truth of his testimony; nor could any other people since have known whether Moses spoke the truth or not. We have no account either sacred or profane, that gives any information of the situation of this company after the earth swallowed them up. If they have been in a state of torment ever since, that torment has been no terror to the living, because the living have known nothing of it. And it is certain, that those who advert to the case of Korah and his company, as an instance proving the doctrine of a future state of misery, do this thing on no higher authority than human tradition.

The destruction of the old world by the flood, is another event, on which, our preachers of punishment in a future state, depend for proof of their terrific doctrine. And such is the habit of thinking, with pious and religious people, on this subject, that whenever they think of the drowning of the inhabitants of the old world, their minds are carried directly to the idea of the awful state of suffering which those people have been in ever since. They never presume to call the matter in question. They never think of asking whether there be any proof of this horrible notion. They take it altogether on tradition, without taking the trouble ever to read the account to see what is said respecting it. Yet it is worthy of notice, that these very people, thus led away with superstition, will wonder, and even laugh at the absurd superstitions of other people, in matters of no consequence in comparison with this which we have now called in question. For instance, what a world of contention there has been between Roman Catholics and Protestants, on the question respecting transubstantiation, and what is termed the real presence. Protestants will even ridicule the superstition of their opponents on this subject; but after all, have they a thousandth part of the evidence to prove that the inhabitants of the old world are in a state of endless misery, as the Catholics have to prove the real presence? No, surely they have not. When Jesus took bread and brake it, he said; "This is my body." Protestants say, that

Jesus spake figuratively; but the Catholics deny this, and say, he meant as he said. Now what we ask is this, is there in all the account which we have of the destruction of the old world, any thing so much in favor of the misery of the people after death, as the words of Christ are in favor of the catholic sentiment? The fact is, there is nothing said on the subject. There is no intimation that the inhabitants who were drowned by the flocd were made miserable at all in a future state. Thus Protestants, as well as the old Pharisees, "strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel."

In the last place, we will notice the case of Judas, who betrayed Jesus. Because Jesus said; "It had been good for that man if he had not been born," it is now contended that Judas is in a state of misery from which there is no deliverance. But did the divine teacher say any thing on the subject of the state of existence that Judas would be in after this life? No, he surely did not. How then can his words prove what they say nothing of?

Let us ask the following question; Is it possible to prove that Judas now has any existence, from the words of Jesus, which we have quoted? "It had been good for that man if he had not been born." Do these words prove that Judas is now in existence? Surely no one will even pretend this. But it is beyond all scruple, that a sentence which does not prove that a man exists at a given time, cannot prove that he is miserable or happy at the same given time.

But it is said, if Judas exists, and if he should be made happy in the eternal world, the words of Jesus. are not true, because the existence of Judas will be a blessing. This we pronounce loose and fallacious reasoning, such as is never used to prove any thing, except the doctrine of a future or endless misery. In all matters appertaining to men's interest, in this life, better proof is required than what is here relied on, to prove a state of endless torment. We even venture to say, that there could not be found a jury of twelve men who would award property to the amount of ten dollars to a man, who could not prove his claim to it

by evidence more to his case. We may suppose that Jesus meant, that it would have been good for Judas, if his lot had been appointed with those who never saw the light; or we may suppose that he meant, it would have been good for Judas if he had not been born until after that period of time; or we may suppose that Jesus meant, it would have been good for Judas if he had not at that time been born of the spirit of truth; for Peter says of those that fall away, "It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandments delivered unto them." Either of these suppositions is within the possible meaning of the words of Jesus; but the supposition that Jesus meant, that it would have been good for Judas not to have had an existence, is not within the possible meaning of his words; for if he had not existed, he could have received no good in any way. Whoever will carefully read what Job says concerning his being born, in his 3d chapter, and likewise what Jeremiah says of his own birth in his 20th chapter, will surely find as much proof of the misery of these men in another world, as they can find in the words of Jesus respecting the misery of Judas in the future state.

According to the words of Jesus in the 19th of Matthew, Judas had followed him in the regeneration. And we learn by the account we have in the 10th chapter, that Judas, as well as the rest of the twelve Apostles, was endowed with power to heal the sick, to cleanse lepers, to raise the dead, and to cast out devils; he was also commissioned to preach the gospel. In the labors of this miraculous ministry, we have no account that Judas was not as faithful and as successful as the rest of the twelve. But he was a fallible man like the rest; satan entered into him, and he committed one act that was base in the extreme; he betrayed his Master. Peter also denied him, and confirmed his denial with oaths. Judas was called a devil, and Peter was called satan. Our tradition has

placed Judas in hell, in the eternal world, and Peter in heaven.

The exclamation that Judas made when he repented and brought back the money (0 that all, who profess to repent, would do likewise,) to the chief priests is worthy of observation: "I have sinned, in that I have betrayed the innocent blood."-This shows the high estimation in which this unhappy man held innocence. It seems that the pain of his heart was occasioned by his having betrayed the innocent.

Now if he had had no love nor regard for innocence, but if entire opposition to all good had possessed his heart, he surely would not have repented and brought back the money; he would not have exclaimed, "I have sinned, in that I have betrayed the innocent blood."

My friends, the scriptures give no account that this man was miserable in another state; but the distress his soul was in, in consequence of having betrayed the innocent Jesus, should be a solemn warning to every one of us, that we never violate our duty to the innocent.

To conclude: God took away the Sodomites, Pharaoh and his host, Korah and his company, the inhabitants of the old world, Judas who betrayed his Master, and many others, as he saw good. His designs are all the designs of goodness. And if the Holy Ghost had intended to inform us that all those people were miserable in the invisible world, we should have found it so recorded in the faithful testimony. But we have reason to be thankful, and to praise the name of him, who gave himself a ransom for all, who is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. We have great consolation in believing, that, "as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." In opposition to the doctrine of future, endless misery, we present the unchangeable goodness of that God, who "is good unto all, and whose tender mercies are over all his works."

LECTURE XXI.

VEXATION OF FALSE RELIGION.

ISAIAH xxviii. last of 19.

"And it shall be a vexation only to understand the report."

THE prophet, in this chapter, contemplates the house of Israel in a state of great seeming security, into which they had introduced themselves, by making a covenant with death, and an agreement with hell, and by preparing for themselves a refuge of lies.

As is perfectly natural with those, who, by their own wisdom, frame for themselves partial systems, this people exulted in their confidence, and raised their expectations of seeing the destructions and calamities, from which they fancied themselves secure, fall like an overflowing scourge on those who had neglected to enter into their covenant, to avail themselves of their agreement, and to take shelter in their refuge.

According to their confidence and expectation they said; "We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing Scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us; for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves."

Thus an overflowing scourge was expected; but it was to come on others, they were safe. They had made due preparations for security, and had nothing to anticipate but their own safety and the destruction of others, who had neglected to get an interest in their means of defence.

But the wisdom of man is foolishness with God. When he thinks himself secure, and is looking out for the destruction of others, he is frequently subjected to