ? No ! Let man be immortal, and all the fires of a thousand Hells shall be unable to in- jure him ! TARTARUS. Though some might consider an explanation of this term essential in a discourse of this nature, yet we HELLOLOGY. 99 Jeem it almost entirely unnecessary, because the word never occurs in any part of scripture universally ac- knowledged by christians. The second Epistle of Pe- ter, especially the second chapter, has been disputed in all ages ; and the probability is, that if genuine, the apostle, without approving the fanciful notions of the Heathen, might cite a commonly received opinion, and argue from acknowledged principles. When we treated of Hades, we there observed that Tartarus was supposed to be the lowest and darkest department of that subterranean region. From what is said 2 Peter 2 : 4, 17, and Jude 13, Dr. Campbell, Ewing, and others, suppose Tartarus to be the dungeon or prison- house of Hades, where the ghosts are reserved in chains, or solitary confinement, might we not ask these sages how spirits disembodied can be chained, or what doors or walls can confine immaterial beings ? Bujt poor orthodoxy must avoid interrogation as well as de- finition. It seems then that while Hades was esteem- ed a kind of Debtors 1 prison, Tartarus was regarded as the solitary cells of criminals. But though super- stition's fancy paint her gloomy scenes in different shades, still Hades and Tartarus were considered as one and the same, and never were, nor are they yet, believed, by the learned, to be the abode of linal wretchedness. To this opinion Dr. Campbell fully agrees, and the best Lexicographers define the words accordingly. Tartarus, says Phavorinus, " aer hupo- gaios kai aneliosf u subterranean air, where the sun shines not ;" and Stephanus defines Hades " hupogaias tqpos skoieinos — a dark place under the earth.'''' We have now finished our investigation concerning the import of the Hebrew and Greek terms translated Hell, in the common English version, and venture to conclude, that not a word in all the Greek and He- brew scriptures, signifies a place of punishment for the wicked after death. On fable, on pagan fable alone, 100 HELLOLOGY. have orthodox divines built the antichristian dogma of Hell-torments*. ■1U9Q91 — SECTION XX. HELL DESTROYED. Lecture on 1 Cor. 15 : 55. O Hell, where is thy Victory. By Rev. J. S. Thompson. Brethren in the Gospel of Christ, and Fellow heirs of the heavenly inheritance — You have heard of the grace of God which bringeth salvation to all men, and have been induced to admit that such a dispensation merited the title of Evangelical, good news. But when this grace of God displays its glories by triumph- ing over sin, death, and hell — you are constrained to exclaim with Paul, it is the glorious gospel of the bles- sed God. Herein you behold it unbosom the eternal and unchangeable love of God towards mankind, by forming them in goodness, directing them in wisdom, glorifying them in power, and performing all things, tor the exaltation of his own glory, and the eternal beatification of all his intelligent offspring. I know not with what feelings you have assembled this eve- ning — whether you arc disposed to hear what God the Lord will say, or determined to hold the vulgar opin- ions for the sake of popularity : O my God, save me from being a dissembler, a sycophant and bigot. Let me die an independent man, that my death may be glorious ; but may I never live an hour in sinful con- formity, alike detested by God and honest men. The reading which I have adopted is supported by the Greek text, the best translators and commentators of ancient and modern times, and is the reading found in the margin of many of our Bibles. The word Hades, which occurs eleven times in the New Testament, is rendered hell in all excepting my text, where it is HELLOLOGY. 101 translated grave. In this the crafty translators, whose heads and creeds were equally fall of hell and damna- tion, betrayed their attachment to the pious frauds of antiquity, and their disposition to save from ruin their favourite system. They perceived that if the word Hades should be translated hell, in the text, the doc- trine built on this supposititious foundation would come to nought. Hell having lost its victory, and death its sting, universal salvation must follow ; and the Pagan doctrine of hell torments, which had been introduced into the christian system, be for ever neglected. Be- holding the inevitable catastrophe which would befal the whole system, rather than admit that the good news would extend to all people, they exposed them- selves to the just charge of corrupting the word of God —2 Cor. 2: 17. Awful as the terms, death and hell, may sound in your ears, my text unfolds the grace which will tri- umph over sin. It is an abyss which will swallow up death in victory ; it is a key which shall unlock the gates of Hades, and let the prisoners go free. Death being the wages of sin, followed it as a conse? quence ; but sin being destroyed, death and the grave must cease to devour, and hell herself be robbed of her prey. Friends, I undertake to disprove the wicked doc- trine of hell torments. If I succeed we shall rejoice together that men are now delivered from that which held them, all their lifetime, in bondage through fear of death, I shall achieve for you a more glorious liberty than that of which a Washington could boast, and in- troduce a new epoch in history, more important than ever has yet been commemorated by the offspring of Adam. Great God favour my efforts ! The doctrine of Hell torments is drawn from false premises, these are that 1. sin is infinite and eternal, 2. the eternal purpose and pleasure of the Deity is; 9* 1,02 HELLOLOGY. that men continue to insult his character and govern- ment, that he may have the honour and satisfaction of damning them to new and untried scenes of torture, during his own lifetime. The absurd doctrine of in- finite sin depends on two others equally absurd and monstrous, namely, there shall be an eternal law of prohibition, and an eternal propensity or liability to sin, therefore an eternal hell. An everlasting hell was built by Paganising christians on the supposition that sin is infinite, which they supposed to be the vio- lation of an infinite law, whose penalty was eternal damnation. Now if sin be infinite, it must be so ei- ther in the parts, or in the aggregate ; if not in the parts, it cannot be in the whole, for infinity can never be shown to consist of parts. If thus one sin be infi- nite, and infinity cannot be augmented, then all the sin committed since Adam, amounts to just nothing ; for his sin being infinite, could not be augmented ; and therefore, joy to a world of sinners ! they have nothing to fear. Moreover, if infinite sin merits infinite pun- ishment, then one sinner deserves all the punishment of an eternal hell — and God himself cannot prepare more than infinite punishment ; consequently there never could be more than one sinner, nor more than one sufferer in the universe. It would be absurd to suppose that God ever gave such a law — there is no intimation of it in the Bible ; infinite sin is nonsense, and infinite punishment is equally ridiculous. Now if such be the law, purpose and disposition of the Deity, no man but a mean, ignorant hypocrite, would say he deserves better treatment than the insults of the wick- ed or the curse of the damned ! ! But I shall plead, on behalf of the God and Father of my master Christ Jesus, not guilty — and endeavour to remove the re- proach from his character, by demonstrating the falsity of the charge from the evidences of Almighty power and love, derived from the voice of reason and the tes- timony of Revelation. HELLOLOGY. 103 In all the descriptions of the divine law given in the sacred oracles, it is uniformly represented a? a rule of life, a ad all its promises and threatenings are commen- surate with the present imperfect state of existence. The law was not made for a perfect man : hat for the lawless and disobedient ; and there is no intimation in the Bible of disobedience ever having entered the world of spirits. All moral evil or imperfection, is confined to the carnal and terrene existence, and can never pas^ the gates of death. The whole testimony of God on this subject, is summarily expressed by Paul in one brief sentence, "he that is dead is free from sin,' 3 Rom. 6 : 7. The supposition of man's liability to sin in another mode of existence is irrational and anti- scriptural, and also repugnant to the moral change, which all human beings experience in death, and the wicked thought that God's pleasure is the destruction ofhis creatures, is denounced by the oath of Jehovah and the mission of Jesus, -Ez. 11:1 Tim. 2 : 4. John 3: 17. and 1 John 4: 11. If all sin originate in the earthly or sensual body, will not the dissolution of this earthly body terminate the reign of sin? Again, if the condemnation due to sin be protracted one year after sin has ceased, what as- surance have we that condemnation will ever be re- moved ? May not the same disposition in Deity that leads him to punish sin one year after it cease, induce him to punish eternally ? If man be freed from tempt- ation or liability to sin, at death, ought any thing less than actual experience or the plain testimony of God, induce us to admit, that man can suffer after death 1 These questions are designed for the consideration of those who believe in purgatorial or disciplinary pains after death, as well as for the awakening of those who dream of everlasting Torments. An endless hell is useless, even according to the opinions of its advocates. They affirm, men will ever 104 HELLOLOG1. be atoning for their sin, but never succeed to exp even the least crime they may have committed. — Hence the punishment of hell must be inflicted to gratify a malignant and revengeful passion in the Dei- ty. Sure nothing less than pure malevolence could inflict pain for no other purpose than the gratification of incensed wrath. If the torments of hell could an- swer any good purpose, we could admit them ; but they are neither for example nor correction, conse- quently, they are the offspring office, unmerited ma- levolence ! Who can address a prayer to Jehovah, and call him father, believing that he prepared hell for man, whom, unasked, he had thrown into existence, knowing that he would terminate his course in the terrific regions of despair. O Calvinists, what think ye of your God, who begets children, makes a lire for them, and burns them to death ? Nay, that is nothing ; he immortalizes their existence to please himself with their contortions ! O Arminian, what better is your God, who makes man, prepares the tire, clears the way, and sits calm and composed while he beholds his creatures going into the fire, and for ever writhing in the liquid names ! ! Some o{ my auditors, who revolt with horror from the doctrine of an endless hell, are still inclined to ap- prove the doctrine of Purgatory. This dogma ori- ginated as far as we can ascertain, with the Platonic philosophy, lie taught that there is in matter a cer- tain refractory force, which resists the will of the meat Artificer. Out of the soul of the universe, which had itself become contaminated by material mixture, God formed inferior souls, numerous as the stars, and sent them down to the earth to be imprisoned in bodies. But the soul being immortal, by disengaging itself from animal passions and rising to the contem- plation of a world of intelligences, might regain its original habitation. Matter can never suffer annihila- IIELLOLOGY. 105 tion; the world therefore, shall be forever; and by the action of the animating principle, it accomplishes certain periods in which every thing returns to its ancient place or state. See Enfield's History of Phi- losophy. The Platonic and Pythagorean doctrines had been admitted into the traditions of the Pharisees before the time of Christ — John 9 : 2. Their ideas of punish- ment were Platonic, and those of a resurrection Pytha- gorean. Josephns tells us that in the region of Hades, angels are appointed as guardians of the souls, who dis- tribute temporary punishments to them, agreeable to every one's behaviour and manner. Virgil causes Anchises to teach this doctrine to iEneas.* For sin are various penances enjoined, And some are hung to bleach upon the wind, Some plunged in waters, others purged in fires, Till all the dregs are drained, and all the rust expires. The souls thus cleansed, to blest abode repair, And breathe in ample fields, the soft Elysian air. In these lines Virgil describes the threefold means of removing the pollution of the sinner ; First, by the winds ; Second, by water ; and Third, by lire. That after they had undergone purification they were intro- duced into the fields of the blessed. Origen adopted the Platonic doctrine and enlarged on it, and hence it became the prevailing sentiment among the chris- tians of the third century. The description of the infernal regions had been abandoned to the fancy of painters and poets, who peopled them with so many phantoms and monsters, who dispensed their rewards and punishments with so * "Supplicia expendunt, aliae panduntur inanes Suspensae ad ventos : aliis sub gurgite vasto Infectum eluitur seclus, aut exuntur igni. Quisque suospatimur manes. Exinde per amplutn Mittimur Elysium/'— .Eneid, 6, 740. 106 IIELLOLOGY. little equity, that a doctrine, the most congenial to the human heart, was disgraced by the absurd mixture of the wildest fictions. The doctrine of a future slate was not held in repute by the polythcists of Greece and Rome. They believed the providence of the gods to be visibly displayed on the theatre of the pres- ent world ; therefore they neither feared nor expect- ed a future state of existence. The doctrine is inferred from the abuse of the terms, Hell and damnation. We have shown that the word Hell, in its modern signification, is totally abjur- ed by the spirit of prophecy and the testimony of Je- sus : and consequently it is a violation and corruption of divine truth, to place such a word in the Bible. We shall now show that it is equally abusive to in- trude the word damnation, on the sacred records of life and immortality. From Krino, to distinguish or judge, is derived Krites, a judge or critic ; Krisis, a distinguishing, a judging, or determining ; and Kri- ma, a decision or sentence. But if Krisis or Krima mean damnation, then Krino, must mean to damn, all judging must be damning, and every judge, a damned person ! Let us however admit the reading of Mat. 23 : 33, and John 5 : 29, " damnation of Gehenna, 1 ' — " Resurrection of damnation," and then let us translate accordingly the following passages, where the same word, Krisis, occurs. John 5 : 22, the Fa- ther hath committed all damnation to the Son. Vcr. 27, given him authority to execute damnation — Verse 30, my damnation is just — John 1G : 7 — 11, the com- forter will reprove the world concerning damnation, because the prince of this w r orld is damned. Judc 1 4, the Lord comcth to execute damnation on all ! Again, we shall take the word Krima, and translate it damnation. John 9 : 39, for damnation I am come into the world — 1- Peter, 4: 17. Damnation must begin at the house of God ! Lastly, let us take the HELLOLOGY. 107 ^vord damn. Mark 16 : 16, he that believeth not shall be damned. John 8 : 10, 11, hath no man damned thee— neither do I damn thee — Mat. 12 : -41, 42, the men of Nineveh shall rise and damn this gene- ration — the Queen of the South shall damn it. In these passages the Greek word is Katakrino, hut the simple verb Krino is also rendered to damn by our translators, 2 Thes. 2 : 12. God shall send them delu- sion, that they all may be damned. Now we shall use the same liberty in a few instances. John 5 : 22, the Father damneth no man — 3 : 17, the Father sent not the Son to damn the world. John 12: 47. If any man hear my words and believe not, I damn him not ; for I came not to damn the world,'but to save the world. But some may be disposed to exclaim, stop, you abuse the scriptures ! Nay rather, I would show you how you have abused them, by putting into them, the pagan and diabolical terms, Hell and damnation — I therefore conclude that there is no word, in the ori- ginal Scriptures, that can, with even a shadow of pro- priety, be used to signify the punishment of Hell, which is what is generally meant by damnation. The doctrine of future rewards and punishments, was built on the supposition of the immortality of the soul ; a doctrine as fanciful as any of which the rev- eries of imagination can boast. All the phenomena from birth to death, are repugnant to the immateriali- ty and immortality of the human soul ; and compel us to admit with Lucretius, what all experience dem- onstrates, that the human mind grows and decays with the body.* God has given us reason to distinguish, and senses to perceive and reflect ; but this very rea- son shows the absurdity of embracing an opinion of spirit, which none of these senses will support. This doctrine was invented in Egypt, the mother of super- * Quoque pariter cum corpors et una crescere sentimus, paritcr- nue senescere mentem. 103 HELLOLOGY. stition, and brought by Orpheus to Greece. Thence it passed to the Romans ; and being so admirably adapted to flatter human pride, Indians, Scythians, Gauls, Germans and Americans, eagerly received the dogma. The hypothesis of future punishment served two important purposes ; first as a reply to the Athe- ists, who objected to the unequal distribution of good and evil in the present state ; secondly, to restrain the manners of men, through the fear of being miserable in another world. Legislators believing the doctrine to act as a powerful charm, used their utmost exer- tions to trive it publicity and influence. Hence Po- ly bius blames the great men of his time for teaching the common people to despise the fables of the poets, and represents them as useful fictions. This doctrine was received by the Pharisees under the reign of the Asmonean princes, as well as several other articles from the philosophy of the eastern nations, such as fate, predestination, angels and spirits. See Gibbon's Rome, vol. 1. chap. 15. Though the philosophers sometimes pretend to countenance the dogma of future punishment, yet they taught that death would terminate all our sufferings ; and in order to reconcile the minds of men to bodily dissolution, they affirmed death would either be an utter extinction of being, or a change for the better, for with one voice they all rejected every kind of fu- ture punishment. Pythagoras taught that all souls were a portion of the great soul of the universe, and discarded the notion of future punishment, as a vain terror. — Plato sometimes favours the representations of the poets, at other times despises them, as convoy- ing too frightful ideas of futurity. — Cicero not only disavows, but even ridicules the doctrine of future- punishment, and represents it to be opinion of the phi- losophers, that the gods are never angry, and there- fore incapable of hurting any person whatever. HELLQLOGY. 109 Josephus appears to have had clear ideas of the origin of the doctrine, for, describing the religion of the Essens, he says " they had the same notion as the Greeks, who allowed the islands of the blessed to their brave men, and the regions of the ungodly in hades to the wicked, who, as their fables relate, are punished there. Hence their dehortations from vice, and exhortations to virtue, whereby the good are bet- tered by the hope of reward after death, and the vi- cious restrained by fear of torment. These doctrine^ lay an unavoidable bait for such as have once had a taste of their philosophy." As our Lord delivered some of his discourses in the vicinity of Gehenna, a reference is made to that valley three times in the gospel history. But will any one pretend that the Jews believed, there would be a place in another world like Gehenna, in the neigh- borhood of their city ? Did our Lord ever inform his hearers that after death men would be put into a place like Gehenna ? Answer these questions in the affirm- ative, and show the proofs, or for ever abandon the wicked dogma. To what part of the universe can we look for the modern hell, whose elements are fire and flame, the abode of creatures totally abandoned by God ; where infinite wrath perpetually abides ; where nothing can be felt but inexpressible torments — nor heard but incessant groans and curses to all eternity ? O ye Pagan fabulists and worshippers of Moloch, give to your gods the glory due to their deeds ; but do not blaspheme our God also ! In vain do paganizing Christians tell us of bible hells and evangelical tor* ments. O, if there were not a single sentence, in all the bible, on behalf of salvation, but that psalm, 145 : 9, u his tender mercies are over all his works,' 5 it alone would suffice to water out all the hells of the universe ! Punishment in another state of being was never 10 tlO HELLOLOGY. threatened, by God, as the penalty of any law which he ever gave to mankind — therefore it cannot be in- Ihcted. — Deity cannot inflict a punishment for the breach of a law, which has never been promulgated ; nor for the violation of a law, to which man was inca- pable of yielding obedience. Now where, in the vol* umc.of revelation, tias God published a law, the pen- alty of which is damnation, in a future mode of exis- tence ? Our eagle-eyed, evangelical preachers, have discovered this heavy threatening in the phrase, u thou shalt die!" If so, then why arc they not afraid, for the threatening is unconditional 1 If to die, means to die spiritually and eternally, then all who die must undergo the penalty ; and be for ever aban- doned of God to the regions of despair, where all the guilty ghosts of Adam's race must for ever shriek and howl, Beneath the weight of heavy chains, Tormenting racks and fiery coals ; And darts to inflict immortal pains, Dipt in the blood of damned souls ! ! ! Had the heathen poet heard these heralds of dam- nation proclaim the corruscations of divine wrath, he would doubtlessly have cried out Tantasne animis ccelestibus irae — Mn. 1,11. Can heavenly minds such dire resentment show, Or exercise their spite in human woe ? Surely these advocates of endless misery, must be unbelievers themselves, otherwise they would fear to add to the revelation of heaven, lest God should add to them the plagues written in his book. But perhaps they are of the same mind with their pious ancestors, that God will never bring men to account for pious frauds or useful corruptions of the sacred text ! O for (he day when every man will speak the truth to his HELLOLOGY. 1 1 1 neighbour, and the priest's lips keep knowledge, that the people may learn the law from his mouth ! In the annals of history, we read not of a more un- provoked hatred, and a more base crime than that of Cain. Abel had brought his offering to the altar of the most high God, and presented it with affections of gratitude to the sovereign of heaven, and love to all his creatures. His sacrifice was accepted ; Cain's heart boils with indignation — the venom of his spleen had almost destroyed him ; nothing can glut his ven- geance, till he dyes his hands in his brother's blood ! Surely the thunders of the Almighty will not sleep, nor his lightnings cease to play, till the wretch be hurled into the hottest of Tartarean flames. Yet strange to relate, the gracious God of heaven only threatens him with temporal banishment, from the society of his brethren or father's family. O Cain, had you lived in the days of orthodoxy, they would have told you such news as would have harrowed up your spirits ; for to all the temporary pains threatened by God, they add eternal misery, in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone ! When God gave the law on Sinai, amidst thunders* lightnings, tempests, and smoke, we might have natu- rally expected, that if he ever intended to denounce damnation, fire would have proceeded from fire, and smoke from smoke ! But will any man be so wild or fanatical as to assert, that the Jewish law contained any such threatening as eternal misery ? No Jew, pre- vious to the Babylonian captivity ever imagined that God would punish him, in another world, for sins committed against the Mosaic institution. The heav- iest penalty ever threatened in the Jewish law, was the loss of life or the dispersion of that nation. Shall it be pretended that God concealed the pains of hell, till the sinner was snared and taken, and then inflict- ed the never-ending torments of a merciless burning » J 12 HELLOLOGY. fire ! God forbid, that I should so blaspheme my Crea- tor's character and government. Can it be admitted that the glorious gospel of the blessed God contains those dreadful denunciations, un- known to the Mosaic dispensation ? Surely not. Je- sus is the mediator of a better covenant, founded on better promises. The law is called the ministration of death, and the gospel the ministration of life ; can then the ministration of life, unfold the horrors of an eternal death, unknown to that very dispensation, which was emphatically denominated the ministration of death ? Reviewing, on this part of our subject, what is call- ed Evangelical preaching, we may apply to modern preachers, the language of God by the prophet Jeremi- ah ; Many pastors have destroyed my vineyard ; 1hcy have made my pleasant portion a wilderness. Chap. 12: 10. They think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams. Behold 1 am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that use their tongues, and say he saith. Jcr. 23: 27 — 31. Often have 1 chal- lenged these dreamers to produce a single passage from the sacred scriptures, wherein God had threaten- ed man with punishment after death ; but though my request has frequently caused the little divines to rage, vet it always proved a sovereign anodyne to all my philosophical and literary opponents. Indeed 1 have fully come to this conclusion, which I deem perfectly correct, that were it not for ignorance, fanaticism, and the love of gain, there could not be found a single ad- vocate of hell torments ! ! The law kiileth, but the gospel or spirit of life quickeneth. Like the good God from whom it sprang, it is a fountain of living waters whose streams magnifi- cently flow in glorious abundance, producing life and purity throughout the vast empire of the universe. The excellence of the new covenant and its superior- HELLOLOGY. 113 ity will appear, by considering that all the promises are absolute and unconditional ; and therefore inca- pable of mutation. From the first proclamation of the gospel, all the blessings of it were pronounced to be free grace, flowing from an impartial God, and therefore for the whole family of the great universal Parent. When Jehovah said to Adam, "the seed of the wo- man shall bruise the serpent's head ;" when he prom- ised to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, that in their seed, i. e. Christ, 4i all the families of the earth shall be blessed,' ' were not these promises unconditional ? Is the law, says Paul, against these promises of God. Gal. 3 : 17, 21,-^Grod forbid ! The law which was 430 years after, cannot disannul the covenant of God in Christ, that it should make the promises of none ef- fect. Micah, addressing the great God, says, " Thou wilt perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn to our fathers from the days of old." Micah 7 : 20. Jehovah never can change, therefore his truth and covenant shall endure for ever. Men may err through ignorance, from the right way, and God may chasten them with rods, yet will he never make void his covenant, nor change that which he has spoken, but his faithfulness will remain to all generations. — Ps. 89 : 30, 35. I will make a new covenant saith the Lord, not according to the covenant I made with Israel when I brought them out of Egypt : I will print my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be their God, and they shall be my people ; they shall all know me from the least to the greatest, for I will remember their sins no more. — Jer. 32: 31, 35. Heb. 8: 8, 13. God's record concerning his Son, is that we, the whole offspring of Adam, have eternal life in him. The un- believer attempts to make God a liar, by not believing God's report ; notwithstanding, the unbelief of man 10* 114 HELLOLOGY. ran never make the word of God of none effect. The gift of God which comes to all men, is eternal life ; and when Jesus our life shall appear, we shall be like him; for he will change our vile bodies into his glorious image, and so we shall be ever with the Lord.— John 3: 2. Phil. 3: 21. Punishment in the future world is inconsistent with the justice .of God, and the changes to which the hu- man body is subjected. Such are the laws of animal economy, and the transmigration of matter, that pain must immediately follow the vicious act as its conse- quent, or otherwise it cannot with propriety be inflict- ed. Through the afflux and deflux of particles, (he human body is perpetually changing, and must entire- ly change every five or six years ; therefore God has ordained that the righteous are recompensed in the earth, much more the wicked and the sinner. There is no peace, saithmy God, to the wicked ; they have no rest day nor night, but are continually tormented. In a word, the wicked are turned into hell, i. e. trou- ble, fear and pain, from the day they assume the char- acter, till they cease to be wicked — then, and not till then, shall they enter into rest. O the riches both of the goodness and wisdom of God. Some may ask shall not the wicked be put into hell after death ? Is not this the meaning of the Psalmist, Ps. 9:17? I answer, no ; the Pagan hell was after death, but the biblical hell is iivthis state of being. Poor mistaken man, no longer dream that thou canst sin wilfully, and yet escape the just chastisement of the Lord. His hand will find thee out. His eyes run to and fro through the earth, beholding the righteous and the wicked, and men will distinguish ; they must see, if guided by truth and light, that God malreth a dif- ference between him that serveth the Lord, and him who serveth him not. Mai. 3 : 15. HELLOLOGY. 115 In this body dwell those propensities which induce man to sin. — Bodily appetites and passions entice the man. Sin and suffering follow unlawful indulgence. In the self-same body in which man offends, in it he shall undergo the reward of his folly, and there is no respect of persons. The doctrine of the resurrection prohibits the doc- trine of future misery. Many have supposed that God will raise the dead in similar circumstances to those in which they departed this life, but the suppo- sition is heathenish and anti-scriptural. Paul treats largely of the resurrection, but never intimates that any should have reason to dread the consequences. He affirms, that as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive. Death was the wages of sin ; it followed as a consequent, but grace reigning through Jesus, the common Lord and Redeemer of man, abounds to the obliteration of guilt, and the introduc- tion of everlasting righteousness ; abolishes sin and its consequences, disease and death ; brings immor- tality to light, and passes upon all men for justification of life, which the Son of God imparts to every man without exception. In the history of the resurrection Paul does not contemplate moral character, nor dis- tinguish parties. Therefore, he adopts the human body, as the subject concerning which he predicates all he says, concerning a future state of being. This body is committed to the earth in dishonour, it is rais- ed in glory ; in weakness, but raised in power ; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body ; it is sown in corruption, but raised incorruptible ; a mor- tal body, but raised immortal. All must be changed. Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. As we have borne the image of the earthly, so we shall bear the image of the heavenly. Our first state of being has been earthly, earn a I, "sensual, fleshly, cor- rupt and mortal ; but our second mode of being, shall 116 HELLOLOGY. be heavenly, spiritual, intellectual, incorruptible, and immortal. O glorious state of unchangeable, unmixed felicity. When shall we enter into it and see the joys of our Lord ! Rejoice, believers. Rejoice in the Lord, his beloved disciple informs you, when Jesus appears, you shall be like him, i. e. he shall change your vile body, and fashion it like to his glorious bo- dy, by that power by which lie is able to subdue all things to himself — Phil. 3: 21. Jesus, the faithful and the true witness, testifies, that in the resurrection, men shall be as tfie angels of God ! Luke 20 : 36. Blessed Saviour, never did the base notions of the resurrection proclaimed by pretended orthodoxy, en- ter thy mind ; nor were they known to thine apostles. On the contrary, they proclaim glory, honour, and immortality to every soul of man, every son and daughter of Adam without distinction, as God's free gift to the whole human race. See Rom. 2 : 9. No rational man could ever have indulged in oppo- site sentiments, had not his mind been abased by su- perstition and dishonourable views of God. There could be no proportion between the finite feeble acts of men, and interminable pain or bliss — for the evil or good which man may perform in this life, is abun- dantly recompensed. The future state of existence is entirely of free, sovereign, and unmerited favour ; and as God is impartial, he bestows it on all his intel- ligent offspring indiscriminately. In this appears the character and conduct of a truly benevolent father ; he was able to impart blessings and happiness to all his offspring, he showed his impartiality and wisdom in doing so. The Diatheke, testament, or will which he made, bequeathed eternal felicity and immortal happiness to all the legatees ; and his wisdom and power provided the means, as Omniscience saw ne- cessary, to place every one in full possession of the inheritance. — O how inexpressibly better are the HEkLOLOGY. 117 promises of the new covenant, than those of the old. These were conditional and temporal, hut eternal and universal honour to the Most High God, possessor of heaven and earth ; the promises of the new and well ordered covenant are absolute and eternal. The crown is incorruptible, and fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for us. All the men inearth, or devils in hell, if such beings and place exist, could never touch that crown of righteousness, which the Lord the right- eous judge will give in the day of the resurrection and restitution. Gospel hearers, the heavens must retain Jesus till the time of the restitution of all things, but the apostle tells you that he expected the Lord Jesus from heaven to change our vile bodies and make them like his glorious body. The change and restitu- tion are the same. At that happy period, foretold by ihe prophet, His own soft hand shall wipe the tears From every weeping eye, And pau&s, and groans, and griefs, and fears, And death itself shall die. SECTION 1X1. Further remarks on the words Sheol and Hades. Reasons for dis- believing in the modern use of these terms, urged from scripture usage. BY THE EDITOR. That Sheol, Shaal, Shaul, or Saul, which is the same word in a different dress, should signify a place of never-ending torment, requires proof. Inference, unless the grounds of inference are immutable, amounts to little. Where the importance of inference relates to the greatest possible consequence, analogy must be obvious, and the conclusion irresistible, ere we can 118 HELLOLPGY. give it credence. We hardly need repeat that Said, the very word in question, was a common name in Judea where the import of the word Sheol was well understood. Let us then ask, if the word conveyed to the minds of the Jewish people, the same idea which is attached to it in modern days, v\*ould they have adopted it as an appellative ? Has any one pro- fessing the Christian name, and believing in the hor- rid doctrine of endless misery, ever brought his child to the altar, requesting it to be named Hell ? You must answer, instinctively, No. But do we learn by the scripture, that those to whom were committed the oracles of God, believed in a future, interminable punishment ? Not a word in scripture appears like it. Nay, the use of the term in most, if not all in- stances, utterly forbids the idea. The meaning in nearly every instance, is fixed by the context, and the known usages of the people. None but a mad man, or an infuriated fanatic, would contend that the patri- arch Jacob expected to go to his son Joseph in the hell of modern Christendom ; nor would any man in iiis senses contend, that Job would request to be hid- den in the Christian hell, from the wrath of Jehovah. For, if the wrath of God be exhibited in more dread- fuls terrors out of hell, than in it, those who would drive sinners into heaven by the terrors of hell, have not given the most terrible description with which they are threatened in scripture. But a previous question remains to be settled. Did the Jews believe in the immortality of the spirit ? The question is important. If we have no evidence that they did, the use of any words found in their scriptures cannot be a foundation for giving credit to the dogma of endless misery. Suffering may be com- mensurate with existence, but cannot exceed it. Ergo — those who did not believe in endless existence, cannot believe in endless torment. Consciousness is i HELLOLOGY. 119 necessary to suffering, or more philosophically speak- ing, to misery. But on what authority are we to pro- nounce that the Jews believed in a future, fixed state, of interminable duration ? It is utterly opposed by their history, and even the Pharisees who are suppo- sed to have believed in such a state of being, are far from stating the fact. That they believed in the Py- thagorean philosophy is pretty evident. That allu- sion is made to this philosophy in the ninth chapter of John, no less than twice, can easily be seen. " And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man that was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Mas- ter, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind ?'' Is it possible to refer this simple ques- tion to any other source than the Pythagorean philos- ophy ? How could the disciples, or any others, sup- pose that nonentity could offend ? The question sug- gests the answer. They supposed a previous state of existence, in which crimes were committed, which were to be punished in this state of existence. And the question most evidently includes the principle of the transmigration of spirits into different bodies. True, indeed, the idea of identity is necessary to un- derstand the justice of punishing a spirit and body in connexion, the latter of which had no previous exis- tence, and could not therefore stand connected in a relation to the spirit which ought to render it liable to misery, as a consequence of transgression. Some might indeed object, that to punish a spirit which had previously animated another body, but had lost its consciousnesses not according to our ideas of divine rectitude. And the argument is strengthened, when we reflect, that no human being, has the least recollec- tion of any previous state of being. But, perhaps the fallacy of all this singular jargon is supposed to be justified by the doctrine of original sin, as holden by our doctors of divinity. We grant, indeed, that the 120 HELL6LOGY. moderns arc not a whit behind their progenitors in certain points of mystery, but we are not therefore ready to justify the follies of one generation, by the fashionable frailties of another. But the reply of the self-righteous Pharisees, to him who had received his sight by the instrumentality of Jesus, leaves no doubt that the metempsychosis, more properly than the resurrection, was the principle held by the Pharisees. , " Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us ?" That this is a proof of the prevalence of the Pythagorean philosophy, is gathered from the preceding question of Christ's dis- ciples. If they gave credit to such fancies, no wonder those who were less conversant with the master of as- semblies, should support so unfounded a theorem. But the supposition is strengthened, when we perceive that the Scribes and Sadducees, who had equal oppor- tunities with the Pharisees, believed in neither angel nor spirit. This is certainly strong circumstantial evidence, that neither the law nor the prophets reveal a future state of being But the fact may easily be settled. If the law, or the prophetical writings, inti- mated in undisguised language, a state of immortal be- ing beyond the grave, how can we maintain the in- tegrity of that scripture which declares that .Tesiis brought life and immortality to light through the gospel ? When others can settle this question to their own satisfaction, we shall be-inducedto hear with com- placency, any arguments which they may use for our conversion. At present, we believe that a state of im- mortality was not known under the Mosaic dispensa- tion. Our readers are in possession of the facts from which we thus judge. To their own good sense we leave the subject. Hades, is most evidently the word used by the Seventy in translating the Hebrew word Sheol. By what means the sense of a passage is altered in a fair HELLOLOGY. 121 translation, is not distinctly perceived. That transla- tors miss the sense, and that the corresponding terms in the translation do not always convey the exact idea of the original, is very evident. But every man of sense must see that the errors of any version cannot sanctify palpable contradictions, nor can a wrested meaning, however long it may retain its empire, im- pair the sense of the original. Who for instance, will contend for the common version of Mat. 26 : 45, 46 ? " Sleep on now, and take your rest : behold the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us be going." Who does not see the utter inconsistency of this ver- sion with common sense, and the whole context ? If the corresponding text, Mark 14 : 41, 42, imports the same contradiction in terms, an account of the same scene by Luke, 22 : 46, redeems the subject from re- proach, by a fair exhibition of the sense, as connected with the subject, and the context. " And he said un- to them, Why sleep ye ? rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation." As the true sense of this subject is so obvious that few can miss it, we beseech those who believe in the infallibility of translators, who were under the influ- ence of king-craft and priest-craft, to pause one mo- ment, before they draw a conclusion on any important subject, based on the supposed meaning of any word or particular phrase ; and more especially, when the frequent use of the term is such that a very different sense must often be given, or the connexion left in ut- ter confusion. We have already seen in a former section that though hades does not exactly correspond with Sheol, yet the difference is of little importance. That nei- ther word is used to express the idea which long use has attached to the term hell, as used among Chris- tians generally, is certainly obvious, by the examples 11 122 HELLOLOGY. already given. The etymology of the words makes this not less apparent, than their use at and before the time when they were used in scripture. Added to this, the very singular facility with which the translators accommodated the version to their views, by a render- ing of the words so variously as to hide the meaning of the original by dexterous management, and we have a clue to the means by which the doctrine of endless torments came into general use. But men of research have explored this mystery of iniquity — the orthodox are assisting to pull down their own babel — and the Light of Truth shall yet shine into the dark corners of the earth, and liberate the minds which bave long been chained in the thraldom of ignorance and superstition. To all this, some may reply, that in at least one place in the New-Testament, the word hell is most evident- ly used to denote a place of interminable misery. The parable of the Rich man and Lazarus is that to which we have alluded, which shall be cautiously ex- amined. That the parable indicates misery, or suffer- ing, is granted ; but that this is to be endless, or in a future state of being, is neither said, nor intimated. Let those who suppose this parable to uphold the ten- et of never-ceasing misery, put their finger on the phrase which supports this idea. We have in vain looked for it in this passage, and we trust others will Iook,for it with no better success. If we mistake not, the Catholics look upon this para- ble as a proof of purgatorial purification. But will Protestants admit this ? But why not ? It certainly comes as near the proof of purgatory, as of an endless hell. But it may be well for us to recollect that ortho- dox critics give up hades, as a place of punishment in a future state. The ignorant and the obstinate cling to hell with such pertinacity, that it really seems they are as unwilling to part with the idea of a state of end- HELLOLOGY. 12S less misery, as a state of bliss, from whatever word it may be rendered. Hence, the word hell, wherever it occurs, and in whatever connexions, to their imagina- tion, always conveys the same idea. But let us reject all preconceived opinions, and carefully examine the chapter in which the doctrine of unmerciful punish- ment is supposed to be taught, for if not taught in this passage, it finds no resting place in the New-Testament* If the passage really inculcates the doctrine for which it is used, it is clearly a history of facts, and hell is thus determined to be a place of punishment in a fu- ture state of being. We shall now if you please, sit down to the task in good earnest, examine it as plain matter of history, and endeavour to canvass it fairly and amply as the opportunity will permit. That this may be done in the most acceptable manner, and ena- ble every reader to judge for himself at the moment of reading, we shall cite the whole in connexion, com- mencing Luke 16 : 19. " There was a certain Rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen ? and fared sumptuously every day : and there was a Certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table : moreover, the dogs came and licked his sores*. And it came to pass that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom : the rich man also died and was buried. And in hell he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and seeing Abra- ham afar off, and Lazarus in hi§ bosom. And he cri- ed, and said, Father Abraham have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue ; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy life time receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things ; but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And besides all this ?j be- 124 HELLOLOGY: tween us and you is a great gulf fixed ; so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot ; neither can they pass to us that zoould come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldst send him to my father's house ; for I have five brethren ; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets ; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham ; but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead," Having by this time, carefully examined this as his- torical fact, what information have we obtained? We have read of a rich man, well fed and well clothed, a circumstance of frequent occurrence, even in our day. We also learn that a beggar, full of sores, was laid at his gate, who desired to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table. Both these men died. The one, even without the rite of sepulture, as we can perceive, was carried by angels, and de- posited in the bosom of Abraham, the grand Patriarch of the Jewish nation. A very singulary«^, if it be one, to say the least. The rich man was buried, and lifting up his eves in torment, saw the polluted carcass of Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham. He recognized the venerable Patriarch as his Father, but not Lazarus as a brother, nor did he request an act of favour to be performed throughthim as such. His susceptibili- ty of suffering through the medium of his bodily organs appears not to have experienced any change — it seems to be still as subject to the influence of material ob- jects as at any former period. His complaint of suf- fering applies particularly to the tongue, by the use of which, however, he appears to converse with much freedom. The modesty of his request is most certain- HELLOLOGY* 125 ly as unobtrusive as was that of Lazarus on a former occasion ; he merely solicits that the beggar might be sent to dip the tip of his finger in water, for the pur- pose of cooling his tongue. Astonishing that he should make this request ! Why ask for a mere drop ! and where was the water to be obtained ! in hell ? — But the Patriarch appears to be taking his ease within hail- ing distance, and on the same level too, for all the verbs used indicate motion in a horizontal direction. Not the least intimation is given that one is up, while the other is down. — But let us notice the reply. Sou, remember.. ..remember what ? that he had been " a sensualist, a hard hearted, unfeeling glutton ! M No, not a word like this. What then ? Son, remember, that thou in thy life time [he is dead now] receivedst thy good things. Very well, and were his good things ill- gotten gain ? Had he extorted under false representa- tions — or under the convenient mask of long faces and long prayers, the last penny from the needy ? Had he taken the last mite from u the widow weeping over "her helpless orphans" to replenish the treasury of the LORD ? No such abominations are laid to his charge, nor is s.'vestige of crime alleged against him* It is not even said of him, " And for a mantle large and lang, He cloak'd him in religion." His character and conduct, for any thing which ap- pears to the contrary, were unexceptionable. He re- ceived his good things from the author of all good, and not one intimation is offered, that he had either misimproved, or enjoyed them thanklessly. But one. trait of character is discoverable in the whole affair, . and that is kindness to others, even in the midst of his sufferings. This differs entirely from the orthodox representation of the damned in hell* 11* 126 HELLOLOGY. The former situation of Lazarus is brought in con- trast with his present state. He had in his life time, received his evil things, but not through the means of the rich man. He is dead, and " the dead know not any thing," but still, he is comforted. No eulogy is pronounced on the piety of his former life, no self-aratu- lation on account of the discriminating grace which selected him as a monument of God's sparing mercy, while others no better than himself, were consigned to realms of hopeless wo, for the glory of God's vindic- tive justice ; nor do we learn that paeans of praise were sung for joy, while contemplating the damnation of the sufferer. The comforted and the tormented had changed conditions. One received consolation ; the other was miserable. For any thing which appears to the contrary, the dead retained the use of all their faculties, with the identity of their bodily organs, as completely as at any former period of their existence. The flame in which the rich man was enveloped, seems not to have impair- ed, either his vision or his speech. He recognized both Abraham and Lazarus ; they seem to converse with as much propriety as people do on this mundane sphere ; nor were the pains of the sufferer sufficient to interrupt a regular succession of ideas, nor the usual mode of expression. But another consideration presses hard on the sub- ject. Not a word is heard of the resurrection, nor of a general judgment. The transition appears to be instantaneous. No invitation — Come ye blessed ! No sentence — Depart ye cursed! No reason given for the contrast which was both sudden and great, between their present and former cirmumstances, save the im- plied equality which was effected by the change. But a reason is given why Lazarus could not. fulfil the request for relief. A great gulf was fixed between them. This appears to have escaped the notice of HELLOLOGY. 127 the petitioner. Abraham was not " higher than heav- en,T that the rich man should inquire, " what shall / do!'' Nor was he, in comparison with Abraham, u deeper than hell." The gulf was fixed, so that they who would go hence to you cannot ! Marvellous in- deed ! what, were any disposed to pass from the Abra- hamic, the comforting portion of hades, or hell, to the opposite side of the gulf? So the language would im- port, as clearly as that the rich, or more properly re- duced man, would exchange places with Lazarus. This indeed he did not ask. But was the rich man alone, or " in hell with the damned?" If this be pure history, determine for yourself, why he should rather say /am tormented, than zve are ? But the knowledge of this gulf forecloses all inter- cession in his own behalf. He now solicits that Laz- arus may be sent to his father '$ house, to his five breth- ren, of course to the children of Abraham ! For what end does he request this ? " That he may testify unto them." For what purpose ? " Lest they also come into this place of torment." What was to be the bur- den of his testimony ? The same which Moses and other prophets testified ; for Abraham says, " They have Moses and the Prophets, let them hear them." What then was their testimony ? Did they in one in- stance threaten an endless hell, to the chosen, but stiff- necked Israelites? I answered unhesitatingly, NO. They testified of the coming of the Just One, the Mes- siah, the Shiloh, the desire of all nations, who should finish transgression, and bring sin to an end. Abra- ham is therefore very properly represented as saying, " If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead.'" How clearly this was verified in its fair and scriptural import, will be seen in its proper place. We have now traced the subject in Its leading points, if not to the extent of its various ramifications, and we 128 HELLOLOGY have seen that as a whole, it has no possible claims to stand in the rank of realities. The first part, indeed, which describes the characteristics of the two men, would by itself require no illustration to make it ap- pear as a history of facts ; thus to lead the mind un- consciously into a train of ideas by the use of easy si- militudes, is the very object of parables, and is the mode by which wise men in all ages have imparted useful information. But what shall we say of the re- mainder of this chapter ? Does it agree, or rather, does it not disagree, not only with the testimony of our sen- ses, but with the most obviously literal declarations of scripture — and that too without exhibiting as a conse- quent moral, either warnings or encouragements ? Considered literally, it is a perfect blank. Thus idly amusing the populace with sounding brass, was not the method in which our Master spent his precious time. Those who still pertinaciously adhere to this portion of scripture as a relation of facts, may perhaps fancy with Tertullian, " the shape and corporeal lineaments" of departed spirits, and that they " do yet preserve the shape or character of the body to which they were united ;" but why not also adopt the reveries of Pythagoras, on the metmpsychosis, or transmigration of souls? Each boasts antiquity for its origin^ and each may claim equal authority from scripture. Thes- pesias, indeed, " returning to life, represents the col- our of souls, and saith there be scars and ulcers of their passions left upon them, by which they are dis- cerned." But have you any belief in all this subli- mated nonsense ? But a circumstance of no inconsiderable importance in this discussion, settles the character of the passage beyond controversy. THie fact to which I allude is quoted by Mr. Balfour from the celebrated Dr. Whit- by, on this passage, which I give you verbatim. " We BELLOLOGY. 129 fed this very parable* in the Gemara Babylonicum, whence it is citfed by Mr. Sheringham, in the preface to his Joma." Now the very circumstance of finding it primarily used as a parable, in a work written long anterior to the Christian dispensation, and its repeti- tion by our Saviour without the least intimation of change from a figurative to a literal construction of the language — is very conclusive evidence that he used it as a parable, and in no other sense. What was its use as a figurative representation will be seen in the sequel. But when such critics as Campbell, Dodd- ridge, Chapman, and other commentators, are com- pelled to consider this subject as entirely figurative, the conclusion that their judgment is founded on irre- sistible testimony is obvious, it is inevitable. But the strength of this is increased, when we recollect that this is the only place in the New-Testament, where HADES, here rendered hell, is connected with pun- ishment ! In allusion to this fact we conceive the pres- ent subject particularly interesting. You are already aware that hades, and not Gehen- na, is the word rendered hell in the passage before us. Of this word Dr. Campbell says : " In my judgment it ought never in scripture to be rendered hell, at least in the sense in which that word is now understood by stians." This orthodox Doctor gave this opinion with the most convincing data. Notwithstanding the labour already expended on the negative side of this subject, we shall state a rea- son sometimes urged in favour of a literal interpreta- tion of the passage, which shall be fearlessly met, and /airly investigated. The objection arises from the fact, that it is not introduced as a parable. This ob- jection is easily repelled by a direct appeal to the com- mencement of other parables. To begin then with this very chapter. It commences with the parable of the Unjust Steward. To the use of this as a parable. 130 HELLOLOGY. we think no one objects. But where is its imagery I It is as bare of figure, as is the skeleton tree of foliage, in the depth of winter. Nothing connected with it, but looks more like fact than figure, if we except its application, and even that is ambiguous. Not so with the parable under consideration. Here the imagery is brilliant, and the scope extensive. But we will now call your attention to the comparison. u There was a certain rich man, which, " is the introduction to the first. " There was a certain rich man, whic^'' is the introduction to the one under examination. What a remarkable coincidence. Not a word is said of either as a parable — their commencement is the same. The parable under discussion is full of imagery, and as history, is equally full of improbabilities, not to add impossibilities — the other, destitute of imagery, is taken for granted as parable, nemine contradicente ; and why ? It does not militate against any preconceiv- ed opinions. Were no other fact preceptible, the very reason which is objected to the one as figure, is demonstrably evident as the other is concerned. But though this is considered as an entire answer to the objection now stated, you may compare at your leis- ure, Mat. 13: 44, 45 — 47 — 49, where you may find parables introduced in as abrupt a manner as the one under consideration. See also Mat. 20 : 1. the para- ble of the labourers ; also Mat. 25 : 1. respecting the ten virgins, and that of the talents, v. 14. with others ad libitum. Of those in Mat. 13.. it may indeed be urged, that " All these things spake Jesus to the mul- titude in parables, and without a parable, spake he not unto them." But you ought to perceive that this includes in the most ample form, the very subject un- der examination. The multitude was contradistin- guished from the disciples ; this was spoken to the Pharisees ; ergo, to the multitude. It is then a para- ble. KELLOLOGY. 131 Having already shown, and, as we trust conclusively, that a literal understanding of this subject involves the most palpable absurdities, we shall now turn your at- tention to what is believed to be its true meaning. The rich man will now be considered as a type of the Jew- ish nation, and Lazarus as an emblem of the Gentile world. That this is the import of the passage, we shall now endeavour to make obvious. The parable represents these two as contradistin- guished each from the other, — the one rich, and the other poor. That this relates to spiritual privileges, in which the Gentiles were far behind the Jews, is a position which is soon illustrate^ But perhaps we may first inquire into the propriety of using the singular number when speaking of the whole peo- ple. Let us then recur to scripture authority for a precedent. Deut. 32 : 9, to close of the 15th verse. " For the Lord's portion is his people ; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance. He found him in a desert land, and in the waste howling wilderness ; he led him about, he instructed him, he kept him as the apple of his eye. As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings ; So the Lord alone did lead him, and there was no strange god with him. He made him ride on the high places of the earth, that he might eat the increase of the fields ; and he made him to suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty ipck : butter of kine, and milk of sheep, with fat of lambs, and rams of the breed of Bashan, and goats, with the fat of kidneys of wheat ; and thou didst drink the pure blood of the grape. But Jeshurun waxed fat, and kicked : thou art waxen fat, thou art grown thick, thou art covered with fatness ; then he forsook God which made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation."" 132 HELLOLOGY. Here we observe, not only that the Lord's people are spoken of collectively in the singular number, but that they are represented as rich, even in the good things of this life through the favour of our heavenly father. Nor is this more evident than that he was equally rich in spirituals. Paul, in answer to the ques- tion — What advantage then hath the Jew? replies, — "Much, every way; chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God." And again ; u Who are Israelites ; to whom pertaineth the adop- tion, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, andihe service of God, and the promises ; whose are the fathers, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came." The clothing of the rich man, thus considered, is described, Exod. 27 : 2, 4, 5. " And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, for glory and for beauty. And these are the garments which they shall make ; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and abroidered coat, a mi- tre, and a girdle ; and they shail make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may min- ister unto me in the priest's office. And they shall lake gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and line linen.'' Thus was the rich man, the high priest and repre- sentative of the Jewish people, clothed in purple and fine linen ; and that both he and the peopl# fared sumptuously every day, we may learn by the daily sac- rifices, and more specially by the peculiar demonstra- tions of divine favour which are expressed as follows : " And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God." What nation, then, was like that nation, " whose God was the Lord ?" We see the propriety of representing the Jewish nation as a «nan, a rich man. His clothing and his fare are described HELLOLOGY. 133 in the scriptures of truth, and to this the parabolic language of our Saviour agrees. But the life of this privileged man closes. The law, which had been a lamp to his feet and a lantern to his path, had been made void by vain traditions. He had neglected at- tendance on those oracles of divine wisdom, which had been his life, and he is now dead. The legal dispen- sation had ceased. Having misimproved his talent, the kingdom of God was taken from him and given to another, bringing forth the fruits thereof. He was consequently shut out into utter darkness, where is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Blindness in part had now happened to Israel, and shall continue until the fulness of the Gentiles shall come in. He was there- fore buried in the darkness expressed by an apostle — Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and bow down their back alway. He now saw Abraham afar off and Lazarus in his bosom. Thus was the pre- diction of the Saviour fulfilled, recorded Luke 13: 28, 29, 30. t; There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and you your- selves thrust out. And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God. And, behold, there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last." It was at the close of the Mosiac dispensation, when the master of the house, the high priest of our profes- sion, had shut the door on the Jews, and opened it to the Gentiles, that those which had been the first, and highly favoured people, became the last ; and the Gen- tiles, who had been the last, were in the same sense made the first. The Gentiles came from the four quar- ters of the earth, and found life in the dispensation of 12 134 HELLOLOGY. the Gospel, the same gospel which had been preached to Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. We have before said, that this is the only passage in the New-Testament, in which hades is connected with punishment. You will recollect that the original term signifies unqualified darkness. If this is a parable, hell is here used to signify . mental darkness, as it lite- rally signifies physical darkness. Thus does the figure completely correspond with the fact. Hence it is obvious, that as the Jewish nation looked to the right- eousness of the ritual law, which consisted of carnal ordinances, so the rich man in the parable calls to his father after the flesh for assistance. Having rejected the counsel of God against themselves, and refused to submit to the rule of a s-uifering Messiah, they judg- ed themselves unworthy of eternal life, and the angels, or ministers of the gospel, turned to the Gentiles, who were thus brought into the life of the gospel, the faith of Abraham. H To exhibit the force of Abraham's closing reply to the rich man, u If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither would they be persuaded though one rose from the dead," let us refer to John 5 : 45, 46. " Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father : there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me : for he wrote of me. 1 ' But what says Paul to the Romans on this subject ? " For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief; Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they °.lso may obtain mercy." It hence appears obvious, that the unbelief of the Jews, and the faith of the Gentiles, were simultane- ous. The one died to all which distinguished them as rich in their life time — the other died to their idola- HELLOLOGY. 1S5 frous worship, and to their ignorance of the true God, and no wonder the Apostles exclaimed in astonish- ment, " Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life." Thus the rich man died, and was buried — the poor man needed no burial, he came to life — the life of the new dispensation. In speaking of this passage literally, notice was taken of the entire want of character from which to infer the cause of the sudden change of circumstances re- lated of these two men. As a figure, it is truly charac- teristic of the relative situation of the two grand divis- ions of men. Not only a were the Jews highly privi- leged as a people, but their exclusive claim to these privileges was so deeply rooted, that even the apostles of our Lord, had strong doubts of the propriety of teaching the way of life to the Gentiles. Nay, the Sa- viour of men, while under the Mosaic dispensation, afforded strong evidence of this exclusive spirit. His disciples were forbidden to preach to the Gentiles, and he declared himself not sent, but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. True, after his resurrection, the commission was extended to every creature ; yet before his crucifixion, he declared it not meet to give the children's bread to dogs, alluding to the case of the Gentile woman. Here then is a case in point. The woman answered — " Truth Lord, yet the dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their master's table." What a singular coincidence ! The Jews, and even Christ, at that time, considered the Gentiles as dogs. That the Gentiles, who are here represented in the character of a beggar, were poor in the same sense in which the Jews were rich, will hardly be disputed, when reference is made to Eph. 2 : 11,12. " Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands: that at that time ye were without 136 HELLOLOGY. Christ, "being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world." The poor man is represented as outside the rich man's gate. " Without are dogs. 15 lie is also said to be full of sores. If being strangers from the cove- nants of promise, and without hope, does not suffi- ciently point out the moral ulcers of the Gentile world, we know not in what language to describe it. But Isa. 1 : 5, 6, in full to the purpose. " The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. Why should ye be stricken any more ? ye will revolt more and more. The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it ; but wounds and bruises, and putrefying sores : they had not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with oint- ment." That the exclusive spirit of the Jewish nation was highly provoked by any intimation of granting their privileges to the Gentile world, is manifested by their conduct to the Messiah, on his hinting the change which was about to take place between these two grand divisions of men. They thrust him out of the city, and led him to the brow of the hill whereon their city was built, that they might cast him down head- long. W T hat, did the Spirit of Pharisaic pride, which says, " Stand by thyself — I am holier than thou ;" prompt them to murder ? It did — nor is this a solitary instance. " And he said unto me, depart : for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles, And they gave him au- dience unto this zvord, and then lifted up their voices, and said, away with such a fellow from the earth : for it is not fit that he should live.*" HELLOLOGY. TST But perhaps you are ready to inquire, What is meant by the dogs licking his sores ? we conceive it points to the instructions of the heathen philosophers, which might palliate, but could not heal, their moral diseases. " Life and immortality were brought to light through the gospel." The death of the poor man was the close of his dispensation of misery. The life time in which he had received his evil things terminated, and he was brought by the angels, or messengers, or ministers of the gospel, into the glorious life, and light, and liberty of the new dispensation. He came from darkness into the light of divine truth, he was not buried. The rich man died to the light, and was buried in darkness as profound as that from which Abraham was taken — he was therefore buried — he is buried still. He listened not to the voice which said. Turn ye, turn ye, O house of Israel, for why will ye die ? But the Deliverer shall come out of Zion, and turn away ungodliness from Jacob. The vision of the dry bones in Ezekiel 37 : will yet be fulfilled. " Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel : behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost ; we are cut off for our parts. Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, O my peo- ple, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you out of your graves, and shall put my Spirit in you, and ye shall live ; and I shall place you in your own land : then shall ye know that I the Lord have spo- ken it saith the Lord.'' That the primitive preachers of the gospel were termed angels, will not admit of disputation, and that they were commissioned to turn the Gentiles from a 12* 133 HELLOLOGY. state of mental darkness and moral degradation, to the light of the gospel, is evident from Acts 36 : 17, 18. a Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to liglit, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may re- ceive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith which is in me." Perhaps you are by this time ready to inquire what is meant by the great gulf, which completely preclu- ded the possibility of passing to and fro. I presume it means no more than the determination of God, who hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day. This prediction will most surely be ful- filled, and nothing but the necessary time to bring in the fulness of the Gentiles is now wanting to close the glorious promises respecting this people. Do you learn that this can never be passed ? on what page of scrip- ture do you find it written. The Jews were to bow down their back alway, but a deliverance is neverthe- less promised. That which cannot be performed to- day, may be accomplished to-morrow. That which was broken from its own olive tree can be grafFed in again, and so all Israel shall be saved, and the top stone of salvation shall be brought forth with joy, cry- ing grace, grace. Christ said to his disciples, as he did to the Jews, whither I go ye cannot come — but the question of a disciple, elicited an answer of peace. But instances of this description are so common, that you will hardly need a repetition in this place. You may also be ready to ask, who were the five brethren of the rich man. Whether the number five has here any special reference to any definite portion of men, is not perhaps certain. But it is certain, that as the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin were count- HELLOLOGY. 139 ed but one, so the ten tribes would, in the same ratio, number live. That the Samaritans, or ten tribes, were acknowledged by the Jews as children of Abra- ham, is evident, notwithstanding they had no dealings together. And that they kit them nearer of kin, and nearer in feeling, than others called Gentiles, is more than probable. And as the ten tribes never did op- pose the gospel as did the Jews, so it might be said, they had not come into the place of torment into which unbelief has brought the Jews. Hence the whole is easy of understanding. The rich man did not consider Lazarus as his brother — but he saw him in a situation as he supposed, to render assistance. The perplexity of the Jews was great. They were tributary to the Romans, and continually expected a conquering Messiah, who should rescue them from this state of vassalage. The time of his coming, was at the advent of Christ, and hence they would take him by force and make him a king ; hence also, the populace cried, *Hosanna to the son of David — and the same populace cried, crucify him — his blood be on us and on our children. But after all which has been said on this citation, some may yet inquire, how comes it about, that so many learned men still persist in using this text as proof of interminable misery ? We answer, first, by inquiring whether circumstantial testimony, and that very equivocal, is sufficient to outweigh the phalanx of facts which guard this passage from perversion ? If you answer, Yes — you are prepared to believe in the infallibility of Popes, and Synods, and Councils. If you reply, No — the question is answered, and the subject is put to rest. But again — If the tenet is true, merely because ma- ny believe and teach it, why not always go with the current of public opinion ? On this principle, the Jews were justified in their persecution of Christ and his 140 HELLOLOGY, disciples, and you would thus commend the maxim. that the voice of the people is the voice of God. Numbers would thus sanctify error, and that may be orthodox to-day which will be the most damnable her- esy to-morrow. On this principle too, the multitude might say to the few who think — Hitherto shalt thou go, and no further. Every advance which has been made in knowledge would thus be an advance in error, and we might be persuaded to retrace our steps from civilization to the most heathen barbarism. We have now looked again at the words sheol and hades, and at their use in the scriptures. We have taken one instance of the use of the latter, and that the strongest instance in the New Testament, and on examination, found it wanting, as a support for the vulgar but popular error of endless misery. Scrip* ture, reason, analogy, are all against it, as a term ex- pressing a place of punishment posterior to this mode of existence. We find it used figuratively as an em- blem of the shutting up of the Jews from the privile- ges of the gospel kingdom, and of the entrance of the Gentiles into this kingdom. It is thus, that it fulfils the predictions of the Bible, and alfords strong reason for trusting in the fulfilment of every other prophecy yet to be accomplished. In confirmation of what has been advanced on this passage, we shall quote from Dr. Campbell, with some remarks on the quotation from Mr. Balfour's Inquiry. Of the word ados he says — " Here it is represented as a place of punishment. The rich man is said to be tormented there in the midst of flames. These things will deserve to be ex- amined narrowly. It is plain, that in the Old Testa- ment, the most profound silence is observed in regard to the state of the deceased, their joys or sorrows, happiness or misery. It is represented to us rather by negative qualities than by positive, by its silence, HELLOLOGY. 141 its darkness, its being inaccessible, unless by preter- natural means, to the living, and their ignorance about it. Thus much in general seems always to have been presumed concerning it, that it is not a state of activi- ty adapted for exertion, or indeed for the accomplish- ment of any important purpose, good or bad. In most respects, however, there was a resemblance in their notions on this subject, to those of the most an- cient heathen. " But the opinions neither of Hebrews nor of heath- en, remained invariably the same. And from the time of the captivity, more especially from the time of the subjection of the Jews, first to the Macedonian empire, and afterwards to the Roman ; as they had a closer in- tercourse with Pagans, they insensibly imbibed many of their sentiments, particularly on those subjects whereon their law was silent, and wherein, by conse- quence, they considered themselves as at greater free- dom. On this subject of a future state, we find a con- siderable difference in the popular opinions of the Jews in our Saviour's time, from those which prevail- ed in the days of the ancient prophets. As both Greeks and Romans had adopted the notion, that the ghosts of the departed were susceptible both of enjoy- ment and of suffering, they were led to suppose a sort of retribution in that state, for their merit or demerit in the present. The Jews did not indeed adopt the Pagan fables on this subject, nor did they express them- selves entirely in the same manner ; but the general train of thinking in both came pretty much to coin- cide. The Greek hades they found well adapted to express the Hebrew sheol. This they came to con- ceive as including different sorts of habitations for ghosts of different characters. And though they did not receive the terms Elysium or Elysian fields, as suitable appellations for the regions peopled by good spirits* they took instead of them, as better adapted to 142 HELLOLOGY. their own theology, the garden of Eden, or Paradise, a name originally Persian, by which the word answering to garden, especially when applied to Eden, had com- monly been rendered by the Seventy. To denote the same state, they sometimes used the phrase Abraham's bosom, a metaphor borrowed from the manner in which they reclined at meals. 1 ' On the above Mr. Balfour remarks as follows : — "How did the Jews in our Lord's day, come to consider Hades as a place of punishme'nt for the wicked ? That a change in their opinion on this sub- ject, had taken place from what is contained in the Old Testament is evident; for he says, — "on this sub- ject of a future state, we find a considerable differ- ence in the popular opinions of the Jews in our Sav- iour's time, from those which prevailed in the days of the ancient prophets." Well, how did this change in their opinions taken place ? Was it by some new rev- elation which God made to them on this subject ? No such thing is stated by Dr. Campbell, but the reverse. He thus accounts for the change of their opinions. " But the opinions neither of Hebrews nor of heath- en, remained invariably the same. And from the time of the captivity, more especially from the time of the subjection of the Jews, first to the Macedonian em- pire, and afterwards to the Roman ; as they had a closer intercourse with Pagans, they insensibly imbib- ed many of their sentiments, particularly on those subjects whereon their law was silent, and wherein, by consequence, they considered, themselves as at greater freedom. As both Greeks and Romans had adopted the notion, that the ghosts of the deceased were susceptible both of enjoyment and of suffering, they were led to suppose a sort of retribution in that state, for their merit or demerit in the present. The Jews did not indeed adopt the Pagan fables on this subject, nor did they express themselves entirely in HELLOLOGY. 143 the same manner ; but their general train of thinking in both came pretty much to coincide.'' — This state- ment is surely too plain to be misunderstood. How much plainer could he have told us, that a punish- ment in Hades was a mere heathen notion, which the Jews learned from their intercourse with them ? Could this have been more obvious had he said so in as ma- ny words ? We presume no man will deny this. He not only declares that neither Sheol nor Hades is used in Scripture to express a place of punishment, but he shows, that the Pagan fables teach it, and the Jews learned it from them. What are we then to think, when this is the account of the origin of the doctrine of hell torments by one of its professed friends ? Had this statement been given by a profess- ed Universalist, the cry would be raised that it was a mere fabrication of his own, in support of his sys- tem. But no, this is the statement of the learned, and acute Dr. Campbell, late principal of Marischal col- lege, Aberdeen, who lived and died, a celebrated the- ologian in the church of Scotland. It is notorious, that in this quotation he declares, that the Jews de- rived these opinions from their intercourse with the heathen. Where they got those opinions he does not inform us. Had they been from divine revelation, the heathen ought to have learned them from the Jews. But here the matter is reversed. The heathen it seems anticipated divine revelation, as to the doctrine of punishment in Hades. They revealed it to the Jews by means of their fables. The Jews it is said, — " did not adopt their fables, nor did they express them- selves entirely in the same manner, but their general train of thinking came pretty much to coincide." That man must be very dull, who does not learn from this, that the doctrine of torment in Hades, had its origin in heathenism, and, that the Jews were ignorant of it, until they learned it from the heathen. — From all this, i44 HELLOLOGY. will it be easy for any one to resist the conviction,* that to this popular opinion, which the Jews had im- bibed from their intercourse with the heathen, our Lord alluded in his parable, of the rich man and Laz* arus ? Such were the popular notions of the Jews in our Lord's day; and to what else could he allude? The Old Testament, as we have seen, taught no such doctrine, and in the parable it is not introduced as a new revelation to the world. It is merely brought in as a part of its imagery, and that without asserting its truth, or exposing the erroneous notion which peo- ple had imbibed. He no more attempts to correct this Pagan notion, than the common opinion, that satan had bound a woman eighteen years with an in- firmity. " Dr. Campbell further declares, that though the Jews did not adopt the Pagan fables on this subject, yet their train of thinking pretty much coincided with theirs. " The Greek Hades they found well adapted to express the Hebrew Sheol. This they came to conceive as including different sorts of habitations for ghosts of different characters." They did not adopt the terms Elysium, or EJysian fields, to express the regions of good spirits, but he says, "they do not seem to have declined the use of the word Tartarus 1 ' to ex- press the unhappy situation of the wicked in an inter- mediate state.'' Le Clerc, as qnoted by Rev. Mr. Balfour, gives us the Pagan notion of punishment in a future world, in the following words : — " Though enough has been said, showing that pun- ishment in Hades was a heathen notion, and not sanc- tioned by divine revelation, it may be of some use to see what were the views entertained by the ancient heathen about Hades and Tartarus. M. Le Cierc, in his Religion of the Ancient Greeks, p. 147 — 154. thus writes: — " In general, the doctrine of a future life has HELLOLOGY. 145 been adopted by all nations, at least by all those that deserve to be cited as examples. Legislators consid- ered it as the most effectual curb for restraining the passions of men, and they have employed every ar- gument to establish this salutary doctrine, as we may be convinced by attending to the descriptions which the ancients have left us of hell. " This word signified among them the residence of souls. Thither, after death, they repaired in crowds to receive remuneration for their deeds. Minos sat as judge, and as the names were drawn out of the fatal urn, he distributed to each his merited punishment or reward. Pluto, seated on a throne of ebony, presided over the infernal regions ; because, as we have al- ready observed, in the symbolical region of the an- cients, part of which was dedicated to the worship of the stars, winter was the night of nature, and because the sun at that time took the name of King of the Shades. For this reason Pluto, who represented the sun, makes so important a figure in mysteries destined to describe the empire of the dead. The gloomy region was situated at an immense distance, far be- yond the limits of this universe. According to the author of the Theogony, [Hesiod, Theog. v. 720.] ' as far as the heaven is distant from the earth, so far is the earth removed from the dark abyss. A mass of iron, falling from the top of the starry heavens, would take nine days and nine nights before it reached the surface of the earth ; and it would require the same time in falling from thence to Tartarus,' the place destined for the punishment of the wicked. " This frightful abode was said to be twice as deep as it is distant from the brilliant summit of Olympus. It was surrounded by a triple wall, it was bathed by the flaming waters of Cocytus and of Phlegethon, and towers of iron guarded the entrance. The cruel Tysiphone watched night and day at the gate, armeo H6 HELLOLOGY. with serpents, which she shook over the heads of the guilty. Their groans, the doleful cries, mixed with the sound of their stripes, cause the wide abyss to resound. There are for ever shut up the impious Ti- tans, and those no less audacious mortals who dared to resist the divinity ; Tityus, Ixion, Pirithous, and the impious Salmoneous. Perjury, adultery, incest, and parricide, are likewise punished ; and those whose life has been sullied with odious crimes ; those who have not respected the ties of blood, who have waged unjust wars, who have sold their country ; those who have dared to commit enormous wickedness, and en- joyed the fruit of their crimes, are all consigned to the most cruel torments. " A less rigorous fate was reserved for him who had been guilty of smaller offences, or who, having com- mitted crimes, had given signs of repentance. It was necessary that he should be punished till he had ex- piated them ; but when he had been in some sort re- generated and cleansed from the impurities contract- ed by guiljt, he was admitted into the abodes of the blessed. " That place of delights was admirably contrasted with the dismal regions of Tartarus. The ground sparkled with gold and precious stones ; its fertile plains were watered with a multitude of never-failing; streams, which maintained a perpetual verdure. The flowers of spring were mixed with the rich fruits of autumn. A sky for ever serene and unclouded, a sun and stars from which incessantly flowed streams of living light; and, in fine, a'! the objects which the most brilliant imagination could conceive, were col- lected to embellish those happy plains. They were inhabited by virtuous men, the friends of justice, who had served their country, and cultivated the useful arts ; they tasted a pleasure which nothing could em- bitter ; and the remembrance of the virtues they had HELLOLOGY. 147 practised on earth was for them a continual source of felicity. In the midst of the unmingled pleasures they enjoyed, they exercised themselves in the occupations which during life had obtained them the gratitude of their countrymen. The legislator contemplated the principles of that august and eternal law of which he had before but a glimpse ; and the assembly of the just that surrounded him, were attentive to his instruc- tions. The sight of arms, even in the bosom of peace and tranquillity, recalled to the remembrance of the hero those battles which he had fought in defence of his country ; while the poet, who had consecrated his harp to the worship of the gods, celebrated anew, in celestial strains, the power and benignity of the im- mortals. " We may conceive what impression these images would make on the mind, when unceasingly presented to the eyes from earliest infancy. It is not to be doubted, that if the hope of felicity unclouded leads to virtue, the idea of endless punishment must have a still stronger influence on the conduct. The religion of the ancients, which to us appears of so light a na- ture that we are apt to believe its only end was to flat- ter the senses, yet employed the most proper means for restraining the outrageous multitude. It alarmed them on alt sides with the most frightful repesentations. A poet of antiquity [Lucretius, lib. 5.] paints, in the strongest colours, that continual terror which takes pos- session of the human heart, which disturbs and poisons the pleasures of life, and which in every part of the earth has erected temples for the purpose of concilia- ting the gods. Plato, in the beginning of the first book of his Republic, represents an old man seized with fear at the approach of death, and full of inquietude with regard to objects that never occupy the season of health. Then it is, says he, that we reflect on our crimes, on the injustice we have committed, and that 148 HELLOLOGY. often, in our agitation, we start in our sleep, and are frightened like children. As soon as some were found among the ancients who had overcome these fears, it was pretended that such had never existed among them : we might as reasonably judge of the public belief at this day, by the opinions in which some mod- ern writers have been pleased to indulge themselves. The testiomy of those of antiquity who opposed the prejudices of their times, their very attempt to dissi- pate those fears, and to turn them into ridicule, rather proves how deeply they were rooted. Observe with what solicitude Lucretius every where endeavours to burst the bonds of religion, and to fortify his readers against the threatenings of eternal punishment. The observation of Juvenal, so often cited, that nobody in his day believed in the fables of hell, is that of an en- lightened mind, which takes no part in the opinions of the vulgar. The same thing is to be said of what we read in Cicero, and in some other writers, on the same subject : and when Virgil exclaims, ' happy the man that can tread under foot inexorable Destiny, and the noise of devouring Acheron,' he indicates, in a man- ner sufficiently precise, that it was the province of phi- losophy alone to shake off the yoke of custom, riveted by education. u Those who were unable to conquer these vain ter- rors, found consolations of a different kind. Religion stretched forth her kind hand to encourage their hopes, and to relieve their despondency. When remorse had brought back, within her pale, an unfortunate wan- derer from the paths of justice, she informed him that, by a true confession of his guilt, and sincere repent- ance, forgiveness was to be obtained. With this view expiatory sacrifices were instituted, by means of which the guilty expected to participate in the happiness of the just" HELLOLOGY. 14* To rebut what has been said, by orthodox commen- tators, in the present section, proof of the reverse must be given, and all the researches of these able scholars must be given to the winds. SECTION XV. Further examination of the subject. Appeal to the Scriptures relative to the first transgression. BY THE EDITOR. We learn by the preceding section, that the use to which hades has been applied, is of heathen origin, to which the Catholic tenet of an intermediate state, suit- ed to purgatorial discipline, also owes its parentage. Orthodox writers of much learning and diligence, are given as authority, whose testimony as to matters of iact will hardly be disputed. They give up every word, as expressive of future misery, save Gehenna. But do a majority of Christian readers, know the rad ical difference between the various words which are rendered hell in our common translation ? Most cer- tainly not. The clergy, who ought, and many of whom do know better, seldom, if ever, attempt to set their hearers right respecting these things. The rea- son is very obvious. Once give them a clue to the truth, and they will be less ready to receive the dog- ma of endless misery, which needs all their ignorance and prejudice for its support. Exhibit the ignorance, or malversations of the translators, and implicit faith in the traditions of the fathers, will vanish. Hence, those who have done so much for the cause of truth, while it militates so apparently, against their own prejudices, deserve the greater praise. But, if Sheol, or Hades, originally signified a place of wretchedness in a future state of being, is it not most astonishing, that we never read of its creation ? 13* 150 HELLOLOGV. If it is in the universe of God, it was either designed from eternity, or was an accident, growing out of cir- cumstances unseen by Jehovah when he brought the material earth on which we live from chaos into order. But we neither hear of its creation, nor of its exist- ence, from the records of truth. No threatening of this sort is recorded in the Old Testament. " In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," con- tains no intimation of this sort. Nor does any word, or circumstance, relating to the first transgression, or its effects, produce any thing like it. No awful denun- ciation of implacable vengeance, and never-ending torment, are recorded as being fulminated by Almigh- ty wrath : — No fear of such a consequence is record- ed as the result of disobedience. — Adam is represent- ed as being ashamed, and gave this as a reason for hi- ding himself. Shame was the consequence of guilt. But, were he in dread of ceaseless misery, could he so deliberately have made his excuse? and had the threatening been as our modern clergy represent it, is it within the scope of probabilities, that he was so lit- tle concerned as to the result ? But suppose it should be objected that he did not fully understand the threat- ening, let us inquire, if the Father of our spirits could give a law to man, involving such awful conse- quences, while man was totally ignorant of the effects which must follow the breach of that law ? Impossi- ble we can come to such a conclusion, without char- ging God with deliberate malice, and the most abomi- nable deception. But the event shows that this was not the case. All, on the part of Jehovah, exhibits the utmost benignity. " Adam, where art thou ?" The answer proved him guilty, for shame was recog- nized as the legitimate result of transgression ? No : " Cursed is the ground for thy sake." But was not the man cursed also ? No ; and how was the ground cursed ? It was to produce thorns and thistles. The HELLOLOGY. 151 man was to eat bread in the sweat of his face. Ne- cessity was laid on him to labour, and the consequence was to follow — how long ? u Until thou return to the ground — for dust thou art, and to dust shalt thou return.'" Here was all the penalty threatened, com- prised in two words — labour and shame. But we may be told, and indeed we are told — that " all man- kind by the fall, lost commonion with God ;'' let us ask, however, where is the proof ? We read nothing like it here, for the fall of man is not once mentioned in the Bible. Nor yet do we learn from that book, that man lost communion with his Maker. Indeed, the very reverse is proved in the history of the primi- tive offence. But we are also met by the declara- tion, that the first offence against the law subjects all men to the u wrath and curse of God," and that from the same authority. But is this worthy of more cred- it than the former ? Where is this related ? The or- thodox catechism contains it, but the warrant is not found in the book of revelation. Nothing like it is stated as the consequence. Perhaps the objector will grant that he cannot find all this in so many words, and may be willing to waive these declarations as untenable. But others of equal consequence may be started. He may presume we will grant, that in consequence of sin, we are all " made liable to all the miseries of this life, and to death itself." No, we are not ready to allow this neither. Many of the miseries of this life, have no possible connexion with transgression. Our consti- tution renders us liable to many evils, in no way con- nected with the subject. Those nerves, and that fine sensibility of feeling, which were the inlets to the most exquisite pleasure, make us susceptible of the most excrutiating torture, aside from the evils of mor- al pollution. Nor is the latter position a whit more tenable. That man was made immortal, incorrupti- 152 HELLOLOGY. ble, and by moral degradation became the subject of dissolution, is a most palpable solecism. His cor- ruptibility proves the reverse. Endless life, in this state of being, was never promised as the consequence of obedience. The very expression, until thou re- turn to the dust, is strong corroborative testimony, that the original plan was precisely that which the event displays. His mortality is a demonstration of the fact, that he was made liable to dissolution. We grant an apostle inform us, that death passed upon all men, as all have sinned ; but the same writer informs us, that to be carnally minded is death. But besides this, the context shows, that he alluded to moral, and not to natural death. But one objection still remains. We are told, that all men, in consequence of sin, are " made liable to the pains of hell for ever. 5 ' Now we doubt this ; first, because we do not find it in the oracles of God ; and, secondly, because David, on whom the pains of hell had taken hold, declares that God had delivered his soul from the lowest hell. But as the word sheol, hades, or hell, no where occurs in the history of the first transgression, those who wish to maintain the principle for which they contend from the use of the word, will be under the necessity of seeking for it elsewhere HELLOLOGY. SECTION V. loo Quotations from Dr. Campbell relative to Sheol and Hade?, and Mr. Balfour's deductions from them. Further remarks by the Editor. On a subject so long and so generally misunderstood, and of such immense importance, no person can ra- tionably be blamed forgiving line upon line, and pre- cept upon precept. The most close, the most ample examination of the subject, even to prolixity, is evi- dently erring on the safe side. If truth should al- ways be the object of research, the greater the sub- ject, the more importunate should we be to find it. If the scriptures have been made to speak a language foreign from their true meaning — if they have been wrested from their original meaning, either through ignorance or design, the sooner, and the plainer, these errors are exploded, the better. We shall now quote a few extracts from Dr. Campbell, who being in the orthodox ranks, and an accomplished scholar, would be careful not to state as facts, any thing to discredit his own system of faith, but on the most undoubted authority. Speaking of hades, he says — " As to the word a&js, which occurs in eleven pla- ces of the New Testament, and is rendered hell in all, except one, where it is translated grave, it is quite common in the classical authors, arid frequently used by the Seventy, in the translation of the Old Testa- ment. In my judgment it ought never in Scripture to be rendered hell, at least in the sense wherein that word is now universally understood by Christians. — In the Old Testament, the corresponding word is Sheol, which signifies the state of the dead in genera], without regard to thegoodness or badness of the per- sons, their happiness or misery. In translating that word, the Seventy have almost invariably used a<%. This word is also used sometimes in rendering th? 154 HELLOLOGY. nearly synonymous words or phrases bor and abnt bor, the pit, and stones of the pit, tsal moth, the shades of death, dumeh, silence. The stale is always repre- sented under those figures which suggest something dreadful, dark and silent, about which the most prying eye, and listening ear, can acquire no information. The term a(5r)g Hades, is well adapted to express this idea. It was written anciently, as we learn from the poets^for what is called the poetic, is nothing but the ancient dialect) ab privativo et video, and signifies obscure, hidden,- invisible. To this the word Hell, in its primitive signification, perfectly corresponded. For, at first, it denoted only what was secret or con- cealed. The word is found with little variation of form, and precisely in the same meaning, in all the Teutonic dialects. 1 ' On the above quotation, Mr. Balfour offers the fol- lowing remarks : — I have made this long quotation from Dr. Campbell at the outset of my remarks for several reasons. It shows that Sheol of the Old Testament, and Hades of the New, both translated by our English word hell, do not signify a place of endless misery for the wicked, but simply the state of the dead, without regard to the goodness or badness of the persons, their happiness or misery. It follows of course, that wherever those two words are used in Scripture, though translated by the word hell, we ought not to understand such a place of misery to be meant by the inspired writers. Inattention to this has led to a mis- understanding of many parts both of the Old and New Testaments. It establishes also that our English word hell, in its primitive signification, perfectly corresponded to Hades and Sheol, and did not, as it now does, signify a place of endless misery. It denoted only what was secret or concealed. Thi* we shall show more fully HELLOLOGY. 155 afterwards. What we wish to be noticed here, is, that the people generally have connected the idea of endless misery with the word hell, but it is evident that it is a very false association. It is beyond all controversy, that the word hell is changed from its original signification to express the idea. It is also obvious from the above quotation, and from other authors which might be quoted, that Ge- henna is the word which is supposed to express the idea of a place of endless misery. The correctness of this opinion we shall attempt to consider after- wards. At present it need only be observed, that if the opinion be correct, it is somewhat surprising that the English language had no word to express such a place of misery, but the word hell must assume a new sense to accommodate it with a name. I shall only add in regard to the statements, made in the above quotation, that they are not opinions, broached by a Universalist, which he found to be ne- cessary, in support of his system. No : they are the statements of Dr. Campbell, who was not a Univer- salist. Nor are they his own individual singular opinions, but are now admitted as correct byJearned orthodox critics and commentators. If the doctrine of eternal misery was not revealed under the Old Testament dispensation, it follows, that it, as well as life and immortality, was brought to light by the Gospel. If it be allowed that this doc- trine was not revealed under the Mosaic dispensation, it is very evident that persons could not be moved with fear, to avoid a punishment, concerning which they had no information. If it be said, that it was revealed, we wish to be informed in what part of the Old Testament this information is to be found. It seems then to be a conceded point, that neither Sheol of the Old Testament, nor Hades of the New t so often translated hell, means, as is commonly be- 156 IIELLOLOGY. lieved, the place of eternal punishment for the wick* ed. From the concessions made in the foregoing quo- tations, most people would deem it proper for me to decline the labour which Dr. Campbell calls endless, to illustrate by an enumeration of all the passages in both Testatments, that those words do not signify this place of punishment for the wicked. Unwilling, however, to take this matter on trust, I have submit- ted to this endless labour, and shall proceed to bring forward all those passages. The word Sheol in the Hebrew of the Old Testa- ment, occurs, sixty-four times. It is rendered by our translators, three times pit, twenty-nine times grave. and thirty-two times hell" We cannot forbear the gratification of noticing, in this place, the high desert of Mr. Balfour, in submit- ting to the astonishing labour, which the celebrated Dr. Campbell termed endless. Few men have either the ability or the means ; and fewer still the courage, and the persevering diligence, which this Inquiry ex- hibits. It is a specimen of fair and logical reasoning, of which the greatest man whoever breathed our at- mosphere need not be ashamed. It is a chain of facts and corresponding deductions, from which is no ap- peal. The premises are undoubted, and the conclu- sion irresistible. After requesting the reader to exam- ine carefully the remarks which precede this para- graph, we would call his attention to' the following, from the same author. " Let us attend to the texts in which it is translated pit. In Numb. 7 : 30, 33, it occurs twice. Speaking of Korah and his company, they are said to go down, " quick into the pit.*' What is said in these two ver- ses, is explained by the earth opening her mouth and swallowing them up. Had Sheol been translated hell here, as in other places, according to the common ac- ceptation of this word, Korah and his company weni HELLOLOGY. 157 down alive, soul and body, to the place of eternal mis- ery. But this would be contrary to common belief, for it is allowed, that men's bodies do not go there un- til the resurrection. All that seems to be meant in this account is, that they were swallowed up alive, as whole cities have been by an earthquake, and that without any reference to their eternal condition. This, I presume, is the view most people take of this judgment of God upon those men. Job 17 : 16, is the only other text in which Sheol is rendered pit. It is said, speaking of men, — " they shall go down to the bars of the pit." What is meant, is explained in the very next words, — " when our rest together is in the dust. 1 ' As it would be a mere waste of time to make any further remarks to show that Sheol, translated pit in these texts, docs not refer to a place of eternal mis- ery, let us bring to view all the texts in which this word is translated grave. The first three places then, in which it occurs, are, Gen. 35 : 35. ; 43 : 38, and 45 : 29. noticed already by Dr. Campbell in the above quotation. Had Sheol been translated hell in these texts, as it is in many others, Joseph would be repre- sented as in hell, and that his father Jacob expected soon to follow him to the same place. In like man- ner, it would make Hezekiah say, " I shall go to the gates of hell." And to declare, — u hell cannot praise thee." See Isai. 38 : 10,18. I may just notice here, that, if those good men did not go to hell, it would be difficult;.. to prove from the Old Testament, that Sheol, or hell, was understood to mean a place of eternal misery for the wicked. But further, let Sheol be translated hell, instead of grave in the following texts, and we think all will allow, that the idea of a place of future misery, was not attached to this word by the Old Testament writers. Thus translated, it would make Job say, chap. 17 : 13, — " if I wait, hell is mine house." And to pray, chap. 14 : 13, — " O that 14 153 HELLOLOGY. that thou wouldst hide me in hell.'' It would also make David say, Psalm 83 : 3. — " My life draweth nigh unto hell." And to complain, Ps. 6 : 5, — " in hell who shall give thee thanks. 1 ' After a critical discussion, Mr. B. proceeds — " David says, Psalm 31 : 17, — " let the wicked be ashamed and let them be silent in hell.'' In some of the preceding texts we read of persons being brought up from it. Thus, 1 Sam. 3 : 6, — " the Lord killeth and maketh alive : he bringeth down to hell and bringeth up. 1 ' And again, Psalm 30 : 3, — " O Lord, thou hast brought up my soul from hell." But what this means is explained in the next words, — " thou hast kept me alive, that I should not go down to the pit." In these passages the language is evidently fig- urative. It is evident, that by hell could not be meant a place of endless misery, nor could these passages be understood literally ; for surely David, nor no one else, was ever brought down to such a place, and af- terwards brought up from it. We find Job says, ch. 7 : 9, — " he that goeth down to hell shall come up no more," which contradicts what was said in these pas- sages about persons being brought up from hell. But what Job means, is plain from the next words, " he shall no more return to his house. 11 But further, if Sheol was translated hell instead of grave in the fol- lowing texts, it would make the sacred writers repre- sent all men as going ^o hell. Thus it is said, Psalm 69 : 48, — " what man is he that livetb and shall not see death ? shall he deliver his soul from the hand of hell ?" Notwithstanding this, David says, Psalm 49 : 15, — u But God will redeem my soul from the power of hell. 11 By comparing these two last texts, it is evi- dent that "hand of hell, 1 ' and " power of hell," mean the same thing. We have also a proof, that Sheol did not mean a place of eternal misery, but the state of the dead ; for death and Sheol arc words used HELLOLOGY. 159 to express the same idea. Besides, we know for cer- tainty, that no man can deliver himself from the pow- er of death, or hand of the grave ; but surely all men do not go to hell, or a place of eternal misery ? Again : if Sheol is translated hell instead of grave, it makes Solomon say, Eccles. 9 : 10, — " there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in hell whither thou goest." But are there none of these things in the place of eternal misery ? To answer this in the negative, would be to contradict common opin- ion on the subject. But this can be affirmed concern- ing the state of the dead, and shows that Solomon, by Sheol, did not understand a place of endless misery, but this state, or as Job calls it, " the house appoint- ed for all the living." Here " there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom.'' " But further ; if Sheol indeed means hell, in the common sense of the word, very strange statements are given in the following passages. It is said, Prov. 1 : 12, — "Let us swallow them up alive as hell." And in Job 24 ; 19, it is added, — " drouth and heat consume the snow waters , so doth hell those who have sinned." Again, Psalm 49 : 14, — " like sheep they are laid in hell ; death shall feed on them ; and the upright shall have dominion over them in the morn- ing ; and their beauty shall consume in hell from their dwelling. 1 ' And, Psalm 141 : 7, — our bones are scattered at hell's mouth as when one cutteth and cleaveth wood." Now, I ask every candid man, whether all these statements do not perfectly agree with understanding Sheol to mean the grave, but are contrary to truth, to understand them of hell, or a place of eternal misery. Such an idea does not ap- pear to have entered the minds of the Old Testament writers. Does any man believe that people's bones are scattered at the mouth of the place of eternal misery 7 160 HELLOLOGY. and docs this place consume persons in if as drought and heat consume the snow waters ? It is not generally noticed hy most readers of the Bible, that our translators have rendered Shcol both grave and hell in the same passage, and speaking of the same persons. An example of this occurs in Ezek. 31: 15, 18. In the 15th verse it is rendered grave, and in verses 16th and 17th it is twice rendered helh Besides, observe, that what is called grave and hell in versesloth, 16thand 17th verses, is called in verse 18th, u the nether parts of the earth." — Another example we have of this in Isai. 14: 3 — 24. In this pas-age, too long for quotation, is given a descrip- tion of the fall of the king of Babylon. Any our who reads it, may see that things are stated which forbid us thinking, that by Sheol, translated both hell and grave, a place of eternal misery was intended. But it is well known that detached parts of this passage have been so applied. The persons represented as in hell, are said to be moved at the coming o( some other sinners to the same place of misery ; and assay- ing to them — M Art thou also become weak as we ? Art thou become like unto us ?" But the passage needs onlv be read by any man of ordinary sense to convince him of the absurdity of such an interpreta- tion. But further : in Prov. 30 : 16. Sheol, or hell, is represented as never satisfied. And in ("ant. 8: 6. jealousy is said to be " cruel as Sheol, or hell." All this may be said of the grave, but how it could be said of a place of eternal misery, 1 cannot perceive. 1 lad our translators rendered Sheol hell in the following passage, it would have given such a plausible aspect to it, as meaning a place of misery, that it would not have been easy to convince many people to the con- trary. Thus it is said, Job 21 : 13. speaking of the wicked, — u they spend their days in wealth, and in a moment go down to hell. " Had this been done, peo- ple would have quoted it as decisive in proof of the IIELLOLOGY. 161 doctrine of eternal misery. Why it was not rendered here hell instead of grave, I know not, but sure I am, it is as strong as any of the texts in which it is render- ed hell, to prove this doctrine. The last passage in which Sheol is translated grave,, is Hosea 13: 14, — "I will ransom them from the power of 'the grave. I will redeem them from death ; O death I will be thy plagues ; O grave, or hell, I will be thy destruction." On this text I beg leave to make the following remarks. 1st, If Sheol, translated grave, and in other places hell, means a place of eternal misery, it is evident from this passage, that men arc to be ransomed from it, and it destroyed. " 1 will ransom them from the power of hell," and, " O hell, I will be thy destruc- tion." It will be easily perceived, that those who be- lieve Sheol to be the place of endless misery, ought to give this up, for if they do not, they must admit, that neither the place nor its punishment is to be of eternal duration. If Sheol, translated pit, grave, and hell, is relinquished, as referring to such a place, it follows, that no such doctrine as this was known under the Old Testament, as taught by the inspired writers. Dr. Campbell, and others, as we have seen in the foregoing extracts, give up Sheol, and contend that Gehenna is the place of eternal punishment for the wicked. 2d, In the passage under consideration, there seems to be a double kind of proof, that Sheol does not signify hell, but the grave or state of the dead. The first clause of the verse, — " I will ransom them from the power of the grave," is explained by the second, " I will redeem them from death.' ' Death, in this last clause, answers to, or is synonymous with, grave in the first. But again, it is equally evident, that death in the third clause, is equivalent to grave in the fourth. This kind of parallelism is common in the Old Tes- tament ; attention to which is of importance in under^ 14* 162 HELLOLOGY.. standing the precise import of many expressions there used. As this text is quoted in the New Testament, and must again be brought to view, we shall for the present dismiss it. These are now all the passages fairly before us, in which Sheol is rendered grave in the common ver- sion. Some may be disposed to ask, — why did not our translators render Sheol hell in all these texts, as they have done in many others, which we shall pres- ently introduce ? The answer to this question is of easy solution. It would have been absurd, nay, shock- ing to all our best feelings, to have rendered Sheol hell in many of the above passages. For example, it would not do to represent Joseph in hell, or a place of endless misery. No one could bear to hear, that Jacob expected soon to go to the same place. And surely it would never be believed that Job ever pray- ed, — "O that thou wouldest hide me in hell.'" In short, it never could be admitted, that David, Heze- kiah, and others, could have spoken about Sheol as they did, if they attached the same ideas to it as we do to the word hell. "Had our translators rendered Sheol uniformly by the words pit, grave, or hell, we would have been less liable to mistaken views on this subject. Let us, for example, suppose that they had always translated it hell. We, in reading our Bibles, must have seen from the context of the places, from the persons spoken about, and other circumstances, that a place of eter- nal punishment could not be meant by this word. The Old Testament saints expected to go to Sheol, yea, prayed for it ; but what should we think, to hear Christians now speaking about hell, as they did about Sheol ? For example, would it not astonish us to hear a professed saint, pray, — O that thou wouldest hide me in hell, or in the place of endless misery? But why should it astonish us, if they meant by Sheol. HELLOLOGY. 1G3 what we now do by the word hell ? Take only a sin- gle example of this. If Jacob meant by Sheol what we now mean by the word hell, why ought the follow- ing statement to surprise us ? — A Christian loses a son, and refuses to be comforted by his family. He says, " I will go down to the place of endless misery unto my son mourning.'' Concerning another beloved child he says, — "if mischief befal him by the way in which ye go, then shall ye bring down my gray hairs with sor- row to the place of endless misery." This would be strange language in the mouth of a Christian in our day. But it ought not, if we indeed contend, that Sheol or hell, in the Old Testament, had any reference to such a place of misery. The attention of the reader is now particularly turn- ed to the passages in which the words Sheol and Hades are translated hell in our common version, The careful examiner will notice, that the translators have frequently put grave in the margin, where hell is found in the text, thus strengthening the arguments already used for the exposition of these words. Why they have done this, is not very problematical. Of these instances Mr. Balfour thus speaks : — " Who, for example, does not perceive this in Psalm 1G: 10. "for thou wilt not leave my soul in hell." This is quoted, Acts 2: and applied to the resurrection of our Lord. It may surely be asked, — was our Lord ever in hell, the place of eternal misery ? When he said, " Father into thy hands I commend my spirit, " did his father send him to hell ? This, I presume, will not be pretended. Where, it may be said then, was our Lord's soul not left ? He was not left in the state of the dead, or in Sheol or Hades, which are only two names for the same place. The Lord did not suffer his Holy One to see corruption, but raised him again from the dead. 164 HELLOLOGY. " But again : was Jonah in hell, when he said, chap. 2 : 2, — u out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou hearedst my voice?'' I have always understood, that in hell prayers were unavailing. But if Jonah was in hell, this is not true, for he not only prayed' there, but was heard and delivered out of it. It deserves no- tice, that our translators, Gen. 37 : 35. aware that it would not do to send Jacob to hell, translate Sheol grave ; and here, thinking it rather strange to repre- sent Jonah as praying in hell, they put grave in the margin. — But again ; are we to conclude, when it is said, Psalm 55 : 1 5, — " let death seize upon them, and let them go down quick into hell," that David prayed that the persons of whom he spoke, might go down quick, or alive, into a place of endless misery ? As this was not a prayer very suitable for the man after God's own heart, we find our translators again put grave in the margin. " Having seen from Psalm 16 : 10. that the Saviour is represented as having been in hell, we need not be much surprised at what is said in the following pas- sages, which refer to him. Thus, Psalm 18: 5. it is said, — " the sorrows of hell compassed me about ; the snares of death prevented me." See also 2 Sam. 22 : 6. and Psalm 116 : 3. where the same language is used. In this text, " sorrows of hell," and '* snares of death," are convertible expressions, and seem evi- dently to refer to the Saviour's suiFerings. I am aware, that it hath been held as an opinion, that our Lord actually went to hell, and surFered its pains for a season. This opinion was probably founded on these passages. In the present day, I presume the man is not to be found, who would risk his reputation in de- fending it. That Sheol, translated hell, means the grave, or state of the dead, is, I think, obvious. Thus, Solo- mon, speaking of a lewd woman, says, Prov. 7 : 27, HELLOLOCY. 165 — "her house is the way to hell ;" which he immedi- ately explains, by adding, " going down to the cham- bers of death." This is, if possible, still more evi- dent from chap. 5 : 5, — " her feet go down to death,' 1 which is explained by the next words, — u her steps take hold on hell.'" The same remarks apply to Prov. 23 : 13, 14. — as the state of the dead was concealed from the eyes, or knowledge of all the living, its being known to God, is stated as a proof of his perfection in knowledge. Thus it is said, Job 26 : 6, — " hell is naked before him, and destruction hath no covering." And again, Prov. 45 : 11. " hell and destruction are before the Lord, how much more then the hearts of the sons of men." u Sheol, whether translated pit, grave, or hell, is rep* resented as below, beneath, and at a great depth. Persons are always spoken of as going down to it. It is contrasted as to depth, with heaven for height, the extent of both being alike unknown. Thus it is said, Prov. 15 : 24, — " the way of life is above to the wise, that they may depart from hell beneath.'' And, — " it is high as heaven ; what canst thou do ? deep- er than hell ; what canst thou know ?'' Job 11:8. See also, Amos 9 : 2. And Psalm 1 39 : 8. where sim- ilar language occurrs. See also Dr. Campbell's dis- sertation quoted above, on all these texts. But not only is Sheol, hell, represented as a great depth, but we read of the lowest hell. Thus .in Deut. 32 : 22. it is said, — " for a fire is kindled in mine anger and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the founda- tions of the mountains." Here, as in other places, for hell in the text, our translators put grave in the margin. Should we understand hell in this text, to mean the place of eternal misery, it is implied, that there is a low, and lower, as well as lowest place of misery for the wicked. Accordingly, it has been 166 HELLOLOGY. common to assign to notoriously wicked men the low- est hell. But whatever sense we put on the phrase, u the lowest hell,'' it is the same place of which Da- vid thus speaks, Psalm 86: 13, — "for great is thy mercy towards me : and thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest hell." Was David ever in the low- est place of eternal misery ? But here again our translators for hell in the text put grave in the mar- gin. The fact is, the language in the above texts is used figuratively, and it would be absurd to interpret it literally. See the foregoing dissertation of Dr. Campbell in proof of this. — When we read of the lowest hell, which implies a low, and a lower, is not this mode of speaking used as a contrast to the ex- pression highest heavens, which implies a high and a higher heavens ? We read also of the third heavens, which clearly implies two more. I would therefore suggest it for consideration, if the expression " lowest hell," did not originate, from the dead being some- times cast into pits, the depth of which was as little known, as the height of the highest heavens. When the common honours were paid the dead, they were put in caves, or vaults, or decently interred under the earth. But when persons were deemed unworthy of funeral honors, were they not cast into pits, the depth of which, was sometimes unknown ? Did not this un- known depth give rise to the expression depths of hell, just as the unknown height of the highest heavens, gave rise to this expression ? " In Isai. 5: 14.it is said, — u hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure ; and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth shall descend into it." This may be said with respect to the grave, but surely with no propriety could it be said of a place of eternal mise- ry. Speaking of the proud ambitious man, it is al- so said, Hab. 2 : 5, — " who enlargeth his desire as HELLOLGGY. 167 hell, and is as death, and cannot be satisfied." In this text, death and hell are used as convertible words to express the same thing. In Prov. 27 : 20. it is said "hell and destruction are never full.'" Similar things are stated above in the texts where Sheol is translated grave, as in these passages, and show, that the same was intended by the inspired writers, al- though the original word is differently rendered. The context of all these texts sufficiently show, that the grave or state of the dead is meant ; and not a place of eternal misery. Indeed, let any one read Ezek. 32 : 17 — 32. and observe, that all the dead are repre- sented as in hell, and as speaking out of the midst of hell. Their graves are represented as about them : that the mighty are gone down to hell with their wea- pons of war, and that their swords are under theirheads. All this description agrees very well with the ancient mode of placing the dead in their repositories, but it is contrary to common belief, that a place of eternal misery could be referred to. Does any one believe that the mighty of this earth have their sworefo :under their heads in such a place ? ^^^V* " As Sheol, the grave, or hell, was the most debasetl state to which any person could be brought, hence I think God says, reproving Israel for their idolatries, — " and didst debase thyself even unto hell." Isai. 57 : 9. And as death and the grave are of all things the most dreaded by men, it is said of some, that they, — " have made a covenant with death, and with hell are at agreement.' 1 This language, expresses in a very strong manner, their fancied security, but which were only vain words, for it is added, — " your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand.' 1 Isai. 28 : 15 —19. " The last text in which Sheol is translated hell, is Psalm 9 : 17, — ' ; the wicked shall be turned into hell, 163 HELLOLOGY. and all the nations who forget God.'" [An old version thus gives this passage — " The wicked shall go into hell."] There is no text in which the word Sheol oc- curs, which has been more frequently quoted than this, to prove that by hell, is meant a place of misery for the wicked. The wicked are the persons spoken of, and they are said to be, or shall be, turned into hell, with all the nations that forget God. Plausible as this appears to be, we have only to consult the context, to see that no such idea was intended by the inspired writer. The Psalm in which the words stand, is treat- ing of God's temporal judgments upon the heathen na- tions. We think if verses 15 — 20. are consulted, this will sufficiently appear. What leads people to think that this passage refers to eternal misery, is, the false idea which they have attached to the word hell. They have associated a false idea with this word, and in this text they conclude that it is taught. But surely no one, who has attended to all the above texts, can con- tinue to believe that Sheol here, has such a meaning. It is the same hell into which the wicked are turned, where Jacob said he would go down to Joseph mourn- ing. It is the same hell in which the Saviour's soul was not left. It is the same hell David prayed the wicked might go down quick, or into alive. - When once I can believe that David prayed the wicked might go down alive to a place of endless misery, and Jhat Korah and his company did go there alive, it is possi- ble I may believe that the text before us contains the answer to David's prayer. But it will not be easy to produce evidence of this. The fact is, it would prove too much for even those who take this view of it. It would prove that all ihe heathen nations must go to eternal misery, a thing which few are prepared to ad- mit. Ask the question of* the most zealous advocates of the doctrine, — are all the heathen nations turned into eternal misery? They hesitate, they faulter to HELLOLOGY. 169 any, yes. But why do they so ? for if Shoel means such a place, the passage is plain and explicit in de- claring it. " It perhaps may be objected to this view of the text, — are not all good people turned into Sheol, or the state of the dead, as well as the wicked ? why then is H said the wicked shall be turned into hell with all the nations that forget God ? The answer to this is easy. Though all good people in David's day, went to Sheol, as well as the wicked, yet not in the way he is here speaking of the wicked. David is speaking of God's public judgments on the heathen, and by those judgments they were to be cut off from the earth, or turned into Sheol. It is one thing to die, and. quite another to be cut off by the judgments of God from the earth. That the Sheol or hell here mentioned, was not a place of endless misery for the wicked, see Ainsworth on this text, and on Gen. 37 : and Psalm 16. — I shall only add, if all the wicked, yea, all the nations who forgot God in those days were turned into a place of endless misery, upon what principles are we to justify the character of God, or of all good men, for their want of feeling to- wards them, or their exertions to save them from it ? We are told that the times of this ignorance God winked at : that he suffered all nations to walk after their own ways. If all the heathen nations were turn- ed into a place of eternal misery, neither God, nor good men Mt, or spoke, or acted, as if this was true. " I have now finished what Dr. Campbell calls an endless labour, namely, to illustrate by an enumeration of all the passages in the Old Testament, that Sheol, rendered pit, grave, and hell in the common version, does not signify a place of endless misery. What he stated concerning this in the above extract, we think is strictly correct. Before closing my remarks on all these passages, there are a few facts and observations. 15 170 HELLOLOGY. which have occurred in the examination of them, which deserve some notice. " 1st, The word translated everlasting, eternal, for ever, is never connected with Sheol or hell by any of the Old Testament writers. If they believed that this was a place of punishment for the wicked, and that it was endless in its duration, it is somewhat sur- prising that this should be the case. Every one knows, that these words are very often used there, but not in a single instance do the inspired writers in any way use them, when speaking of Sheol, or hell. So far from this, in some of the texts, it is said, hell is to be destroyed. We may then make an appeal to every candid mind, and ask, if hell in the Old Testament re- fers to a place of eternal misery, how are we to ac- count for this ? The fact is certain. To account for it, I leave to those who believe this doctrine. We read to be sure in books, and we have heard also in sermons, of an eternal hell, but such language, is not found in all the book of God, nor did it ever drop from the lips of any inspired writer. " 2d, Another fact equally certain is, that not only are the words eternal, everlasting, or for ever, omitted in speaking of Sheol or hell, but this place is not spoken about, as a place of misery, at all. Whether Sheol is translated pit, grave, or hell, in not one of the passa- ges, is it described as a place of misery for the wicked, or for any one else. Before there need to be any dis- pute, whether the punishment in this place is to be of eternal duration, we have first to prove, that it is a place of punishment" That it is not described as a place of punishment, either short or long, is very evident from scripture language. We are informed that it is a place of si- lence, darkness, and ignorance, where is " no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom." The man- ner in which the inspired writers of ancient times. HELLOLOGY. 471 speak of Sheol, or hell, in regard to themselves, ren- ders the subject palpably obvious. They speak of going to hell as a matter of course, as men now speak of death, or the grave. Could they have done this, with the same views which modern christians have concerning it ? Impossible. But, if the ideas of scrip- ture writers, relative to these words, were the same as are those which we frequently hear from the pul- pits, how shall we account for the incongruity of their expressions ? Nothing which they say y intimates any such idea as is generally attached to the words in modern times. No word expressing endless duration is used in connexion. By what means then, are we to conclude they meant what they have not express- ed ? The truth is, that a departure from the sense of scripture, requires a departure from the language of scripture." But whatever strength is gathered from preceding facts, are corroborated by a circumstance about which we cannot well be deceived. If the fears by which the moderns are held in bondage, and frequently tor- mented to desperation, were harboured by the proph- ets and apostles, is it not beyond measure strange, that they have not somewhere expressed it ? Do either of the writers of the sacred oracles, express a fear of endless punishment, for himself, or others ? — Who will affirm this ? Do they any where express a belief that their writing, or preaching, would be availing to save men from the horrors of an endless hell ? No; Do they once intimate their fears for the safety of de- parted friends ? No. But if they had these, fears, and these sorrows, they certainly had language in which to express them. We have accounts of the bereave- ment of parents, and friends, in very affecting circum- stances, but not a word of these dreadful fears rela- tive to their eternal welfare. In the affecting lamen- tation of David for the death of his parricidal son, not 172 HELLOLOGtf. a word escapes him which should lead us to conjec- ture that he formed the horrid idea of interminable misery. But if this was the current belief in those days, why was it not in some way expressed ? We leave this for those to answer who think themselves competent to the task. But does not Noah plead with God not to damn eternally the whole world of men ? O no — he knew nothing about endless punishment in Sheol, or hell, and Gehenna was not then known. But Abraham knew that God was about to destroy Sodom and Go- morrah, and did he not plead for the people? Yes — but he never asked of Jehovah that they should be sa- ved from a hell of future torment. He knew nothing of such a doctrine. The gospel, ar> preached to him, contained no damnation : — that has been added by his followers. The gospel with which he was acquaint- ed, was h lessing to the whole race of man, in these words — In thee shall all ?iations be blessed. Nor do we find in any other instance of exemplary destruc- tion, that any person deplored the endless destruction of any individual, or nation, destroyed on account of his or their iniquities. But, if the doctrine were known in those days, why do we not learn this from Bible history ? When the Ninevites were threatened with destruction, was a hint given, that a fearful and an endless hell, awaited them ? Nothing like it is re- corded of the preaching of Jonah. Nay, if endless misery were the threatening which he w r as command- ed to preach, how does it appear that he w r as faithful to his duty ? And further — ifhe knew this, what shall we say of his anger because God did not send to in- terminable destruction the inhabitants of a populous city ? But was any prophet of the Lord ever sent with a threatening of hell torments, as a means of re- claiming the people ? Every reader of the Bible knows better. The following extract from Mr. Bal* HELLOLOGY. 173 four is worthy your careful attention, and to your bet- ter judgment we submit it. " One thing we think must be admitted by all who have read the Old Testament with attention. It is this : good people in those days, do not appear te have had the fears and anxieties of mind which haunt men's minds now, about their children, their rela- tions, their neighbours, and a great part of mankind, as all going to a place of endless misery. You may read the Old Testament, until your eyes grow dim with age, before you find any thing like this there. How is this silence to be accounted for, if the doctrine of endless misery was known and believed ? If by Sheol they understood the same as men do now by the word hell, is it possible, that good people in those days could feel so easy on such a subject ? Whatever ideas they attached to this word, we think it is certain, they did not mean by it a place of endless misery. The question is likely then to be asked, seeing that Sheol or hell does not m ean a place of eternal misery, — what does it mean ? What is the idea which the Old Testament writers affixed to this word ? From the re- marks already made, we think something has been said in answer to this question. — By Sheol, seems ev- idently to be meant, what Job calls, chap. 30 : 33, — u The house appointed/or all the living.'' 1 And it is the same to which Solomon alludes, when he says, Eccles. 3 : 20. — u all go to one place." The question still returns, What place is this ? What place it is, may be learned further from the following passages. In 2 Sam. 12: 23. where David is speaking of his dead child, he says, — a I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me." This, it may be said, only provokes the question — where was his child ? In heaven, most peo- ple would answer, and some have quoted this text to prove the salvation of all infants. Nothing more, I conceive, is meant, nor could be rationally inferred 1*4 HELLOLOGY. from the text than this, — that his child was in the state of the dead, or in Sheol, and David, impressed with a sense of his own mortality, intimates, that he would soon follow him to the same place. So Jacob speaks of himself in a similar way in reference to his son Joseph. But further, we rind in 1 Sam. 28 : 19. Samuel thus speaks to Saul, " to-morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me. 1 ' Where was this ? It may be asked, — When Saul desired the woman to bring up Samuel, was it from heaven he expected him to come ? Surely not ; for in this case Samuel would have been brought down, not up. Was it then from hell, the place of eternal misery, he expected him to come ? This cannot be admitted, for neither Saul, nor any one else, ever thought that Samuel was there. From what place then did Saul wish the woman to bring Samuel ? I answer, from Sheol, the same place to which Jacob said he would go down mourning to Joseph. The same place in which the Saviour's soul was not left. If Saul and his sons went to hell, a place of endless misery, it is certain Samuel was there before him. And it is equally certain, that if Samuel was in heaven, Saul and his sons were there soon after with him. But what appears simply to be meant is this, — Samuel was in Sheol, or the state of the dead, and the issue of the battle proved, that Saul and his sons were with Samuel, and with all the dead who had gone before them. As to the woman's having power to bring Samuel from Sheol. we do not believe any such thing. We believe that she va as an impos- tor, but this is not the place for assigning our reasons, or entering further into this part of the history of Saul. We hare merely referred to it as showing what were the popular opinions in those days on the suhiect be- fore us. HELLOLOGY. 175 SUGTZOM VI. An examination of the only passage in the New Testament, where our Lord threatens the Jews with Gehenna pnnishment. BY THE EDITOR. As we are about to examine the most dreadful threat- ening which has been denounced against transgressors* let us come to the subject with minds solemnized by- reflections on its vast importance. If this threatening is shown to require interminable misery for its accom- plishment, our duty to ourselves, our country, and the world, calls upon us for its developement. No cir- cumstance, and no concern below the throne of God, should divert our minds from the most prayerful in- vestigation, and the most untiring promulgation of the dreadful fact. Whatever have been our previous views of the subject, let us come to the examination with minds imbued with the love of truth, and a de- termination to sacrifice on her altar every prejudice, and every desire to turn away from what is contained in the oracles of God. If the facts be against us, we cannot reverse the determination of the Almighty — nor can we avoid the bright shining of the sun, by shutting our eyes on his refulgent beams. The words under consideration are recorded by Mat. 23 : 33. " Ye ser'pents, ye generation of vipers. how can ye escape the damnation of hell ?" We think every person will be satisfied, that if endless misery is not asserted in this passage, the doctrine is not taught in the New-Testament. In addition to the word Ge- henna, which is here translated hell, and which Dr. Campbell asserts, is used to designate the place of end- less misery, the word damnation is also added. Thus fortified with terrific horrors to the imagination of thousands, we venture to examine the citation fully and fearlessly, and to give our readers the result of the investigation^ 176 HELLOLOGV. We have already seen the concession of the learn- ed, that neither Gehenna, nor any other word in the Old Testament, is there used to signify a place of end- less, nor of limited misery, in any other world than this. It is past controversy, that if the ancient people of God knew no such place, they had no name by which to call it. The first question to he settled, is, how did those on whom Christ denounced this threat- ening, understand him ? If we can learn the true an- swer to this question, the subject is closed, and the meaning demonstrated. That we may gain the best light on the subject which our means will afford, we shall first present a few re- marks from Dr. Campbell. He says, — " if the words and phrases employed by the apostles and evangelists, in delivering the revelation committed to them by the Holy Spirit, had not been agreeable to the received usage of the people to whom they spoke, their dis- courses, being unintelligible, could have conveyed no information, and consequently would have been no revelation to the hearers. Our Lord and his apostles, in publishing the gospel, first addressed themselves to their countrymen the Jews ; a people who had, many ages before, at different periods, been favoured with other revelations. " As the writings of the Old Testament are of a much earlier date, and contain an account of the rise and first establishment, together with a portion of the his- tory of the nation to whom the gospel was first promul- gated, and of whom were all its first missionaries and teachers, it is thence unquestionably that we must learn, both what the principal facts, customs, doctrines, and precepts arc, that are alluded to in the apostoli- cal writings, and what is the proper signification and extent of the expressions used." The good sense of this quotation is obvious, and we can render it no higher praise than by attending to its HELLOLOGY. 177 instructions. We have then to inquire, what was the 44 received usage of the people' 1 to whom Jesus ad- dressed the words in question ? This is easily answer- ed by the fact, that Gehenna is " a compound of the two Hebrew words, Ge hinnom, the valley of Hinnom, a place near Jerusalem. That this valley formed a division line among the children of Israel, is evident by Josh. 15: 8. "And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom, unto the south side of the Jebusite ; the same is Jerusalem : and the border went up to the top of the mountain that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward, which is at the end of the valley of the giants northward." This is again mentioned in the same way, ch. 18 : 16, and is occa- sionally noticed in other places of the Old Testament, in a way to put the subject of origin, as to the name, entirely out of dispute. Of the use to which they put this valley, we have already given abundant evidence. To a Jew, nothing could convey a more dreadful idea. Pollution and temporal suffering were the images with which the name was always associated, after it was used as a place of sacrifice for human victims, a depot of tilth, and a repository for the carcasses of condemned malefactors. As people have supposed that our Saviour used the term Gehenna as a figure to represent the sufferings of men in the invisible world, it may not be amiss to quote from the Old Testament, a prophecy which was on the eve of fulfilment when he delivered this threatening. " The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying. Stand in the gate of the Lord's house, and pro- claim there this word, and say, Hear the word of the Lord, all ye of Judah, that enter in at these gates to worship the Lord. Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Amend your ways and your doings, and I will cause you to dwell in this place. Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of the Lord, The 5*WS 178 HELLOLOGY. temple of the Lord, The temple of the Lord, are these. For if ye thoroughly amend yoar ways and your doings; if ye thoroughly execute judgment between a man and his neighbour ; If ye oppress not the stran- ger, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not inno- cent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt : Then will I cause you to dwell in this place, in the land that I gave to your fathers, for ever and ever. Behold, ye trust in lying words, that can- not profit. Will ye steal, murder, and commit adul- tery, and swear falsely, and hum incense unto Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye know not ; and come and stand before me in this house, which is call- ed by my name, and say, We are delivered to do all these abominations ? It is this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers in your eyes ? behold even I have seen it, saith the Lord. But go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh, where I set my name at the first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel. And now, be- cause ye have done all these works, saith the Lord, and I spake unto you, rising up early and speaking, but ye heard not ; and I called you, but ye answered not ; therefore will I do unto this house, which is call- ed by my name, wherein ye trust, and unto the place which I gave to you and to your fathers, as I have done to Shiloh. And I will cast you out of my sight, as I have cast out all your brethren, even the whole seed of Ephraim. Therefore pray not thou for this people, neither left up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to me : for I will not hear thee. Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem ? The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger. Do they provoke me fiELLOLOGY. 179 to auger ? saith the Lord : do they not provoke them- selves to the confusion of their own faces ? There- fore thus saith the Lord God : Behold, mine anger and my fury shall be poured out upon that place, upon man, and upon beast, and upon the trees of the field, and upon the fruit of the ground ; and it shall burn, and shall not be quenched. Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel ; Put your burnt-offerings un- to your sacrifices, and eat flesh. For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices : But this thing command- ed I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people : and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you. But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imag- ination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward. Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land of Egypt unto this day ; I have even sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them ; Yet they hearkened not unto me nor inclined their ear, but hardened their neck : they did worse than their fathers. Therefore thou shalt speak all these words unto them : but they will not hearken to thee : thou shalt also call unto them ; but they will not answer thee. But thou shalt say unto them, This is a nation that obeyeth not the voice of the Lord their God, not receiveth correction : truth is perished, and is cut off from their mouth. Cut off thine hair, Jerusalem, and cast it away, and take up a lamentation on high places ; for the Lord hath rejected and forsaken the generation of his wrath. For the children of Judah have done evil in my sight, saith the Lord : they have set their abominations in the house which is called by my name, to pollute it. And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in 180 HELLOLOGY. the valley of the son of Hinnom, to bum their sons and their daughters in the fire ; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my heart. Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that it shall no more be called Tophet, nor the valley of the son of Hinnom, but the valley of slaughter : for they shall bu- ry in Tophet, till there be no place. And the carcasses of this people shall be meat for the fowls of the heav- en, and for the beasts of the earth ; and none shall fray them away. Then will I cause to cease from the cities of Judah, and from the streets of Jerusalem, the voice of mirth, and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride : for the land shall be desolate." The reader is now requested to bear in mind the three last verses of this chapter, and while reading the 19th chapter, quoted below, notice the correspon- dence. " Thus saith the Lord, go and get a porter's earthen bottle, and take of the ancients of the people, and of the ancients of the priests ; and go forth unto the val- ley of the son of Hinnom, which is by the entry of the east gate, and proclaim there the words that I shall tell thee ; and say, hear ye the word of the Lord, O kings of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem : Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears shall tingle. Because they have for- saken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of in- nocents ; They have built also the high places of Baal, 1o burn their sons with fire for burnt-offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not. nor^pake it, neither came it into my mind : Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that this place shall no more be HELLOLGGY. 181 called Tophet, nor the valley of the son of Hinnom, but the valley of slaughter. And I will make void the counsel of Judah and Jerusalem in this place ; and I will cause them to fall by the sword before their ene- mies, and by the hands of them that seek their lives ; and their carcasses will I give to be meat for the fowls of the heaven, and for the beasts of the earth. And I will make this city desolate, and an hissing ; every one that passeth thereby shall be astonished and hiss, because of all the plagues thereof. And I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons, and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat every one of the flesh of his friend, in the siege and straitness where- with their enemies, and they that seek their lives shall straiten them. Then shalt thou break the bottle in the sight of the men that go~with thee, And shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, Even so will I break this people, and this city, as one breaketh a potter's vessel, that cannot be made whole again .; and they shall bury them in Tophet, till there be no place to bury. This will I do unto this place, saith the Lord, and to the inhabitants thereof, and even make this city as Tophet : And the houses of Jerusalem, and the houses of the kings of Judah, shall be defiled as the place of Tophet, because of all the houses upon whose roofs they have burned incense unto all the host of heaven, and have poured out drink -offerings unto other gods. Then came Jeremiah from Tophet, whither the Lord had sent him to prophesy ; and he stood in the court of the Lord's house, and said to all the people, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, I will bring upon this city, and upon all her towns, all the evil that I have pronounced against it; because they have hardened their necks, that they might not hear my words." Having examined with good attention the preceding prophecies, we may be the better prepared to analyze 16 J8i> HELLOLOGV. the threats of our Lord concerning Jerusalem. But first, let us inquire of what Jeremiah was directed to make Gehenna the emblem ? Answer. " Thus eaith the Lord of hosts, even so [as Jeremiah was to break the bottle] will! i break this people, and this city, as one breaketh a potter's vessel, that cannot be made whole again ; and they shall bury them in Tophet, till there be no place to bury. Thus will I do to this place, saith the Lord, and to the inhabitants thereof, and even make this city as Tophet/ 5 Gehenna then, was made an emblem of pollution, and temporal mise- ry, and we shall soon see how our Lord applied it. In the verse preceding the one under special con- sideration, the Jews are directed — " Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers." What was this meas- ure ? Let the context answer : " Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes ; and some of them ye shall kill and crucify ; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city : That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel, unto the blood of Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, all these things shall come upon this genera- tion. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would 1 have gathered thy children togeth- er, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not ! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." The man who does not see that the theatening to make the city desolate, is a repetition of the prophe- cy by Jeremiah, fs most certainly a dull scholar. That Christ here alludes to this prophecy, is evident, from his description of the catastrophe. But let it be par- ticularly noted, that this punishment is denounced HELLOLOGY. 183 against the Jews and their chief city only. It has no allusion to the punishment of wicked men generally, and therefore the apostles of our Lord never preached it to the Gentiles. The Jews, as a people, most evi- dently understood the language, for it was that of the prophets, and they must have understood it as they did the words of their prophecies. And that they did so understand it, is evident by the fact that Christ does not intimate any other meaning; nor do they express any surprise as they undoubtedly would, had he con- veyed any ideas to their minds which were not usually associated with the language in common use. That our Lord was foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem by the sword of the Romans, will hardly be disputed, by those who will carefully consider the prophecies just quoted. How the Lord " made void the counsel of Judah and Jerusalem,' 1 is evident by the result of the siege, as well as the manner in which the disciples were saved by believing the words of their master respecting the suffering of that devoted people. They fled from Jerusalem to Pella, being persuaded the day of vengeance had arrived, in which the wrath had " come upon them to the uttermost.'' Josephus, the Jewish historian, testifies that the hor- rors of the siege, described Jer. 19:9, were literally fulfilled in the generation of the apostles. In this light we also view the declaration, " Verily I say unto you, all these things shall come upon this genera- tion.'' But was this generation to be known in an- other world, and was all the blood of the prophets to be required at the hands of the Jews who heard our Saviour, in another state of existence ? Impossible, that so flagrant a breach of every just rule of criticism should be deliberately practised by honest and dis- criminating minds. But as the labours of the ortho- dox are generally more acceptable than those of Uni- versalists, we will give the celebrated Dr. Adam 184 HELLOLOGY. Clarke's Commentary on Mat. 5: 22. "whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." " Thou fool. — A rebel against God, apostate from all good. This term implied, among the Jews, the highest enormity, and most aggravated guilt. Among the Gentoos, such an expression was punished by cut- ting out the tongue, and thrusting a hot iron, of ten fingers' breadth, into the mouth of the person who used it. " 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 Jerusa- lem, and had been formerly used for those abominable sacrifices in which the idolatrous Jews had 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 chil- dren alive to the above idol. From the circumstan- ces of this valley having been the scene of those in- fernal sacrifices, the Jews, in our Saviour's time, used the word for hell, the place of the damned. [This is a mere supposition without a fact in its support.] It is very probable, that our Lord means no more here than this : If a man charge another with apostacy from the Jewish religion, or rebellion against God, and cannot prove his charge, then he is exposed to that punishment, (burning alive) which the other must have suffered, if the charge had been substantiated. There are three kind of offences here, which exceed each other in their degrees of guilt. 1st. Anger against a man, accompanied with some injurious act. 2dly. Contempt, expressed by the opprobrious epithet raca, or shallow brains. 3dly. Hatred and a mortal enmi- ty, expressed by the term moreh, or apostate, where such apostacy could not be proved. Now, propor- tioned to these three offences were three different de- grees of punishment, each exceeding the other in its HELLOLOGY. 185 severity, as the offences exceeded each other in their different degrees of guilt. 1st. The judgment, the council of twenty-three, which could inflict the pun- ishment of strangling. 2dly. The Sanhedrim, or great council, which could inflict the punishment of stoning. And 3dl v, the being burnt alive in the valley of the son of Hinnom. This appears to be the meaning of our Lord. 1 ' As no man will accuse Dr. Ciarke of wishing to countenance Universalists, we hope the facts which he has stated, and of which he was fully competent to judge, will have their due influence. That the Jews understood our Lord, in the foregoing quotation, to threaten any thing more than u being burnt alive in the valley of the son of Hinnom," to which punish- ment the Sanhedrim could condemn them, no man, we believe, will venture to affirm. If he attached any other meaning to the term ysswa rov itvgog, the burning of Gehenna, we have no means of ascertaining the fact. And can xgjtfsws, condemnation, judgment, add to, or alter the place, or Gehenna ? Nobody will pretend this. Why then, need we seek among the moderns, or the pagans of antiquity, for a meaning to certain words and phrases, not known to the Jewish Scriptures? The question is not, and cannot be, What do the mo- dems believe, or affirm, relative to these things ? But, what did the Jews believe, and to what purpose did they apply them — and what was their understanding of the terms ? We have seen by the Old Testament with what view the prophets used them, and of what they were made the emblems. If our Lord employed them in another sense, the fact has not come down to us, and analogy is utterly against it. But, whatever meaning men may attach to the phrase damnation of hell, or punishment of Gehennp 3 one thing is well to remember — it zoas never threaten- ed to any but Jews, nor to them but by our Lord. The 16* 186 HELLOLOGY. whole system therefore fails, as applied to the Gen- tiles. Few of the Gentile nations knew any thing about Gehenna, and none but Jews could be suppo- sed familiar with their localities, and peculiar cus- toms. As this is evidently a prophetic warning of the des- truction of the Jewish nation and polity, we may gain further information by consulting corresponding pas- sages in the other evangelists. In Mark 13: 14, we read a quotation from Daniel, which will presently be examined. " But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand- ing where it ought not (let him that readeth un- derstand) then let them that be in Judea flee to the mountains. " That this is an account of the same dis- course noticed by Mat. 23 : is too obvious to gainsay. But can we see the propriety offieeing to the mountains, if the torments of hell in a future world, are threaten- ed in this passage 1 A reference to Dan. 12: 11. will set us right in this matter, and point to the very time of Jerusalem's overthrow. u And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abom- ination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.'' At what time was this to happen ? Answer, v. 7. " When he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.'" But when ? See v. 1. — "there shall be a time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation, even to that same time.' 5 But how does this settle it? An- swer — By reference to our Lord's words, Mat. 24 : 21. " For then [at the destruction of Jerusalem, when the power of the holy people, the Jews, should be scattered] shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor kver biiALL be." Could any thing be more definite? Such an entire destruction, so much sullcring, had not HELLOLOGY. 137 occurred before the time of our Saviour, and he de- clares should not again happen. Daniel then de- scribes this very time, of which our Lord prophesied, as ai\>out to happen in that generation. The descrip- tion \s perfect, and the time of the accomplishment of the prophecies respecting that city, put beyond a cavil. How then does the tenet of endless misery gather an iota of strength from this passage ? The hope, if so dreadful, so diabolical a hope could be cherished, is certainly a forlorn one. In the account of this same prediction given us by Luke, we find no cause for variation in the views al- ready given. " And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it, saying, If thou hadst known, even thou at least in this thy day, the things wh'ch belong unto thy peace ! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side ; and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children with- in thee ; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another ; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation. 1 ' We now ask why Jesus wept over the city ? Was his grief occasioned by a prospective view of their suf- ferings in an endless hell ? The enemies of his peo- ple would cast up a trench, besiege the city, and take it. That city, the pride of Palestine, and of the na- tions, with its temple, was to be razed to the ground, and great wrath was to be poured upon that people. But nothing is said of their miseries in another world. Nor did he, immediately prior to his crucifixion, utter a syllable like it. " Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not forme, but weep for yourselves, and for your chil- dren.' 5 Why this weeping for themselves and chil- dren ? On account of the desolation of the city, most 183 HELLOLOGY. certainly, and the sore afflictions which are the con- comitants of war, and the horrors of a siege. He knew that the delicate women would seethe their own children, and that the most dreadful tortures awaited them. And in Mat. 24 : 19, 20, the reason of this ad- monition is made apparent. "And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days. 1 " The reason is obvious. " For then shall be great tribulation." Whether a combination of the horrors of war, famine, pestilence, and intestine divis- ions, were not sufficiently dreadful to render his com- miseration pertinent to the occasion, let those judge, who have experienced but one of these evils at a time — or let him or her who can feci for other's wo, read the history of the Jewish wars, and judge righteous judgment. But we think sufficient has been written, to convince every reasonable being, who is in earnest to understand the subject, that " damnation of hell," or the con- demnation of Gehenna, has no allusion to future limit- ed, or interminable punishment, and that the threat- ening was long ago fulfilled on the outcasts of Israel. But we shall now notice some facts, to show that if the term Gehenna, always translated hell, in the com- mon version, really signifies a place of inexpressible torture in a future state of being, it is certainly re- markable, that this word is not more frequently used in the New-Testament. The whole number of times which Gehenna is found in the New-Testament, is but twelve. That it was not used as many times as it ap- pears, is evident from the circumstance, that the differ- ent evangelists relate the same discourses, and seve- ral are therefore a repetition. In the various places used, it is imputed to our Lord eleven times, and to James once. No other disciple of our Lord, nor one solitary apostle, uses it a single time, in any way. James, speaking of an unruly tongue, says it is set on HELLOLOGY. 189 fire of Gehenna, or hell. In this case, it is so evident- ly used figuratively, that it needs no comment. But what shall we say of the messengers who were sent out into the world to preach the gospel to every crea- ture ? Is not the preaching of hell torments, gospel, or good news ? If it were, why did they not thus preach ? or if they did so preach, why do we not hear something about it ? Let those who believe their master thus taught them, offer an excuse for their neg- ligence. But did Christ ever hint, that God had reserved to himself the privilege of inflicting endless pains on any of his creatures, either for unbelief, or an unholy life? No — never. In the passage which we have just exam- ined, the affirmative method of asking the question, renders it certain they could not, by any means, avoid the punishment of Gehenna. Had they been able to avoid this catastrophe, the prophecy must have failed, and the ^th of Matthew, instead of proving Christ a true prophet, would have proved both him, and Jere- miah, and Daniel, false prophets ! In the next section, we shall examine all the re- maining passages in the New-Testament where the word Gehenna occurs. SECTION VII. The remaining places where Gehenna occurs in the New-Tes- tament fairly examined. BY THE EDITOR. WHOSO READETH, LET HIM UNDERSTAND. In our previous examination of Gehenna, we have endeavoured to show, that the Jews did not under- 190 HELLOLOGY. stand a place of endless misery by the use of this word. It was in common use among the Hebrews as the name of a polluted place near Jerusalem, of which they needed no explanation. But if they did not impute any other meaning to the word, under the Mosaic dis- pensation, by what means should they gain the knowl- edge that the same word in the mouth of Christ, should be subject to a different definition ? To those who profess to believe that the term conveyed to the Jews the same ideas which are attached to it by the moderns, belongs the burden of proof. We shall content ourselves with a demonstration of the ne- gative. A particular point to which we now wish to turn your attention, is the language at the head of this sec- tion. Christ, referring to the prophecy of Daniel, rela- tive to ihe destruction of Jerusalem, points directly to the understanding which the Jews had of their pro- phetic language — whoso readeth, let him understand. But how were they to understand, by a reference to the language of their prophets, that which had never been predicted ? Daniel predicted the overthrow and dismemberment of the Jewish nation, and the conse- quent dispersion of the people. This was to come upon them for their iniquities, and the description of their iniquities, and the consequences which would re- sult from them, are the same, as given by Daniel and by Christ. The time is reduced to the most accurate certainty of which language is capable. The damna- tion of hell spoken of by Christ, is therefore the same to which the prophet refers. But this is so plain, that we doubt if any one who has intelligence and honesty will doubt it. As Mat. 5 : 22, has already received particular at- tention, we have but ten passages left for examination. To these then Ave shall attend, after a few explanatory remarks. HELLOLOGY. 19! The term Gehenna, was never used but to the Jews, unless accompanied by an explanation. To the Gen- tiles it is never threatened in the New-Testament. Let every one examine for himself, the places where it is mentioned, and no reasoning of ours will be ne- cessary, to demonstrate the fact. Our Saviour, indeed, was not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Is- rael, and it may be contended that he could not be sup- posed to denounce a threatening to those who were not the subjects of his ministry. But what shall we say of the ministry of the apostles ? Did they in a single instance, threaten the damnation of hell to their hearers, whether Jew or Gentile ? Search their preaching through, as recorded in the Acts of the apostles, and not one instance can be found of this threatening. Whatever then be the meaning of the term, either the apostles were unfaithful or incompe- tent teachers, or the denunciation of suffering in Ge- henna was not a part of their ministry. But another remark, calculated to throw light on this subject, is, that in nine of the twelve places where Gehenna occurs, it is specially directed to his particu- lar cfcsciples. To them he spoke, as if it might be avoided, but to the unbelieving Jews, as their certain doom. But is this the practice of modern teachers ? we all know it is not. Those who are in the church- es are considered as in the ark of safety ; while those who are without, are often mentioned as fit fuel for hell fire. Did John, the forerunner of Christ, once mention, even to the Jews, the punishment of Gehen- na ? No. True, he inquired, Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come ? But he never men- tioned, that this wrath was to be exemplified in a com- ing state. The wrath to come, was the wrath com- ing upon the Jewish nation, from which the believers in Jesus escaped. Signs were given them, by which they well understood the calamities which were ready to be poured out on their country. 192 HELLOLOGY. Let us now attend to Mat. 23 : 15. Here a wo i< pronounced on Scribes, Pharisees, and hypocrites, who make their proselytes two fold more the children of hell than themselves. As we have already seen to what hell these Jews were liable, and which they could not escape, in the examen of the 33d verse of this chapter, perhaps very little will be necessary on this subject. Let it then be observed, that proselytes from another faith, are more frequently the recipients of unholy zeal, and blind fanaticism, than those by whom they have been converted. To ingratiate them- selves into the good will of their spiritual fathers, re- quires a more constant regard to the prescribed regi- men of the sect, and an over-solicitude for the well- being of the sect which they have joined, lest they be accused of lukewarmness. And in this view of the subject, we see how much more likely would be the opposition of proselytes to bring on themselves swift destruction, than that of even the Jews. No man in his senses, would contend, that if both Jews, and Gentile converts to Judaism, were to be endlessly miserable, the proselytes would be " doubly damned. 11 As to Mat. 5 : 29, 30, we cannot better express our own impressions, than by quoting from Mr. Balfour's remarks on them. " What did our Lord mean by these offending them ? It is well known that the word translated of- fend, signifies to cause to stumble, and is in some pla- ces translated a stumbling block. By their right eye or hand offending them, then, must be meant, their unsubdued passions and propensities causing them to stumble and fall from their profession of Christ's name. If these proved a stumbling block, or caused them to offend, they thereby exposed themselves to the pun- ishment of hell fire. It was profitable, therefore, for them to subdue these, or to part with them, though dear to them as members of their bodies, than expose HELLOLOGY. 19^ themseves to such a punishment. This, so far> I pre- sume, will he allowed as our Lord's meaning, whatev- er sense we give the word Gehenna or hell in this pas- sage. Is it then asked— What does our Lord mean by Gehenna or hell ? I answer, the very same punish- ment which he threatened the unbelieving Jews with, Mat. 23 : 33, when he said to them, "how can ye es- cape the damnation of hell ?■" — If his disciples indulg- ed their lusts, and proved apostates from their profes- sion, they should be involved in the same dreadful ca- lamities with the rest of the Jewish nation. Accor- dingly, he said to his disciples, Mat. 24 : 1 3, — " he that shall endure to the end, the same shall be saved." If the question is asked, — Saved from what ? The con- text clearly shows, that they should be saved from all the temporal calamities foretold by our Lord, which were to come on that generation. All who did endure to the end of the Jewish state, were saved. M'Knight, in a note on Mat. 24 : thus writes : — " The people of the church in Jerusalem being ordered by an- oracle given to the faithful in that place, by revelation, left the city before the war, and dwelt in a city of Perea, the name of which was Pella." This oracle, perhaps, was no other than the information our Lord gave his disciples in Mat. 24. If they attended to it, they need- ed no other oracle. But I only notice this, without pretending to decide about it. As to his disciples, the following is very evident. Patient enduring to the end, was not only connected with their temporal safe- ty, but attention to the directions given Mat. 24. If one of them, being in the field, returned back te take his clothes, the safety promised might not be ob- tained. No worldly consideration was to be an apol- ogy for a moment's delay, but with the utmost speed they were to make their escape. When our Lord spoke of the punishment of hell to the unbelieving Jews, he mentioned it as a thing they could not es- 17 194 HELLOLOGY. cape. " How can ye escape the damnation of hell ? r ' They had nearly filled up the measure of their iniqui- ty, and upon them was to come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth. But when he spoke to the dis- ciples about this punishment, he spoke of it as a thing they might escape, if they attended to the instructions which he gave them. See Matth. 24 : where he is at great pains in pointing out the course they must pursue, if they would avoid the impending destruc- tion. We then see a very good reason why our Lord «aid so much to his disciples about the punishment of hell, and so little to the unbelieving Jews. Allowing that hell does not mean a place of endless misery, but the temporal calamities coming on the Jews, every thing said about it is just what might be expected. But can it ever be rationally and scripturally account- ed for, that our Lord should only once mention u the damnation of helP'tothe unbelieving Jews, if there- by he meant a punishment in eternal torment ? Besides, does not this view rationally and Scripturally account for the very extraordinary fact, that not a word about hell or Gehenna is said to the Gentiles by any of the inspired writers 1 How is the fact to be accounted for on the common view given of the punishment of Gehenna ? If my view be allowed correct, it rational- ly, and I think Scripturally, accounts for these things* That it does account for them, is some evidence that it is correct. "Let us now consider the language of this passage, and see if it does not confirm these views of the sub- ject. It is said twice, — " and that thy whole body should be cast into hell, or Gehenna.' 1 This language is not in unison with the common ideas entertained of hell. Do we ever hear a preacher tell his audience, that their "whole body shall be cast into hell, or that body and soul shall be cast into it?" No ; they al- HELLOLOGY. 195 low that the soul only goes there at death, and the body returns to the dus^ and not at least until the resurrection, do both go there together. The phrase *' thy whole body," appears to be of the same import with that expressed in another passage by the words " soul and body" We shall show hereafter, that by the word soul, is not meant, as is generally believed, the spirit, which exists in a separate state from the body, but natural life. See on Mat. 10: 28. below. Another thing ought to be noticed, that preachers now only threaten men with the punishment of hell if they continue in unbelief ; but here our Lord threatened his disciples with it if they did not cut off a right hand, and pluck out a right eye ; or, in plain language, did not part with every thing dear to them, rather than disobey the Saviour. Besides, he said most about hell to those in least danger of it, and only mentioned it once to those in the greatest danger. — The conduct of preachers in our day, about this, is precisely the reverse of his. All they say of hell is said to the wicked. " By consulting the context of this passage, it will be seen, that there is nothing in it to support the idea, that hell is a place of endless misery. Any evidence it affords, rather goes to prove the view I have given of it. But as a consideration of it, would only lead to similar remarks made already, I pass it over." As to Mat. 13: 8,9, these are so obviously of the same import, that any thing which can be said, would be a mere repetition. It may not be amiss, to state that the use of the term fire, as connected with God's judgments on the Jewish nation, is not a new appli- cation of the word for the purpose. Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Amos, Jeremiah, and David, all used it in this manner, and we have before seen, that if the Jews were not to understand the words used by Christ, as they had been accustomed to understand the writings 1*96 fiTELLOLOGY. of the prophets, the labour of Christ must have been worse than vain. Nay, they must have been design- edly obscured for the very purpose of deceiving the unwary. Let us now quote Mark 9 : 43 — 49. " And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched ; where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quench- ed. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched ; where their worm dieth not, and the lire is not quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out : it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell-fire ; where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. 1 ' Notwithstanding the length, and terrific appearance of this passage, whoever reads it may soon be satisfied that it is only a repetition of the same discourse noti- ced in Matt. 18 : 8, 9. Commentators allow that Mark wrote at Alexandria, or at all events, out of Jewry, which laid on him the necessity of adding to the term Gehenna, the fire that never shall be quench- ed. This addition was not necessary in Judea, where every thing relative to Gehenna was known, while to Gentiles it was absolutely important for the true un- derstanding of the language. Nevertheless, it is now considered as next to proof positive that a state of pun- ishment in a post mortem state, is clearly taught in the New Testament. But this idea originates from a false view of the subject. The contrast exhibited is supposed to justify this view, which a brief examina- tion will exhibit in a very different light from the HELLOLOGY. 197 common sentiment. Christians have supposed that the phrases, to enter into life, into the kingdom of God, and into the kingdom of heaven, all allude to a state of immortal beatitude in a future world. That this is not their meaning, is soon made obvious, by a recurrence to the scriptures where they are used e Dr. Campbell says on this very passage, " they must lay aside their ambition and worldly pursuits, before they be honored to be the members, much more the ministers, of that new establishment he was about to erect.'' Mr. Balfour, on this passage, has the follow- ing: — "Thus in Luke 21 : 31, 32. " so ye, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass away till all be fulfilled." It is evident from this passage, that the kingdom of God, in some sense or other, was not to come till the end of the Jewish dispensation. It was at this period to come with power, Mark 9:1. and comp. Matth. 16: 28. See Whitby on these texts* who takes the same view of our Lord's kingdom which is here given. But in proof of this view of entering into Christ's kingdom, I shall here quote the follow- ing from Dr. Campbell's note on Matth. 19 : 28. He says : — " We are accustomed to apply the term regen- eration solely to the conversion of individuals ; where- as its relation here is to the general state of things. As they were wont to denominate the creation yzvstiic^ a remarkable restoration, or renovation of the face of things, was very suitably termed tfaXj^ysvstfta. The return of the Israelites to their own land, after the Babylonish captivity, is so named by Josephus, the Jewish historian. What was said on verse 23, holds equally in regard to the promise we have here. The principal completion will be at the general ressurrec- tion, when there will be, in the most important sense, 17* -I 198 HELLOLOGY. a renovation, or regeneration of heaven and earth, when all things shall become new ; yet in a subordi- nate sense, it may be said to have been accomplished when God came to visit, in judgment, that guilty land ; when the old dispensation was utterly abolish- ed, and succeeded by the Christian dispensation, into which the Gentiles, from every quarter, as well as Jews, were called and admitted. " Let us now apply these remarks to the texts un- der consideration. To enter into life, or to enter into the kingdom of God, is in the passage before us contrasted with going into, or being cast into hell. As the former does not mean to enter into heaven, the place of the righteous, but into Christ's kingdom, or reign, in this world, so the latter cannot mean, to cast into a place of endless misery, but to suffer the punishment of which we have seen Gehenna made an emblem." Understanding our Lord, " by entering into life," or u into the kingdom of God," in this way, what he says in this passage to his disciples, was per- tinent, and peculiarly suited to their circumstances. It was "better,' 1 it was u profitable" for them thus to enter into his kingdom with the loss of every thing dear to them, rather than retaining these, to be cast into hell tire, or to suffer all the dreadful calamities foretold by Jeremiah in the predictions considered above, and described by our Lord, Matth. 24. At the time of the destruction of Jerusalem, the unbe- lieving Jews were to suffer the damnation of hell, and at this period all his disciples who endured to the end, were not only to "Be saved from this punishment, but were to enter into his kingdom, or reign with him ; and the apostles to sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. But such of his professed disciples as did not cut off a right hand and pluck out a right eye, or did not endure to the end, should share in the same calamities, or suffer the punishment of HELLQLOGY. 199 which we have seen Gehenna made an emblem by Jeremiah, and also by oar Lord. Whitby, on Luke 21. 34 — 36. thus writes: — " Here our Saviour calls upon the believing Christians to take care, and use the greatest vigilance that they do not miscarry in this dreadful season, by reason of that excess and luxury which may render them unmindful of it, or those cares which may render them unwilling to part with their temporal concerns, lest they should be involved in that ruin which would come on others, as a snare, suddenly and unexpectedly ; and that they should add to this vigilance constant prayer to God, that they may be found worthy to escape those tremendous judgments, and might stand safely and boldly before the Son of man, when he comes to execute them on the unbelieving Jews. 41 It is easily seen that this passage not only agrees with the preceding texts, but also accounts for the fact why the Saviour should say so much to the dis- ciples concerning hell or Gehenna, and so little to the unbelieving Jews. Besides, it also accounts for the fact which can never be accounted for on the com- mon view of hell, namely, that not a word is said con- cerning it to the Gentiles. If the punishment of hell be as I have attempted to show, the temporal ven- geance which came on the Jewish nation, all is plain, consistent, and rational. But how can it ever be ac- counted for on rational and Scriptural grounds, that no Gentile was ever threatened with such a punish- ment ? We are sinners of the Gentiles, and are threatened with everlasting punishment in hell by preachers in our day. It becomes them to account for this, seeing they are without any authority either from Christ or his apostles for so doing. If they never said a word about hell in their preaching to the Gentiles, from what source of information is it learn- ed that preachers now are authorized to teach such a 200 HELLOLOGY. doctrine to them ? Are we obliged to receive this implicitly on their ipse dixit? Relative to the peculiar phraseology of this pas- sage, the acute writer quoted above, says : — " It is then, said of hell or Gehenna, — " where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.' 1 Were these words understood strictly, and literally of a place of endless misery, it would prove that there is not only material fire there, but that there are also worms in hell. Some have maintained, and a few perhaps still maintain, that the fire of hell is a literal fire. It is evident that most orthodox preachers still continue to speak as if the fire of hell was real, literal fire. Why speak about it as such if they do not be- lieve it to be so, unless they intend to practise decep- tion on the people ? But we presume no one ever believed that there were worms in the place called hell, or eternal misery. If such an opinion was ever held, we are ignorant of it. But why not believe that there are worms in hell as well as literal fire ? for if Gehenna signifies a place of endless misery, it teaches literal fire and literal worms on the same authority ? Besides, it is implied that the body is there, for worms to feed on, which they could not do on the spirit. I am fully aware that the worm that shall never die, has been long and universally interpreted to mean conscience, which is to torment the subject of it for- ever. But this is a private interpretation ; for I do not know of a single text in the Bible, in which con- science is ever spoken of under the figure of a worm,, either in this or a future state of existence. Unless then, something like proof of this is produced from the Bible, such an interpretation cannot be for a mo- ment admitted. It may then be asked, — " what do these words mean V Let us hear what Mr. Park- hurst says on the words, — " where their worm dieth not, and their fire is not quenched.'" He thus writes HELLOLOGY. 201 on the word Gehenna : — " Our Lord seems to allude to the worms which continually preyed on the dead carcasses that were cast out into the valley of Hinnom, yeewa, and to the perpetual fire there kept up to con- sume them. Cornp. Eccies. 7: 17. Judith 16: 17, And see the learned Joseph Mede's works, fol. p. 31 .'' Here then is a place where their worm dieth not, and the tire that shall never be quenched ; not in a place of eternal misery in a future state, but in the valley of Hinnom, near Jerusalem. Let it now be recol- lected, that the valley of Hinnom was made an em- blem of the terrible calamities which were to come on the Jewish nation. No place was so wretched and abominable as the valley of Hinnom, and no place known to a Jew, could be made so fit an emblem of such miseries. "But we have something more to produce, and something which we think ought to be admitted as conclusive, in determining in what sense our Lord's words, ought to be understood in this passage. — It is certain then, that our Lord here quotes Isai. 61 : 24. where it is said, — " and they shall go forth and look Upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me ; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched, and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." — A remark is made by Mr. Stuart, in his letters to Dr. Channing, p. 69. which very well applies here. He says, — " it will be remembered that the passage in question is a quotation from the Old Testament ; and that to quote the language of the Old Testament, therefore, in order to explain it, is pecu- liarly appropriate and necessary.'" Let us see how peculiarly appropriate and necessary this passage from the Old Testament is, in explaining the words of our Lord before us. Suffer me then to ask, — did Isaiah mean a place of endless misery, when he said, " for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be 202 HELLOLOGY. quenched V Was Isaiah so understood when he ut- tered these words ? I have to ask further, did the Jew's so understand these words when they read them in the prophet ? Yea, I ask still further, did our Lord's disciples so understand the prophet's words when they read them there ? Can any or all of these questions, with truth, be answered in the affirmative ? As this will not be so much as pretended, how comes it to pass that they are made to mean a place of end- less misery when quoted by our Lord? By what rule of interpretation, do we make Isaiah, by these words, only to mean temporal calamities, but when our Lord quotes them, we make them to mean end- less misery ? I urge this ; on what grounds, and by what authority do we make Isaiah and our Lord to have two such different meanings to the same words ? Yea, I press it upon all who regard the words of the living God, to think how it was possible that our Lord's disciples could understand him in this sense, when those very words were understood by them in so very different a sense when they Tead them in the prophet? It is evident our Lord did not explain them in this new sense to the disciples, nor gave the slightest hint that he made any alteration in the meaning of the prophet's words by quoting them. Until it is therefore proved, that by these words Isaiah meant a place of future endless misery, I might excuse myself from any further remarks on them. But as they very strongly confirm the views 1 have given of Gehenna or hell, in the preceding passages, I proceed. " On this passage in the prophet, let it be remark- ed, that the chapter in which it stands, evidently re- lates to events which were to take place under the gospel dispensation. The new heavens and new earth, mentioned verse 22, refer to this period, and the extension of the gospel to the Gentiles, is repeat- HELLOLOGY, 203 edly spoken of in the course of the chapter. But let us attend to the passage, and go over what is said in it, and if possible ascertain the meaning of the prophet. It is said, — " and they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me." Let us ask here, who are the men referred to, and who are said to have trans- gressed against the Lord ? I think the context shows them to be the unbelieving, disobedient Jews. Evidence ol this will appear as we proceed. Again ; let us ask, who shall go forth and look upon the car- casses of the Jews who had thus transgressed against the Lord ? The preceding verses show that they are the persons who worship and obey the Lord. But again ; let us ask, to what place they shall go forth and look upon the carcasses of the men who have transgressed against the Lord 1 Not surely to a place of endless misery ? The connexion of this with the next part of the passage shows that they shall go forth to the place where " their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." If it is said, by way of objection, — " is not this the place of end- less misery, and is not this sufficiently obvious from the words, their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched ? 1 must answer, it is not. We think this can be proved from a variety of evidence, which few, if any, will undertake to dispute. This we shall show presently is not the Scripture meaning of these expressions, but that they refer to temporal punishment and to the punishment of the Jews as a nation. Here I would only ask — do any persons go forth either from this world or from heaven to a place of endless misery, to look upon the carcasses of men who have transgressed against the Lord ? Be- sides, is it not a very strange mode of speaking, to speak of the carcasses of persons in a place of endless misery 1 But if we understand this place to be as to- 204 HELLOLOGY. phet, or the valley of Hinnom, all this may be liter- ally and affectingly true. We have seen from the predictions of Jeremiah, that the Lord was to make the city of Jerusalem as tophet, and the carcasses of the Jews were to be meat for the beasts of the earth, and that they should bury in tophet until there should be no place to bury. Besides, we have seen from Josephus, the Jewish historian, that six hundred thousand of the carcasses of the Jews were carried out of the city and left unburied. It is evident then, if those who worshipped and obeyed the Lord, did not go forth and look upon the carcasses of the men who had transgressed against the Lord, it was not for want of opportunity. Suffer me, then, to ask, might not the worshippers of the Lord, or our Lord's disciples, literally go forth and look upon the carcas- ses of the men who had transgressed against the Lord ? Yea, could they avoid seeing them, and looking on them, when they left the city and were saved from the dreadful vengeance of God which came on the unbelieving part of the nation ? But it is added, " and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." This all will allow to be said to the same persons, who, in the former part of the passage, are said to have transgressed against the Lord. It will be allowed that the Jews had transgressed against the Lord in a very great degree. They had crucified the Lord of glory, persecuted the apostles, they pleased not God, and were contrary to all men. In this respect we see that the passage fully applies to them. Let us see how the last part also applies to them. " And they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." The phrase " all flesh," it could be easily shown, is used in Scripture to designate the Gentile nations. As one instance, among others which I might adduce to prove this, it is said, — " all flesh shall see the salvation of God." Now it is literally HELLOLOGY. 205 true that the Jews then were, and still are, in their descendants, an abhorring unto all the Gentile na- tions. They have been, and still are, a by-word, and a reproach, and an afflicted people, among all the nations of the earth. How long this is still to continue, God only knows. Sure we are, that the Lord is yet to have mercy upon Israel : they are still beloved for the fathers' sake. The deliverer is to come out of Zion, and turn away ungodliness from Jacob. " But let it be noticed, that it is three times said in the passage in Mark, where this passage from the prophet is is quoted, " where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." Let the question be asked, " Whose worm shall not die ? We think the answer to this must be looked for in the prophet whose words our Lord quotes. The answer is, the men who have transgressed against the Lord ; then- worm shall not die, and their fire is not quenched. Should we recur to the context of the passage in Mark for an answer to this question, the only an- tecedent to the word their, is the persons who should offend Christ's little ones, verse 42. This agrees to the answer taken from the prophet ; for the Jews were the greatest opposers and persecutors of Christ's disciples." Having already shown that temporal judgments are signified by fire under the old dispensation, we have now to show that the addition of everlasting, and the declaration that it never shall be quenched, do not furnish any additional proof of the proper use, of these passages, in the common mode of application. The prophet Isaiah furnishes us several specimens of this sort, which shall be duly noticed. " And the strong shall be as tow, and the maker of it as a spark, and they shall both burn together, and none shall quench 18 206 HELLOLOGY. them, 13 Isa. 1 : 31. See also in the 34th chapter as follows : " For it is the day of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompenses for the controversy of Zion. And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night nor day ; the smoke thereof shall go up forev* er : from generation to generation it shall lie waste ; none shall pass through it for ever and ever. But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it ; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it : and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones of emptiness.'" Here we see that for ever, the same as everlasting, is applied to the temporal judgments coming on Jeru- salem, and that brimstone and burning pitch are used as emblems of destruction,, and that of a temporal na- ture. But what shall we understand by for ever in this place? answer, from generation to generation, the whole time which these prophetic calamities were to continue. Jeremiah, in predicting the afflictions which should come on this rebellious people, speak- ing of the fury which should be poured out upon them, says, " it shall burn, and shall not be quenched." The same prophet, 4 : 4, says — " lest a fire should be kindled which none can quench.'''' But it is perfectly obvious, that he is alluding to temporal judgments. But Ezekiel is very explicit, 20 : 47, 48. " And say to the forest of the south, Hear the word of the Lord ; Thus saith the Lord God, Behold I will kindle a fire in thee, and it shall devour every green tree in thee, and every dry tree : the flaming flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from the south to the north shall be burned therein. 1 ' Here then is the fire, the flaming flame, which we are twice told shall not-be quenched. But does not HELLOLOGY. 207 the whole scope of the subject show, that all the threat includes nothing beyond the sufferings of time ? If everlasting burnings in prophetic usage did not sig- nify endless misery, how should the Jews who heard our Lord, be supposed thus to understand him ? That Isaiah, in speaking of everlasting burnings, ch. 33 : 14, alluded to the hypocritical, wicked Jews, is very obvious by the phraseology. Sinners in Zion were said to be afraid, and fearfulness had surprised the hypocrites. That the sinners in Zion is a phrase peculiarly applicable to the Jewish nation, will not be disputed, nor will any man deny that the hypo- crites noticed, are the same sinners before mentioned. All is then plain. The whole is applied to the Israel- itish nation, and to that alone. This also agrees with the common language of our Lord, who brands them as hypocrites, and pronounces many woes upon. them as such. On this subject, we shall take the liberty of again quoting Mr. Balfour. " Let us consider what kind of punishment the pro- phet, in this passage, is speaking about ? It is not doubted that he does speak of punishment, for it is here alleged that he is speaking of future eternal pun- ishment. But from what in the passage is this learn- ed ? It is learned, we presume, by those who take this view of the text, 1st, From the words fire: and burnings being used. But we have shown above, that the word fire, is only a figure used in Scripture to describe temporal punishment, and is used to de- scribe the temporal vengeance which came on the Jews, at the destruction of their city and temple. This we think is placed beyond all fair debate. 2d, We presume eternal misery is supposed to be taught in this passage also, from the word everlasting being applied to the word burnings. But that the word everlasting is applied to temporal punishment, and to this very temporal punishment of the Jews, is also 208 HELLOLOGY. beyond a doubt. This has been partly Seen already, and we shall see it plainly stated in the next passage. When in the passage before us it is said, " who among us shall dwell with devouring fire ? Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings V it is just ex- pressing, under another figure, what is expressed in the following texts : " how can ye escape the damna- tion of hell ?" " who hath warned you to flee from the impending vengeance, or wrath to come ?'' That both referred to the same period we think may be seen from the context. Sec verses 11, 12, 13, 19: Something, then, must be discovered in this text more than the words fire, burnings, and everlasting, to prove that eternal misery in a future state is taught in it. Indeed we think had attention been paid to the figurative use of the word fire in the Old Testament, and the way in which the word everlasting is often used there, much perversion of the oracles of God might have been avoided. In confirmation of the view I have given of this passage, I may add the fol- lowing. As in the passage, the condition of the un- believing part of the Jewish nation is referred to at the destruction of their city and temple, so in the con- text the condition of our Lord's disciples is described. See verses 15 — 17. From verse 20, to the end of the chapter, the peace and prosperity of the Chris- tian church is described. We have said enough to show that this passage does not teach the doctrine of endless punishment in a future state. We have also given what we conceive to be the general meaning of the prophet. Should we be mistaken as to its true sense, yet we think the other never can be proved from it. But as we do not wish to depend on any text of doubtful meaning in support of our views, we shall introduce the following, about which there can be no dispute. HELLOLOGY, 209 " The passage I refer to, is Jer. 23 : 39, 40. " There- fore, behold, I, even I, will utterly forget you, and I will forsake you, and the city that I gave you and your fathers, and cast you out of my presence. And I will bring an everlasting reproach upon you, and a perpetual shame, which shall not be forgotten. 1 ' This passage affords no room for debate. The Jews are the persons spoken about : the punishment threaten- ed, all will allow, is of a temporal nature : that it re- fers to the punishment which came on the Jews at the desruction of their city and temple, will not be doubt- ed : and that it is said to be perpetual and everlasting, is in as many words declared. I may just notice, that the word perpetual, in this last passage, is the same in the original as the word everlastings and is the same word which is translated everlasting, perpetual, and forever, in other passages. After attending to these texts we think it will no longer be doubted, that the temporal vengeance which came on the Jews at the destruction of their city and temple, is called ever- lasting, and also is described under the figure ofjire. But did the Jews understand the words everlasting or perpetual to mean, in these texts, endless duration ? We presume this will not be affirmed. It may be asked, and it is a very proper question to ask, — How comes it to pass, that this punishment of the Jews, of a temporal nature, is described as everlasting, perpet- ual, as everlasting fire, and a fire that never shall be quenched ? To this I answer, that any one who has examined the Scriptures on the subject, knows, that olm, of the Hebrew, aion, and aionion, of the Greek, are often used to express limited duration. They are often used to express a shorter or longer period of time, as the subjects to which they are applied re- quire. I might illustrate this by many examples, if it were necessary." 18* V 210 HELLOLOGY. Whatever may be the common understanding of the terms everlasting and for ever, one thing is beyond dispute — they are so used in connexion with temporal sufferings, that the fact of such use cannot be disputed. It is also fully believed, that from the mere use of this word, a Jew would never conceive the idea conveyed to be endless duration. — And, as the Jews most evi- dently had no belief in endless sufferings, why did not the Saviour, instead of using the language of their scriptures, give them to understand that his meaning was different from that of their prophets, though he couched it in the same words ? When any man can give a rational reply to this question, we shall be ready to listen. We shall now make a remark, on which we are per- suaded very little room will be left for debate. The language of the NezvTestament is that of the Old* Every careful reader must be sensible of this, nor do we believe the former will ever be well understood without a knowledge of the latter. The expression of Mr. Balfour, respecting this remark, is so completely to the purpose, that it ought to be cited in this place, and never forgotten. The Old Testament is the dic- tionary of the language of the New. In examining Mat. 19 : 28, let it be recollected, that our Lord addressed his immediate disciples, in the following language : — " 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.'" Compare this with its parallel, Luke 12: 4, 5, and we will then examine both at the same time. You will be pleased to recollect, that this was address- ed to friends, and that Gehenna punishment was that against which they were to be guarded. We have before seen, that no scripture writer ever uses this word in allusion to a future, unseen place, but the pe- culiarity of the language in this instance, requires that it be fairly examined. HELLOLOGY. 211 As the great object of the Messiah was to close the old, and to introduce the new dispensation, of which the former was but a shadow, of good things to come, we find a great proportion of the New-Testament parables pointed to this event. As the revolution was to be so great, no wonder the Saviour so frequently cautioned his disciples to beware of the fate which was certainly coming on their country. In this light we view this discourse to his disciples. They were to endure persecution, and many trials, which an apos- tle calls "fiery trials ;'' but these cautions are so nu- merous that they need not be cited. The circum- stance which may labour in the minds of some very honest people, is the use of the word soul, which is by common usage considered the spirit, or immortal part of man. The word will therefore be particularly ex- amined. The word +0x1, psuche, here rendered soul, is thus rendered from Nephish, of the O. T. In speaking of this word, Mr. Pilkington has the following remarks. He says, it " is sometimes used expletively, sometimes means life, sometimes the whole man, and sometimes is applied to the irrational part of creation. '' Among its various uses we quote the following: — Gen. 12: 1 3, my soul shall live because of thee. 1 : 20, let me escape thither, and my soul shall live. Exod. 12: 16, which every soul must eat. Lev. 5 : 2, if a soul touch any unclean thing. 20 : 11, if the priest buy a soul with his money. Num. 11:6, our sow/ is dried away : 31 : 23, one soul of five hundred, both of the men, and of the beeves, and of the asses, and of the sheep. Ps. 57 : 4, my soul is among lions : 106 : 15, he sent leanness into their soul. Mat. 2 : 20, they are dead which sought the young child's psuhe, or life. 7 : 25, take no thought for your life, psuhe — Luke 12: 23, the life, psuhe, is more than meat. But the cases are so numerous, that one has but to read and satisfy him-* 212 IffiLLOLOGY. self, that the principle laid down is correct. That the word is used expletively, or as might otherwise he expressed by the word unnecessarily, at least in our idiom, in one of these instances, is evident by com- paring the different expressions of Matthew and Luke. One mentions the destruction of soul and body in hell, while the other speaks of God as being able to cast into hell. The distinction which appears to obtain between the terms soul and body, is a mere Hebraism, as is evident from Matthew's account, which is allow- ed to have been written in Hebrew. But let us sup- pose that both body and spirit, the corporeal and the intellectual part of man are here intended, and that by hell we are to understand a place of suffering in the coining life. Will this agree with the orthodox theo- ry ? \^ho of all our opponents, believes that a cor- ruptible body, with an immortal spirit, will be con- signed to literal fire in a future state? Not one thus believes. We know that the body is scattered among the elements of which it is composed, and that dust re- turns to dust. But perhaps those who see the difficul- ty in this view of the text, are ready to refer this to the resurrection-state. This is assuming too much, for not the least intimation is here given of a resur- rection. But it is not said that God will do this. His power is represented, not his designs. But, even if this were admitted as a certain catastrophe, we have no data on which to build the doctrine of endless mise- ry. Nay, if we understand kill, and destroy, as equal- ly applicable to both body and Spirit, it is very evi- dent that annihilation is more probably meant, than ceaseless misery, for not the least hint is given of their after existence, in either happiness or misery. But let us inquire of Paul, if psuhe, life, and pneuma, spirit, are both one. He speaks of dividing asunder of soul and spirit, Heb. 4 : 12, and again makes the same distinction, 1 Thes. 5 : 23. which may be exam- HELLOLOGY. 213 ined at your leisure. But one case more may be cited, which ought to put the subject at rest. Christ, when on the cross commended his pneuma, spirit, into the hands of his Father ; while his psuhe, soul, went to hades, in which place it was not left, for the body was raised by the power of God, and itspsuhe, life, restor- ed. But the context to the passage under considera- tion, is explicit as to the meaning of the word render- ed soul. Mat. 10: 39. he that findeth his psuhe, life, shall lose it. Here it is evident, that our Lord's meaning was this : he that refuses to believe me in the prediction of that destruction which was at hand, will assuredly perish, while those who take my coun- sel will be saved from the threatened evil. This we find true in point of fact. The unbelieving Jews, thought that if the religion of Jesus should prevail, the Romans would come and take away both their place and nation. His religion was a peaceable, non-resisting religion, and they expected a conquering Prince, who should free them from the Roman yoke. The dread- ful sufferings of the Jews when their city was taken, proved the words of the Saviour true. One apparent difficulty remains yet to be solved. It may be asked, what are we to understand by the expression in Luke, which implies, that the destruc- tion which God can effect, is after the body is killed. Man, indeed, can do no more than dissolve the connex- ion between the body and its life, or in other words, kill the body. God can, indeed, withhold his power, and the life would be annihilated, and were we taught by God that he will in any instance thus act, we might indeed, strongly assert the doctrine of annihilation, but it would be doing nothing in favour of endless misery. No power but his who alone hath immortali- ty, can preserve the spirit in an immortal state. But we must find some very different passage, on which to build either tha one or the other dogma. But we shall 214 HELLOLOGY. present a question worthy of due consideration. Does killing, or destroying the life, signify continuing it in existence in any state 1 When this can be duly an- swered, we will find tune to re-cxamiue the subject. A vast deal more might be said on this subject, in illustration of the foregoing, but we refer the reader to Mr. Balfour's 1st Inquiry, and his answer to Rev. J. Sabine, as our room will permit no more than a single quotation. u We have now one remark to make, and we deem it conclusive on this subject. Supposing then that Gehenna, in the passages under consideration, does mean the place of endless misery. Let this be con- sidered for argument's sake, a truth: yea, let it also be granted that the punishment of this place is of endless duration, 1 ask what follows from these pas- sages ? It only follows that the body, or if you please, hody and soul, or the life, are destroyed there. It does not follow that the pneuma, spirit, or immortal part, has any concern in this punishment. No ; for we have seen them expressly distinguished ; and in these passages not a word is said about its being in Gehenna, or punished there. No : nothing like this is to be found in the Bible. We read there of nephish, psuhe,soul, or life, going to Sheol or Hades, and hear of its being destroyed in Gehenna ; but do we ever read of the pneuma, spirit, being in any of those places? No ; at death, it returns to God, who gave it. So far from the pneuma, spirit, being tormented, killed, or de- stroyed in Gehenna, or any of those places, it is nev- er represented as being in them at all. We call on any man to produce an instance from Scripture where it is ever said the pneuma, spirit, is in Gehenna, or killed or destroyed in Gehenna. Though nothing like this is to be found in. -the sacred writings, yet peo- ple, from the passage we are considering, conclude that the immortal spirit of man is to-be killed or de- OELLGLOGY. 215 stroyed in Gehenna. Even in the parable of the rich man, it it is not said his pneuma, spirit, was there, or tormented in Hades. No such representations are given in the Bible, either about Hades or Gehen- na. But ought not such representations to be found there, if the common belief be the doctrine of Scrip- ture ? It certainly is the common opinion that the spirits of the wicked go to hell, at death. But from what part of the Scriptures do we learn this ? If evi- dence of such a doctrine is to be found there, let it be produced.' ' James 3 : 6, is the last place in which we find Ge- henna in the N. T. And that it is here used in a figurative sense, no one will dispute. " And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity : so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and set- teth on fire the course of nature ; and it is set on fire of hell.'' In examining this passage, we believe few would be such fanatics, as to declare that the fire which kindles on the tongue, was lighted in a place of end- less misery, or even in the literal Gehenna to which James alluded. Every one may see, that the apostle alludes to the impurities of Gehenna, with which the pollutions of the tongue are compared. But this is illustrated by other passages of scripture. For in- stance, we are told that iniquity burnetlr like fire ; and Peter advises, that he who would see good days, should refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile. Our Lord also speaks of the tongue in a similar manner, when he says, that out of the heart proceed blasphemies, evil speaking, &c. But we need go no further into this subject than our own observation. How many families, churches, societies, communi- ties, and whole nations are set on fire by the improper use of the tongue ! Nay, look at the desolating wars which blacken the page of history, and the almost in- extinguishable fires of wrath which are kindled by the 216 HELLOLOGY. tongue, and then say whether James was correct, while picturing the effect of this member, by the pollutions and miseries of Gehenna, so well known to the Jews. The apostle was a Jew, and wrote to the Jew?, as is evident by a look at his introduction. That he should draw an illustration of his subject from those cir- cumstances with which those to whom he wrote were acquainted, is certainly very probable. The epistle was most certainly intended for the Jews, and for them alone ; and not only for Jews, but for believing Jews. We have not a particle of evidence, that the Jews, in the time of the apostles, conceived any different idea from the use of the term Gehenna, than did their fathers : Nor have we the least intimation, that the writer intended his epistle for the use of the Gentiles. So far from this, that an examination will show that the peculiar situation of his countrymen at that time elicited the epistle. No evidence has yet been pro- duced, that Gehenna was ever deemed, by the Israel- ites, the name of a place of punishment, excepting as understood by the valley of Hinnom. In closing this examination, we have only to say, that as far as the arguments have gone, we have no fear of refutation. We believe that the facts produ- ced, are indisputable, and that the inferences are per- fectly conclusive. That we differ from highly respect- ed names, is no just reason why the most obvious truth, and the most legitimate criticism, should be con- sidered with an evil eye. Claiming no better rule than that laid down by Dr. Campbell, and others, we are willing that our production should be submitted to the strictest scrutiny. Dr. C. says — " ecclesiastical ose is no security that the word, though it be under- stood, conveys to us the same idea, which the original term did to those to whom the gospels were first pro- mulgated. In a former dissertation, the fullest evi- dence has been given, that in regard to several words, HELLOLOGY. £17 the meaning which has long been established by eccle- siastical use, is very different from that which they have in the writings of the New-Testament/' Again he says — " the opinion of Grotius and some learned Rabbis, unsupported by either argument or example, nay, in manifest contradiction to both, is here of no weight. Scriptural usage alone must decide the ques- tion. These commentators (with all deference to their erudition and abilities be it spoken) being com- paratively modern, cannot be considered as ultimate judges in a question depending entirely on an ancient use, whereof all the evidences that were remaining in their time, remain still, and are as open to our exam- ination, as they were to theirs. In other points where there may happen to be in Scripture an allusion to customs or ceremonies retained by the Jews, but un- known to us, the case is different. But nothing of this kind is pretended here.'" We now conclude this section, by two quotations from Mr. Stuart's Letters to Mr. Channing, which are worthy of perpetual remembrance. " The claims of the Bible to be authoritative being once admitted, the simple question in respect to it, is, what does it teach in regard to any particular passage ; what idea did the original writer mean to convey 1 When this is ascertained by^the legitimate rules of interpretation, it is authoritative. This is orthodoxy in the highest and best sense of the word ; and every thing which is opposed to it, which modifies it, which fritters its meaning away, is heterodoxy, is heresy ; to whatever name or party it is attached." " After all, it is a prin- ciple, by which, if I have any knowledge of my owa heart, I desire forever to be guided, to 'call no man master on earth.' I would place the decision of Scripture, fairly made out, immeasurably above all hu- man opinions. I regard the one as the decision of an unerring God ; the other as the opinions of 'fallible men." 19 218 HELLOLOGY. ADDENDA. We here take the liberty of inserting two extracts from Rev. J. S. Thompson's Christian Guide, being a new translation, and a select commentary. u Whoso- ever shall be unjustly angry with his brother, shall be accountable to the Judges ; and whosoever shall call his brother vile man, shall be exposed to the sentence of the Sanhedrim ; but whosoever shall say apostate wretch, shall be held a bond slave in the fiery Gehen- na." Appended to the above, is the following note for its illustration. " For the illustration of this obscure pas- sage, which has long puzzled the Commentators, and spread terror in the ranks of the superstitious, there appears nothing more needed, than to simply state the facts to which our Lord alludes. Here are three degrees of crime mentioned, and three degrees of punishment respectively annexed to each, proportion- ate to the powers invested in the three courts of Judi- cature, held among the Jews. The crimes are; 1, causeless anger ; 2, anger accompanied with expres- sions of insult and contempt ; 3, hatred and detesta- tion accompanied with execration. The two first are threatened with temporal punishment, or the ani- madversions of the Jewish tribunals ; and it is highly analagous to our Master's reasoning, that the punish- ment annexed to the last, should be also temporal, see- ing the crime was the same in nature, as the second, though somewhat aggravated. On the contrary, to suppose with many commentators, that for the little difference of saying fool instead of simpleton, our Lord should pass from such a sentence as a Jewish court could pronounce, to the awful doom of eter- nal punishment in hell-fire, is what cannot be re- conciled to any rational rule of faith, or known HELLOLOGY. 210 measure of justice. This opinion will be found un- tenable from attention to the construction of the Greek. In the former instances, the construction is svo^oc; Tt\ xf»£sj —