period of time, age, life, the present world, the Jewish dispensation; Donnegan, time, space of time, lifetime; Odyss. 5, 152 and 160, life; Iliad, 22, 58, Hes. Suet. 331, the ordinary period of man's life; Homer and Pindar, frequently the age of man, man's estate; Iliad, 24, 725, a long period of time, eternity. Schweighaeuser defines it to mean, age, life; Valpey, age, length of time; Hincks, a period of time, life, an age, the world, eternity; Hedericus, age, eternity; Pickering, age, a long period of time, indefinite duration, time whether longer or shorter, past, present or future; and Schrevelius, age, world, life.

From these authorities, we are fully justified in saying that aion is a word of ambiguous import, and therefore, of itself, it can afford no proof of endless punishment; for when its meaning is endless, it must be in consequence of the manner in which it is used. The same is true of aionios. All allow that no adjective can signify more than the noun from which it is formed. Hence lexicographers define aionios to signify eternal, lasting, permanent, age of the world, etc., etc.

Perhaps it will be said, though both of these words are ambiguous, they may have been used by Jesus and the apostles precisely as for ages ever, forever, everlasting, and eternal, have been employed by divines to denote, when applied to punishment, its endless duration. We grant that such has long been the popular acceptation of these words, and that they have been employed by theologians to express the eternity of woe; and we are willing also to grant that if, in the times of Jesus and the apostles, the popular signification of aion and aionios, when applied to punishment, was endless, it is fair to infer that they meant to be understood as teaching endless misery, unless the connection in which the words are found necessarily restricts their meaning. That the connection does thus restrict it, Mr. Balfour has clearly shown, and on this point nothing need be added. What we propose to do, is to show that the popular signification of aion and aionios, when applied to punishment in the days of Christ, was right the opposite of what ever, forever, everlasting and eternal, are in our times; that while one who now applies the latter words to punishment is understood to teach its eternity, in the days of Christ and the

apostles none were understood to teach it when they applied the former to punishment. If we succeed in this, we shall give a full answer to the question, how Christ and the apostles could honestly have used aion and aionios in connection with punishment, if they did not believe it endless. A preacher of universal salvation could not honestly threaten sinners with everlasting punishment and eternal damnation, without very distinctly showing that he did not use those words in their popular sense. Therefore, if we find the cotemporaries and successors of Christ, who denied the eternity of misery, threatening sinners with aionion punishment, without any explanation of the sense in which they used it, the inference will be fair that its popular acceptation then was different from what it is now.

Some aid on this important point may be gained from Josephus who finished his Antiquities of the Jews in A. D. 93. We find him often using aion to signify time indefinite, age. He says that Esau should obtain renown forever (di aionos), Ant. I. XVIII. 8, vol. i. 119. He calls the landmarks of the Jews a limitation of rights made by God himself to last forever (eis aiona), Ant. IV. VIII. 18, vol. i. 213. He represents a Roman senator, after the death of Caligula, expressing the wish that the quiet might endure for all time (eis pan tou aionos), Ant. XIX. II. 2, vol. iv. 135. We find many such cases in Josephus; and also many showing that he very often used aionios, as he did aion, to signify long duration. The remembrance left by the patriarchs is called everlasting (aionion), Ant. 1. XIII. 4; vol. i. 111, 112. He represents the Jewish soldiers as being promised everlasting (aionion) celebrity, Ant. xII. vII. 3, vol. iii. 43, 44, and he says Manahem predicted that Herod the Great should acquire everlasting (aionion) fame, Ant. xx. x. 5, vol. iii. 250.

Philo Judæus, who wrote between A. D. 20 or 30 and the middle of the first century, uses aionios very much in the same sense. He styles the punishment inflicted by the strong upon those who make false promises lasting (aionios), Fragmenta, tome ii. p. 667. He speaks of the sagacity of the brute as longreaching (aionia), tome ii. p. 397; of the divine allotments as

distinguished by a constant (aionia) order, "quisquis virtuti studet," tome ii. p. 449.

We now proceed to authorities that bear more directly upon the question under consideration. In the Sibylline Oracles, sinners are said to be condemned to an intense fiery torment, which is frequently called everlasting; and yet they teach distinctly the doctrine of universal salvation. Justin Martyr, who believed in the annihilation of the wicked, repeatedly calls their punishment everlasting. These two authorities reach down to a period as late as A. D. 150. Irenæus, whose writings bring us to a. D. 180, says, the unjust shall be sent into inextinguishable and eternal fire; and yet he believed in their annihilation. Some other writers speak of punishment as everlasting, though there is no evidence that they believed it endless; for the fact just stated proves that aionios is no criterion by which to decide. We know that many, before this period, believed in universal salvation, among whom were the Basilidians, Carpocrations and Valentinians; they date back to near the beginning of the second century; and though regarded by what were called the orthodox as heretics, no objection was ever made to their faith in the salvation of the world, which is full proof that in those times this was not heresy, but good orthodoxy.

The first Christian writer who asserted that punishment was of equal duration with happiness, was Tertullian, a man whose heart was well fitted to enjoy his barbarous doctrine. Cotemporary with him was Clemens, a man of great eminence and excellency of character, a profound scholar, and a true Christian. Universal salvation was a prominent doctrine in his writings. While he was illustrating and enforcing his benevolent faith, Tertullian sent out his Apology, bearing date about A. D. 200, in which he declared that punishment was endless, and described the exultation he should have in beholding the torments of the damned! Thus he has the honor of being the first Christian Father known to teach endless misery.

The next writer of importance was Origen, who began to publish his works about A. D. 220. He was a stanch advocate of universal salvation; and yet he frequently threatens sinners with

everlasting fire and everlasting punishment, and without offering a word to show that he did not mean endless fire and punishment. This, then, settles the question, and shows beyond all doubt that aion and aionios, in connection with punishment, had not, even as late as the time of Origen, acquired their present popular signification.

Rev. H. Ballou, 2d, D. D., in his Ancient History of Universalism, from whom we have gathered the facts presented relative to this subject, says: "In all his works, Origen freely uses the expressions everlasting fire, everlasting punishment, etc., without any explanation, such as our modern prepossessions would render necessary, to prevent a misunderstanding. It should also be particularly remarked, that, among the numerous passages in which he advances Universalism, there is not an instance of his treating it in the way of controversy with the orthodox; and that, on the other hand, they themselves did not, so far as we can discover, censure or oppose it. Sometimes he avails himself of its peculiar principles to vindicate Christianity from the reproaches or witticisms of the heathens, and to maintain the benevolence of the one God against the objections of the Gnostics. Sometimes, again, he states and defines it, in a formal and labored manner; but in most cases he introduces it incidentally, either as the natural result of some well-known Christian principle, or as the positive doctrine of particular scriptures."

Thus there was not the slightest danger that Jesus and the apostles would be misunderstood; for the popular acceptation of aion and aionios in their day was a limited time, or time indefinite. Judging, therefore, by their use in the age when the New Testament was written, these words can give no support to the eternity of misery; for their received meaning was time indefinite. They owe all their influence, upon the public mind, against universal salvation, to a false education, to a meaning acquired since the time of Christ.

The following facts corroborate the foregoing views.

1. The cotemporaries of Christ, that believed in endless misery, never employed aion or aionios to express it. The favorite epithet of Philo for endless was aidios, with other words signifying immor

tal, interminable. While he applied such words to punishment, he used aionios, as we have seen, in a temporal sense. Josephus also thus employs aidios. He says the Pharisees believe "that the souls of the base are allotted aidios ergmos to an endless prison." He also says the Essenes believe that the souls of the bad are sent to a dark, tempestuous cavern full of aidialeiptos timoria, incessant punishment. Thus these believers in endless misery did not express it by the terms applied by Christ and the apostles to punishment. Aionion punishment then, in the times of which we speak, did not signify an endless one. Josephus, like Philo, uses aionios to denote limited punishment. He calls the imprisonment to which the Romans doomed the tyrant John, aionion imprison

ment.

2. The Greek fathers of the first four centuries, who opposed the doctrine of universal salvation, did not employ aion or aionios against it. This is a fact of great significance; for if the words in question were then understood as they now are, they certainly would have been adduced to prove endless misery. The present use made of them is positive proof of this. No writer now appeals to the Bible, in opposing Universalism, without urging against it these words.

5. There is no instance on record, till early in the 5th century, in which aion or aionios is employed to prove endless misery. Augustine, a Latin writer, was the first to argue that as aionios is applied to punishment the same as to life, both must be of equal duration. Though a man of talents, he is said to have been a poor Greek scholar. The fact that none reasoned thus before him, shows conclusively, that it was some centuries after Christ before the words we are considering acquired their present signification.

The foregoing facts clearly prove, that if Christ and the apostles used aion and aionios in their popular sense, they did not mean to express by them endless punishment. O. A. S.