not quenched; an expression taken from Isa. lxvi. 24, which, though we translate hell, is in the original Gehenna, or the valley of Hinnom, where was kept a constant fire to burn up the carcases of beasts and other filth of the city of Jerusalem, where though the fire never was quenched, yet it does not follow, nor is it said that the bodies that were burnt in it were never consumed, only that the worms that gnawed and the fire that burnt them were constant, and never ceased till they were destroyed. So, though the fire was not put out, yet the chaff was burnt up and consumed, Matt. iii. 12; and the tares, xiii. 30; in both which places, and the parallel, Luke iii. 17, the Greek word signifies to be consumed by burning, though in our Bibles it is translated burn up but in one of them, viz. Matt. iii. 14. Taking it then for evident that the wicked shall die and be extinguished at last, how long they shall be continued in that inexpressible torment is not, that I know, anywhere expressed; but that it shall be excessively terrible by its duration as well as its sharpness, the current of the Scripture seems to manifest; only if one may conjecture, it seems to be before our Saviour's delivering up the kingdom to his Father. The account give of it by St Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 23, 28, at Christ's second coming, the just rise by themselves; then Christ shall set up his kingdom, wherein he shall subdue all rule and all authorities and power that opposes him, for he must reign until he has put all enemies under his feet; the last enemy that shall be destroyed is Death; then he shall deliver up the kingdom to God his Father, and then cometh the end, i. e. the full conclusion of God's whole dispensation to Adam and his posterity. After which there shall be no death, no change; the scene will then be closed, and everyone remain in the same estate for ever.

One thing upon the occasion may be worth our inquiry; whether the wicked shall not rise with such bodies of flesh and blood as they had before; for that all that is said of the change of bodies, 1 Cor. xv. and 1 Thess. iv., has been already shown to be spoken only of the saints; the like whereof may be observed in other places of Scripture, where bodies changed into a better state are mentioned; as 2 Cor. v. 1-4, it is always spoken of the bodies of the saints, nor do I remember any change of the bodies where the resurrection of the wicked can be supposed to be comprehended; but it is only spoken

of thus: "The hour is coming, in which all that are in the grave shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." John v. 28, 29. We must all appear before the judgment-seat of God, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad, 2 Cor. v. 10. And so likewise, "Raise the dead." Acts xxvi. 8; 2 Cor. i. 9. Quicken the dead." Rom. iv. 17. But of the change of their bodies, of their being made spiritual, or of their putting on incorruption or immortality, I do not remember anything said. They shall be raised, that is said over and over; but how they are raised, or with what bodies they shall come, the Scripture, as far as I have observed, is perfectly silent.

We have seen what the Scripture says of the state of the wicked after the resurrection, and what is the final catastrophe they are doomed to. Let us now see what Scripture discovers to us of the state of the just after the Resurrection; that whatsoever was earthly, corruptible, mortal about them, shall, at the instant of the sound of the trumpet that is to call them at Christ's coming, be changed into spiritual, incorruptible, immortal, we have already seen.

The following paper appears to be intended as a supplement to the Mode of acquiring Truth; it illustrates Mr Locke's other works, and shows how deeply his mind was engaged in this particular.

ENTHUSIASM-METHOD.

The way to find truth as far as we are able to reach it in this our dark and shortsighted state, is to pursue the hypothesis that seems to us to carry with it the most light and consistency as far as we can without raising objections, or striking at those that come in our way, till we have carried our present principle as far as it will go, and given what light and strength we can to all the parts of it. And when that is done, then to take into our consideration any objections that lie against it, but not so as to pursue them as objections against the system we had formerly erect

ed; but to consider upon what foundation they are bottomed, and examine that in all its parts, and then putting the two whole systems together, see which is liable to most exceptions, and labours under the greatest difficulties; for such is the weakness of our understandings, that, unless where we have clear demonstration, we can scarce make out to ourselves any truths which will not be liable to some exception beyond our power wholly to clear it from; and therefore, if upon that ground we are presently bound to give up our former opinion, we shall be in a perpetual fluctuation, every day changing our minds, and passing from one side to another we shall lose all stability of thought, and at last give up all probable truths as if there were no such thing, or, which is not much better, think it indifferent which side we take.

To this, yet as dangerous as it is, the ordinary way of managing controversies in the world directly tends. If an opponent can find one weak place in his adversary's doctrine, and reduce him to a stand, with difficulties rising from thence he presently concludes he has got the day, and may justly triumph in the goodness of his own cause; whereas victory no more certainly always accompanies truth than it does. right. It shows indeed the weakness of the part attacked, or of the defence of it; but to show which side has the best pretence to truth and followers, the two whole systems must be set by one another, and considered entirely, and then see which is most consistent in all its parts, which least clogged with incoherencies or absurdities, and which freest from begged principles and unintelligible notions.

This is the fairest way to search after truth, and the surest not to mistake on which side she is. There is scarce any controversy which is not a full instance of this; and if a man will embrace no opinion but what he can clear from all difficulties and remove all objections, I fear he will have but very narrow thoughts, and find very little that he shall assent to.

What, then, will you say, shall he embrace that for truth which has improbabilities in it that he cannot master ? This has a clear answer. In contradicting opinions, one must be true, that he cannot doubt; which then shall he take? That which is accompanied with the greatest light and evidence, that which is freest from the grosser absurdities, though our narrow capacities cannot penetrate it on every side.

Some men have made objections to the belief of a God, and think they ought to be heard and hearkened to, because, perhaps, nobody can unravel all the difficulties of creation and providence, which are but arguments of the weakness of our understandings, and not against the being of a God. Let us take a view, then, of these men's hypotheses, and let us see what direct contradiction they must be involved in who deny a God. If there be no God from eternity, then there was no thinking thing from eternity; for the eternal thinking Thing I call God. If from eternity there were no thinking Thing, then thinking things were made out of unthinking things by an unthinking power: as great an absurdity as that nothing should produce something. If matter be that eternal thinking thing, let us change that deceitful word matter, which seems to stand for one thing when it means the congeries of all bodies, and then the opinion will be that all bodies, every distinct atom, is in its own nature a thinking thing. Let any one then resolve with himself how such an infinite number of distinct independent thinking things came to be of one mind, and to consent and contrive together to make such an admirable frame as the world, and the species of things and their successive continuation is. How some of them consented to lie buried for long or numberless ages in the bowels and centre of the earth, or other massy globes,-places certainly very uneasy for thinking beings, whilst others are delighting themselves in the pleasure of freedom and the day. Let them produce harmony, beauty, constancy from such a congeries of thinking independent atoms, and one may, I think, allow them to be creators of this world; and I know not why upon their own grounds they should not think so themselves, since there is no reason why the thinking atoms in them should not be as wise as any other in the universe; for if they once allow me one atom of matter to have from eternity some degrees of knowledge and power above any other, they must tell us a reason why it is so, or else their supposition will be ridiculous when set up against the supposition of a Being that had from eternity more knowledge and more power than all matter taken together, and so was able to frame it into this orderly state of nature so visible and admirable in all the parts of it.

LETTER OF M. LE CLERC TO LOCKE.

"A Amsterdam, le 12 d'Août, 1694. "Je reçus, Monsieur, la semaine passée, par la voie de Monsieur Furly, les additions de votre ouvrage, qui m'ont infiniment plû. J'ai lû avidement l'addition du chapitre de la Liberté, qui m'a entièrement satisfait, étant convaincu depuis long-temps que la pluspart du temps, les hommes ne se déterminent pas par la vue distincte ou confuse de ce qui peut être leur plus grand bien, ou qu'ils croient être tel, mais par le plaisir qu'ils prennent à certaines choses, auxquelles ils sont habitués. On pourroit seulement demander si ce plaisir, ou cette easiness, comme vous vous exprimez plus commodement que je ne le saurois faire en François, est toujours de telle nature, que malgré cela, l'esprit ne puisse se determiner du côté opposé. Pour moi, j'avoue que je ne vois pas bien comment lorsque je lis avec attention ce que vous dites; mais je ne sais si le sentiment ne nous en convainc point. Au moins, il me semble qu'en mille choses je puis faire, ou non, et que je ne me determine que parceque je le veux sans trouver plus de plaisir d'un côté que d'un autre. Mais c'est là une matière qui demande plus d'étendue, qu'un billet écrit à la hâte.-Pour parler d'autres choses, et pour répondre à un article de vos lettres auquel j'ai oublié de répondre trois ou quatre fois, vous disposerez comme il vous plaira de l'exemplaire relié de ma Geneses, soit que vous le veuillez garder pour vous, ou le donner à quelqu'un de vos amis. J'attends avec impatience le livre de Monsieur l'Evêque de Bath et Wells, pour voir ce qu'il dira contre moi, car les François de Londres, gens envieux et malins, s'il y en eut jamais, ont pris plaisir à sêmer qu'il me refutoit en termes forts. Cela me fâcheroit, non à cause des raisons, auxquelles je ne ferai pas difficulté de me rendre si elles sont bonnes, mais à cause de la consequence: je ne sais si je me trompe, mais je m'imagine que ce sont des raisons de théologie in quibus magis optant viri pii quàm docent. On prescrit & Dieu ce qu'il doit avoir fait comme on le juge à propos, sans rechercher ce qui est effectivement. Quoi qu'il en soit, j'en userai avec lui, avec tout le respect qu'il pourra demander; et pour l'en convaincre, je lui ai déjà envoyé dix-huit feuilles