ulative tribe." The corruptions incorporated with Christian truth, from the third to the fifth century, came in through the instrumentality of Origen, and Mosheim and other historians declare that he derived his philosophy from Plato. Among these corruptions was the doctrine of purgatorial punishment, or that sinners might escape from the punishment of hell. The very man whom Universalists are most proud to own as a defender of their faith, is more responsible for the ancient corruptions of Christianity, than any other one man. Goodrich says of him, "he was a learned man, but most unsafe guide"-he held to a "hidden sense of the scriptures, and endeavored to give this, but always at the expense of truth." My second remark is, that neither the trinity, vicarious atonement, total depravity, nor endless punishment, were introduced into the church during the dark ages. We might leave the subject just here, since Mr. Austin has not adduced the slightest testimony to prove his assertion. So far as we have any clear and satisfactory account of the doctrines of the church for the first three or four hundred years, it goes to the point that the doctrines above alluded to, were generally, not to say uniformly, embraced in the church. This fact, so far as relates to future and endless punishment, we shall notice more at large hereafter. That the trinity was a doctrine of the church in the second century, is plain from a fact stated by Mosheim, viz. "the Christian doctrines concerning the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and the two natures united in our blessed Savior, were by no means reconcilable with the tenets of the sages and doctors of Greece, who therefore endeavored to explain them in such a manner as to render them comprehensible." Here we have Greek philosophers caviling with the doctrine of the trinity-the very men whom Mr. Austin asserts brought this doctrine into the church. Another historian says-"From the writings of Justin, Clement, Theophilus, Ireneus, Tertulian and others, we have abundant evidence that the doctrine of the trinity was strongly asserted by the church in this [second] century, against the sectaries of every denomination."-(Ruter's Ecclesiastical History, page 39.) On the other hand, nothing is better supported by the united testimony of church historians, than that the peculiar notions of Origen were innovations upon the established faith of the church.

Having detained you thus long with these incidental matters, I will return again to the point at which I left the scriptural argument. My next step is, that the scriptures represent the happiness of the wicked as confined to this world, and that in this respect they have

THEIR PORTION IN THIS LIFE.

(Ps. xvii. 14.)-Here the Psalmist prays, deliver my soul, O Lord, "from men who have their portion in this life, and whose belly thou fillest with thy hid treasure." This is that class of

men whom Job (xxi. 14,) represents as saying to God, " depart from us, for we desire not the knowledge of thy ways. What is the Almighty, that we should serve him? and what profit should we have, if we pray unto him?" In most cases they live long, become "mighty in power:" they succeed in every earthly undertaking, and their seed is established in their sight.-(verse 8.) "They spend their days in wealth, and in a moment go down to the grave." He moreover says, "the rod of God is not upon them," that is, they are not punished in this life, nor even afficted as other men. They have chosen the world for their PORTION, and God allows them to have their choice. But when they die, "their expectation perisheth."

David describes the same class of men, as the "ungodly who prosper in the world: they increase in riches." He says, "they are not in trouble as other men, neither are they plagued like other men." In the 18th verse of 73d Psalm, he describes their "end." "Surely thou didst set them in slippery places, thou castedst them down to destruction. How are they brought into desolation as in a moment! they are utterly consumed with terrors." St. Paul (Phil. iii. 19,) describes a similar class of men, "whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things." This same class of persons is described by our Lord in the parable of the rich man, who enlarged his barns that he might have room to bestow his goods. "Thou fool, this night shall thy soul be required of thee." The concluding remark is very significant. "So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, [seeks his portion here] and is not rich towards God."-(Luke xii. 20.) This scriptural view of those who have their portion in this life, is farther illustrated in the account our Lord gives of the rich man and Lazarus. The rich man is described as "faring sumptuously every day." He was "clothed in purple and fine linen." In his "life-time he had his good things; his portion was in this world. He chose this as his supreme good; hence, when called to leave it, he left his only source of enjoyment, "and in hell he lifted up his eyes, being in torment." We need not multiply examples under this head. The plain import of all this is, that those who make worldly wealth and sinful pleasure their pursuit and chief good, forgetting God, and neglecting and contemning religious obligations, shall have no portion of joy or happiness beyond that state of existence in which their chosen portion is found. Here again, the righteous and wicked are brought in direct contrast. The righteous are every where represented as being introduced at death to a state of happiness, and the enjoyment of a glorious reward; while the wicked not only has no intimation of happiness hereafter, but it is said of him, he is "driven away in his wickedness"-" is consumed with terrors"-"goeth down into destruction"-"his expectation perisheth"-"his hope is cut off!!!"

Another point I make in this argument is, that there is revealed to us in the scriptures

A PLACE OF PUNISHMENT IN THE FUTURE WORLD.

The terms employed in the holy scriptures to designate the place of future punishment, are Sheol, Hades, Gehenna and Tartarus. The term sheol, which is Hebrew, is always translated hades in the Septuagint, which is a Greek version of the Old Testament. By these two words the ancients describe the state of the dead, and the scriptures, the spirit world. They are not in their proper sense used to describe the grave, but the unseen and invisible world. Plato described Hades as the invisible world, and Plutarch as a dark place where one sees nothing. According to the notions of the Jews, says Kitto, sheol or hades was a vast receptacle where the souls of the dead existed in a separate state until the resurrection of their bodies. The region of the blessed during this interval, or the inferior paradise, they supposed to be in the upper part of this receptacie; while beneath was the abyss or gehenna (tartarus) in which the souls of the wicked were subjected to punishment."

66

Stewart says, (Essay on Future Punishment,) "while the Old Testament employs sheol, in most places, to designate the grave, the region of the dead, the place of departed spirits, it employs it also, in some cases, to designate along with this idea, the adjunct one of the place of misery, place of punishment, region of woe." "In this respect, says Watson, (Theological Dictionary,) it accords fully with the New Testament use of hades. For though hades signifies the grave, and often the invisible region of separate spirits, without reference to their condition, yet, in Luke xvi. 23, in hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment," it is clearly used for a place and condition of misery."

The term Gehenna, by common consent, signifies the "Valley of Hinnom," a place near Jerusalem where children were cruelly sacrificed by fire to Moloch, the idol of the Ammonites. As in process of time this place came to be considered an emblem of hell, the term gehenna is frequently employed in the New Testament to designate the place of punishment reserved for the wicked in a future state.

The word Tartarus, from the Greek "tartaros," is but once used in the New Testament.--(2 Pet. ii. 4.) It is borrowed from the ancients, who used it in a sense corresponding pretty nearly to the signification of hades, and is applied by St. Peter to that state of darkness and misery in which the angels that sinned are reserved unto the judgment of the great day." That both sheol and hades are employed in the scriptures to designate the grave, is a fact which no one disputes; hence Mr. Austin need not employ argument to prove it. The question which I now discuss, is, whether these words, as well as gehenna, are used with refer

ence to a place of future punishment. I say they are, and now proceed to adduce the proof.

Psalms ix. 17.-"The wicked shall be turned into hell (sheo,) and all the nations that forget God." Neither conscience, nor a state of punishment in this life, nor the grave, can be consistently understood here as the signification of the word sheol. The righteous go into the grave as well as the wicked, and the wicked no more than the righteous. There will be neither force nor appropriateness in the declaration, if we understand it to relate to the grave.

Prov. xv. 24. "The way of life is above to the wise, that he may depart from hell beneath." Here, sheol is used in such a Connection, that it would destroy the antithesis, and do violence to the construction and obvious sense of the whole passage, to understand hell to mean the grave. (Prov. v. 5.)-"Her feet go down to death, her steps take hold on hell." On this Clarke remarks, "First the death of the body, then the damnation of the soul." (Prov. ix. 18.)-" But he knoweth not that the dead are there; that her guests are in the depths of hell," (sheol.) Some of the most eminent Biblical scholars, among whom, if I recollect right, Dr. Campbell may be classed, render the term dead, ghosts. He knoweth not that the ghosts are there, that her guests are in the depths of (sheol,) hell. This rendering seems required by the sense of the passage. To suppose it to refer to the dead bodies only of those who had visited her haunt of vice, would weaken the force, and be inconsistent with the design of the passage, which is to deter from vice, by a consideration of its moral results. But allow the passage to stand as it does, and sheol must be understood as applied to a place of future woe.

Prov. xxiii. 14.-" Thou shalt beat him with a rod, and shalt deliver his soul from (sheol) hell." The preceding verse says, "if thou beat him with the rod, he shall not die." This verse explains the meaning of the other, and decides the application of sheol, to a place and state of punishment. The passage teaches the moral influence of chastisement in leading to reformation and saving the soul from perdition. No one ever thought of saving the body from dissolution, by beating it with a rod. Though other passages might be adduced, these examples from the Old Testament must suffice. With the candid they will have influence; others, we scarcely hope to convince.

Let us now inquire into the application of kudes and gehenna, as employed in the New Testament.

"In the New Testament, (зays Kitto) the word hades is used in much the same sense as sheol in the Old, only, that in a less proportion of cases, can it be construed to signify "the grave." There are still, however, instances in which it is used in this sense, as in (Acts ii. 31.) (1 Cor. xv. 55); but in general, the

hades of the New Testament, appears to be no other than the world of future punishments." The following are examples. Matt. xi. 23." And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained un.il this day" This terrible declaration of our Lord embraces two particulars, and the fact that one of them has been fulfilled in the most signal manner, must settle the question as to the other. The first relates to temporal destruction, which this city experienced during the wars between the Jews and Romans; the other relates to that future perdition to which the Sodomites were doomed. Hence, the next verse says, " it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee." The punishment and judgment here referred to, did not take place in this life, for two reasons. 1. The city of Sodom, as to its temporal destruction, had already been judged and punished. 2. The temporal destruction of Capernaum was more tolerable than that of Sodom. The meaning of the passags is, that in the decisions of the day of final judgment, and the punishments that shall follow, the inhabitants of Capernaum will be deemed more guilty, and deserving of greater punishment, than those of Sodom. And Jude 7th says, they are set forth an example, "sufering the vengeance of eternal fire." It is perfectly obvious, that the word hades, in the above passage, reveals a place and state of future punishment. Matt. xvi. 18.-"On this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell [hades] shall not prevail against it." The Latin word by which the Greek is translated here is inferi," "the infernal shades," or spirits who inhabit the infernal regions. According to Jewish custom, the term gate was used as expressive of wisdom, counsel and strength. In this case it represents the machinations and powers of the Devil and his angels, whose centre of influence is hades, and whose character and conduct must ever doom them to the misery of the lost.

Luke xvi. 23.—“ In hell [hades] he lifted up his eyes, being in torment." Whether the account of the rich man and Lazarus be a parable or a real history, need not be mooted here, since it can make no difference in the force of the argument. If it be a history, it is what has been-if it be a parable, it is what may be ; whether it be or be not a parable, the doctrine taught by it is the same-there is a place of punishment in the future state. To suppose this to be the grave in which the dead body of this man was faid, would outrage common sense, and can only be sustained by a mode of interpretation of the most wild and visionary character -one that would only be adopted by those who have resolved to maintain a particular theory at all hazards. The description of this man in hades, makes him conscious of unhappiness, and of