in his own spirit, could be made alive [wononoɛís], in the natural sense of the words, I am not aware. Was his spirit mortal, like his body, and therefore quickened for the work of preaching in Hades? But, (3) Understanding quickened (woronosis) here as applied merely to Christ's own spirit, and that the Spirit of God is not brought to view (which many take to be a fair construction, although our translation gives a different view), then in what sense is it said: By which [spirit] he went and preached to the spirits in prison? When the writer had already mentioned, that Christ was put to death in the flesh was there need of telling us immediately, that not his flesh but his spirit went and preached to those in prison? There is, at all events, something exceedingly strange in this passage, or (to say the least) very unusual, if such be its meaning. If, however, we understand the passage, as our translators did, of the Spirit of God who dwelt in Christ, and made him to triumph over death-that same Spirit who moved Noah to preach, "when the longsuffering of God" bore with the antediluvians, we shall have, at least, an intelligible sense of the passage, if not a satisfactory one. (4) Not a word is said here, in case we maintain that Christ did preach to the spirits in prison, and while they were in prison, of their conversion and repentance; so that, at all events, no positive aid can be elicited from this passage, in behalf of the position that there will be repentance in a future world. If the question be urged: Would Christ have preached in vain? The answer is easy: Not altogether in vain, if indeed he did preach; some good end would doubtless be answered, although we may not be able to tell what it was. But Christ preached to many thousands of Jews, during his incarnation, who were never brought to repentance; so that we cannot deduce from the fact that Christ preached to the spirits in prison, the conclusion that they were brought to repentance by his preaching.

I do not assume the position, that I have given a satisfactory exegesis of the passage before us, nor hold out the show of being able to give one. It is unquestionably one of the most difficult passages in all the Bible, and depends for its solution, as I apprehend, on some popular views common at the time when Peter wrote his epistle, but which are not known to us. One thing, however, is plain: Can we build

our hopes for eternity on such a doubtful passage as this? Does not the passage itself show, if it be interpreted as affirming the preaching of Christ to the spirits while in prison, that a distinction was made by him? For why did he preach only to Antediluvians? This last question presents, indeed, a difficulty which is well nigh fatal to such an exegesis; for why should all the heathen world, that never heard the Gospel, be excluded from the offers of repentance and salvation, while the Antediluvians, who were much more wicked, enjoyed the privilege of such an offer?

Where else besides this as yet slippery ground, shall we find a stand in the Scriptures for the advocates of future repentance? It is easy enough to say that the thing ought to be so, and must be so, and to assume it on grounds a priori; but we are, and for very good reasons, concerned at present only with the Bible.

I must merely cast a look at two or three passages of Scripture, and then withhold my hand; for on any other ground I should be forced to write a book, instead of a short communication adapted to this Miscellany.

Deeply anxious, nay distressed, as my mind has sometimes been, on this awful subject, and eagerly intent on every species of evidence which seemed to have a bearing upon it, I have never yet been able to see how we can fairly dispose of some few passages of the Bible that remain, even after we pass by all the contest which respects the meaning of for ever, and for ever and ever. I cannot do less than hint

at some of these.

I do not indeed at all concede, that any advance has yet been made, toward showing that for ever and for ever and ever must or can have a mere temporary and limited meaning, when applied to future punishment. The moment which decides that they can, decides that God and heaven are temporary too; for the same qualifications are applied to them in regard to duration, as are applied to future punishment. Nor is it true, that the words εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰών vor, or by, or by, do not naturally mean eternity or endless ages. Whenever they have a different sense, if ever, it is only a metaphorical one. We speak of an endless recital, of an everlasting noise or din, with just the same modified meaning as the Hebrews did, when they applied the preceding words to any thing not strictly eternal. Yet nothing

could be more untrue than that endless and everlasting mark, in and by themselves, only a temporary existence.

Passing by all this, for the present, as I must do, there are difficulties in the way of penitence and restoration in a future world, which I have never been able to remove, and which I shall propose to the serious consideration of others.

In the 20th chapter of the Revelation, John represents himself as seeing in vision the sea and the grave giving up the dead for a general judgment; in other words, he presents the doctrine of a general resurrection and a general judgment, at the final close of all things, i. e. after the material heavens and earth have passed away, and a new heaven and a new earth are created; Rev. 20: 1-15. Here, at the close of this awful scene, "those whose names are not written in the book of life," i. e. all impenitent sinners, are represented as "cast into the lake of fire, which is the SECOND death."

So then, after the material heavens and earth are passed away, there is a judgment; and by that judgment the wicked are sentenced to undergo the SECOND DEATH. And what is this? The first death is not of a permanent and enduring nature. The resurrection removes the effects it had produced, and reanimates the bodies which it had dissolved. But what is the second death? Is there a resurrection from this? We read, it is true, in Rev. 20: 6, of a first resurrection; but this precedes the Millennium; the second resurrection, therefore, must be the final and general one, or is there another still? That seems to be out of question; for the body and soul, the original elements of our nature, both have existence after the second resurrection. Is there no room then for a third? None; certainly none in any apposite sense of the word resurrection.

What then is the second death, but a death that is to be followed by no resurrection? I cannot conceive of any other appropriate meaning to be attached to it. It is a death which is never to die, i. e. never to cease or to be followed by life. Not a death of the wicked in a natural or physical sense; for they are raised up so as to be immortal; but death in a spiritual sense, i. e. a state of misery, and one which admits of no end, inasmuch as no resurrection from it is disclosed.

But we are met here with a difficulty; yea, with even a

claim that a contrary opinion is established by the context of the passage under consideration. This is, that "death and hell are said to be cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death," Rev. 20: 14. If death himself who is the messenger that summons sinners to the world of wo, and hell which is the place where they are tormented, are both destroyed, i. e. cast into the lake of fire, then, it is asked, how can there be any further punishment of sinners?'"

As this shape of the argument, if argument it may be called, has often been adduced and urged, it may be expedient to say a few words upon it.

The figurative style of the Apocalypse all will be ready to concede, who have read it with any attention. To every thing life and animation is given, by the imagination of the writer; and not unfrequently even to objects which in themselves are inanimate. Personification is every where to be found in the book, i. e. objects in themselves incapable of speaking or acting, are represented as doing both.

As a proof of this, the reader needs only to turn to Rev. 6: 8, where, of the dread array that march forth to the contest in behalf of the Messiah's Kingdom, Death and Hell (Bávaros xai adys) are represented as constituting a part. There it is plain that death is personified; and in the same manner that Hades also is. But what is Hades in this case? Is it the place of the dead, or is it a collective noun, designating the under-officers (so to speak) by whose aid Death is imagined to manage the affairs of his realm? The latter sense seems plainly to be the only appropriate one here; for with what congruity could the writer represent Hades as a place following in the train of this fearful array ?

Transfer now these plain and simple elements of the apocalyptic style of representation to the passage before us. First, the sea is represented as giving up its dead, that they may go to judgment. Then Death and Hades, whose domains were conceived and spoken of by the Hebrews as being subterranean, are spoken of as yielding up their dead for the same purpose. In other words, the king and princes of the Under-world yield up their dead, at the summons of the last trumpet. In plain and simple words: The resurrection is universal.

But now, as the king and princes of the Under-world are only poetic or fictitious persons, how can it be said of them

that they are "cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death?" Plainly this is neither more nor less than a consistency of representation carried through. Having, in the body of his work (see Rev. 6: 8), spoken of Death and Hades as agents or persons, the writer here carries through this bold idea, and represents them as finally cast into the lake of fire, from which there is no escape; of course they can never issue from it to commence their ravages or exercise their dominion any more.

Such appears to be the simple object of this representation. If the reader has any doubts in respect to it, let him turn, for a moment, to what Paul says, in regard to the closing scene at the judgment day. In 1 Cor. 15: 24 seq. he represents the end [ro Télos] of all things as arrived. Christ will now complete his triumph over all his enemies. Verse 26th tells us, that "the last enemy which shall be destroyed, (xaragyɛitai, rendered inactive or inefficient), is death." Accordingly, at the close of this sublime representation, after the glorious resurrection of the saints, he represents them as triumphantly singing: "O death, where is thy sting? O Hades where is thy victory ?" 1 Cor. 15: 55. In other words, when the final judgment comes the power of death henceforth ceases, i. e. it is subdued and conquered.

In consonance with this representation is that in Heb. 2: 14 seq. Christ, by his death, is there said "to destroy (xaragrnoa) him that had the power of death, i. e. the devil."

In this passage, respect is had merely to Christians; but still the representation is for substance the same as in the text under investigation. The power of death is overcome, and ceases.

In all three of the passages the idea is prominent, that the power of death is, at the consummation of all things, to come to a final end. But in the passage before us, the poetical expression comprises death and his auxiliaries, called Hades by the writer. So we say familiarly, Great Britain for the King and Parliament, putting place or country for those who live in it and possess it. In the Apocalypse, Death and Hades are plainly considered as the possessors or lords of the Under-world; phraseology borrowed from the popular modes of speech prevalent among the Jews, as any one may see who will carefully read Isaiah XIV.

Consider now the result. The wicked are cast into the