Romans, for they have power to kill your lives, and send you immediately to the paradise of God; yea I say unto you fear them"!!! What nonsense! Dare you look up to heaven and

charge Christ with uttering such folly?

6. It is not true that the Jews could not, or did not put Christians to death in the Primitive Church. It is true the power of putting to death judicially was in the hands of the Roman Governors, but it is a matter of fact, well known to all intelligent persons, that the Jews frequently put the saints to death in a lawless manner. They stoned Stephen, and instigated Herod to put James to the sword. Hear the testimony of Jesus on this point. Addressing the Jews he says: "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 ye shall scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city." Math. 23: 34. Here the position of Mr. Ballou, that the Jews could not, or would not, as a matter of fact, kill the saints, is refuted by the testimony of a witness from heaven. To the Jews he says: "Some of them ye shall kill, and crucify." Mr. Ballou says the Romans would do the killing-and not the Jews. Have you any doubt as to which of these witnesses you are to believe?

7. Again, if Mr. Ballou's exposition is correct, Christ in this text, attempted to ensnare his disciples in a bewitching temptation. Christ warned them to fear men-not the Jews-but the Romans. Solomon says: "The fear of man bringeth a snare." Did Christ exhort his followers to fear their enemies and thus cast them into the snare of the wicked one? I trow not? I cannot make these things harmonize. It is all confusion confounded to me.

8. Nor is Mr. Whittemore's explanation any more rational. He regards Christ as merely asserting the power and not the determination of God to punish the wicked after the body is killed? This is not only charging Christ with solemn trifling, but with Jesuitical duplicity. Look at the circumstances under which he made use of the warnings in the text. He was for the first time sending his disciples out to preach his gospel. They were to encounter the cruelist opposition and persecution. He frankly told them of this-that they were going forth as sheep amidst wolves. This was adapted to alarm their fears, and the danger was that they would be overawed by their murderous enemies. To bear them up and render them fearless of men, he reminded them of that punishment, which awaits the impenitent after the death of the body. "Be not

afraid of them that kill the body, but after that have no more that they can do, but I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear, fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, fear him." How solemn! How significant! How appropriate! But just attach the sense Mr. Whittemore would put upon the words of Christ, and lo! how useless and unmeaning this solemn text. Let us see how it

will sound.

"Be not afraid of them that kill the body, but after that have no more that they can do, but I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear, fear hin which after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell, yea, I say unto you fear him, for he will not do it! You need not fear that he will ever do this; he only has the power to do it. There is no danger." What puerility! What a tissue of unmeaning words! What solemn warnings where there is nothing to be feared. This explanation virtually charges Christ with hypocrisy. It makes him warn his disciples in the most solemn manner where he knew there was no danger. Who would do this but a hypocrite? Universalists sometimes tell us, that the believers in a future judgment get up "bug-bears" and "scare-crows" to play on the passions of the weak and simple; but here they virtually charge the Holy Jesus with the same hypocrisy.

Once more. Your authors attempt to get rid of the natural common-sense meaning of Luke 12: 4, 5, & Math. 10: 28, by a learned criticism upon the meaning of the word gehenna, rendered hell in this and several other texts in the New Testament. Mr. Ballou says: "The word rendered hell in our text (Math. 10: 28,) means nothing but that place of execution, where malefactors were cast alive and consumed in fire." See Book above referred to, p. 114. Now to this I briefly reply,

1. The doctrine of future retribution does not depend for its support upon the meaning of the words rendered hell. Let these words denote what they may, and the doctrine is nevertheless abundantly sustained by numerous texts and considerations, where the word hell does not occur.

2. If we should substitute the word heaven for the word hell in this and similar texts, then the grammatical construction of the passages would render it necessary to understand the word heaven as sometimes denoting in the scriptures, a place or state of punishment in the future world. To illustrate. Substitute the word heaven for hell in Math. 10: 28, and the sense of the text would not be changed. "Fear him which is able to de

stroy both soul and body in heaven." Or as it would read in Luke, "Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into heaven." You see that the word heaven substituted for that of hell, does not alter the meaning of the text. The text in such an event would impart a peculiar meaning to the word heaven. It would go to show that, in one instance, at least, the word heaven represents a state or place of punishment, where body and soul might be destroyed after the body is killed.

3. There is no authentic evidence that there was any place in or near Jerusalem in the days of Christ, called gehenna(hell) in which "malefactors were cast alive and consumed in fire." Neither the New Testament writers, nor any other ancient author mentions any such fact. Nor does it appear that Christ or any of his followers were ever threatened with any such punishment by the Jews or Romans.

In my next I shall probably bestow some attention to the scriptural import of the word gehenna. Yours as ever.

LETTER XIX.

My Dear Sir:

Agreeably to promise I now come to examine the import of those words which are rendered hell in our Bible. You are already informed, that let the import of the word hell be what it may, even if it denotes the heavenly and not the infernal world, still the doctrine of future retribution is a sentiment clearly expressed and necessarily implied, as I have proved in a multitude of passages; but as many hope they shall go to heaven because there is no future hell, it may not be unprofitable to bestow a little attention to this matter as we pass. You are probably aware that there are three words rendered hellin the New Testament, viz: gehenna, hades, and tartarus. Learned men of every age of the Church, and of every denomination, your own only excepted, have agreed that gehenna and tartarus are employed by the sacred writers to denote a place or state of punishment for the wicked in the future world.

The greek word gehenna, you know, is a word of Hebrew origin. It is derived, as the learned inform us, from two other words which signify, the valley of Hinnon. This valley was

once a pleasant and delightful place near the entrance of the east gate of Jerusaleni. At an early period in the history of idolatry among the Jews, in imitation of the pagan nations around them, they set up in this valley, a brazen image of their god Moloch. To this deity they offered human sacrifices, and, at times, immolated their own children, "causing them to pass through the fire into Moloch." The name tophet was afterwards given to this valley, a Hebrew word, which means drum, because drums were there employed to drown the cries of the burning infants. These horrid rites were totally abolished by Josiah before the Babylonish captivity. After this for a while, the filth of the city was deposited there, and a fire was kept perpetually burning, and worms were generated there in the offal; and hence arose the phrase, "Where the worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched." Now, learned theologians of all denominations agree that the name of this loathsome, fiery and wormy valley was used by the Jews in the days of Christ and the Apostles, as an emblem of the future condition and sufferings of the wicked. It is very natural that it should have been so. Words are constantly changing in their meaning. The word paradise primarily denoted nothing but a garden of pleasure; but it afterwards came to be employed to denote the felicity of the righteous in the future world. The word heaven primarily denotes the atmosphere or open space around the earth; but afterwards it acquired a very different meaning. The word villain once denoted a servant,and the Apostles are called "villains of our Lord Jesus Christ," in the first English translation of the Bible; but now the word signifies something very different, and the holy Apostles are no longer called the villains, but the servants of our Lord and Redeemer.

But, notwithstanding the united testimony of all learned men,you contend that the import of gehenna had passed through no change in the days of Christ; that this word was used by Christ in its primary sense, to denote the valley of Hinnon, where criminals were executed by burning. To this I reply,

1. This sense which you attach to the word gehenna as used in the New Testament, is without any foundation in history.There is no evidence, to my knowledge, that criminals were executed in the valley of Hinnon in the days of Christ or his Apostles. Josephus gives no such intimation nor do the New Testament writers. Nor is there the least shadow of evidence that fire for any purpose, was then kept burning, in this once dreadful valley. For all that appears to the contrary, the Valley of Hinnon was as pleasant and agreeable a spot, in it

self considered, in the days of our Saviour's ministry, as it was in the days of Abraham. The notion that a fire was kept burning here in the days of Christ, for the execution of criminals or for burning offal, has become somewhat prevalent, but it rests for proof wholly upon the assertion of a Jewish Rabbi by the name of Kimchi, who flourished in the fourteenth century.We are not satisfied with this assertion.

2. The sense which you would have us attach to the word gehenna, makes Christ utter nonsense, and falsehood, when he uses the word. Let us see. Our Saviour says: "Whosoever shall say, thou fool, shall be in danger of (gehenna) hell fire." Math. 5: 22. Now, put your construction upon the word gehenna and how will it read? Whosoever shall say, thou fool, shall be in danger of being burnt alive as a criminal in the valley of Hinnon!! Now is it so? Are those who berate and slander their neighbors, in danger of being transported to Jerusalem, and then burnt as criminals? But perhaps you will say this was designed to apply to the Jews only. But I ask what evidence have you that the Jews had any law against the sin of calling a person a fool? Can you, can all the Universalists in the world, produce one word from Jewish history, going to show that according to your construction of the word gehenna, Christ spoke the truth, when he said "Whomsoever shall say thou fool, shall be in danger of (gehenna) hell fire?

Take another passage. "And if thy right eye offend thee pluck it out and cast it from thee, for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish and not that thy whole body should be cast into (gehenna) hell; and if thy right hand offend thee cut it off and cast it from thee, for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish and not thy whole body be cast into (gehenna) hell." Math. 5: 29, 30. Mark 9: 43, 45.

How can you harmonize this passage with your sense of the word gehenna? Can you understand how a person was liable to be burnt in the valley of Hinnon, for having an offending eye or hand? Christ is here inveighing against the lascivious look; sin in the heart. The Jews had no civil laws against such sins.

Look at another passage. "Woe unto you Scribes, Pharisees, and hypocrites, for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him two-fold more the child of (gehenna) hell than yourselves." Math. 23: -15.

The Jewish proselytes were pagans (mostly resident in hea