is introduced to apply the moral of the parable, and the amount of his preaching is simply this. When alive you possessed what you considered the greatest good, which from its very nature you could not bring with you into the next existence. Lazarus indeed suffered severely while on earth, but his sufferings were of such a nature that death terminated them. Now you are necessarily miserable, because you have lost the wealth in which you trusted. He is happy because he has escaped from those bodily sufferings which belong to earth. The rich man is then made to express a tender concern for his brothers who were following his example; and he wishes to have Lazarus sent to warn them of their folly and wickedness. He is answered that if they will not keep the moral law of the Old Testament, it would hardly profit them to hear a messenger from the dead. How simple, how clear, how beautiful the instruction of our Saviour." Page 217.

Yes, we say, be it a parable. Accuse us not of confining it to a literal construction. But we say it is not a riddle, it is a parable, a parable too which meant something-which could be understood-which recognized not only a future existence, but a state of happiness and misery there. No parable could be invented, and expressed in words that would teach the doctrine more positively or more certainly. We are not obliged to suppose our Saviour confirmed all the particularities of the jewish belief about the future state: but we are obliged to suppose he confirmed as much as is positively implied in his language. That one happy state, and another state of misery in the future life, are recognized by him in this parable, as well as generally, is so certain as to admit of no dispute except with those, who will not assent to the force of language, nor bow to the most positive declarations of Scripture. Not a single man would ever give this parable a different sense from this, were it not for the purpose of getting it out of his way.-What vast numbers of passages have been so explained, as to make them entirely useless and frivolous, if not nonsensical and absurd, for the sole purpose of getting them out of the way of a creed!

SECTION IX.

The duration of future misery, and the Greek adjective AIONIOS, considered.

1. Before we refer to particular texts, it seems necessary to answer some cavils against the perpetuity of future punishment. It is said, sin cannot be infinite; and consequently punishment cannot be infinite: and of course cannot be endless. Whatever may be thought by some, the author of this volume does not conceive sin to be infinite. Nothing can be infinite, which admits of degrees, and sins vary in enormity so much that no two are scarcely alike, or equally criminal. Neither does the writer conceive punishment to be infinite. But that may be endless which is not infinite. Man is supposed to have an endless existence; but none would say that man's existence is infinite.

It will be said that man's sins are not endless any more than they are infinite. No: but they certainly will be endless unless he reforms. The more corrupt an individual becomes, the greater effort becomes necessary to reform him. We have seen the young and tender, upon being convicted of an offence, easily softened and broken into contrition, when old and experienced villains become hardened and callous in iniquity. The more they sin, the farther they are from penitence; the stronger their propensities, the more ungovernable their passions, and the more incurable their habits. The drunkard resolves by and by to reform; he breaks the resolution, and re-resolves; but every indulgence makes reformation one degree more difficult, and leaves him one degree less of moral courage and strength of resolution, than he had before, so that he is constantly removing farther and farther from the probability of reformation. He gets at last so far that he has not resolution enough to reform. It may be said of such that

they cannot reform. Yet God permits them to suffer the loss of wealth, of reputation, and health, and to be involved in all the complicated afflictions attendant on such a course, as much as if they retained the control of their appetites and resolutions. So with the voluptuary, the gamster, the debauche, and all the victims of dissipation and criminality. Notwithstanding they have lost their virtuous resolutions, become dead to moral feelings, and totally incapacitated to relish the sober charms of virtuous and honourable life, God permits them to suffer the natural consequences of their condition whatever it may be. So the wicked may become so hardened and stupified in sin, when they enter upon another state of being, as to have no power to reformno moral sense-no relish for piety-and no affinity of feeling for any thing that is lovely, amiable, or good. All the dormant sources of virtuous resolution-all the finer feelings of humanity-all the slumbering springs of moral vitality, given at their birth, may be dried up, benumed, and enchained, in the lethal powers of moral death. So that they have no moral ability-no taste, wish, or capacity to reform. But every element of their nature-every propensity and feeling may be to execrate the Author of their being, and to abhor and detest whatever is good. And yet God may suffer them to be as unhappy as they are sinful; and in so doing, he would be pursuing the same principle of government that we have seen occasionaly indicated in this world. Have we not seen the murderer abandoned to all the miseries of his condition, notwithstanding the murder was the result of an almost total abandonment of all moral principle? Have we not seen the drunkard, in a delirium of intoxication, when he had no self control, commit deeds of horrour for which he is made accountable, and for which he suffers? Those principles that are good enough for the Deity to act upon now, may be good enough for him to adhere to at any other time, and at all other times. We see the wicked here plunging into crime deeper and deeper;

aud suffering in the necessary consequences of their vices; and only made more desperate and unyielding and infatuated by all their misfortunes and miseries. Why may it not be so with some in another state of conscious being? Reason cannot prove the contrary-Philosophy cannot dispute it. Let us then examine the only authority on this subject -the Bible.

2. It is necessary here to examine into the true and proper import of the word aionion, an epithet used in the Greek Testament to denote the duration of rewards and punishments, or the happiness of heaven and the misery of hell. We have had a vast deal of universalist criticism and learn

ing on this word. And the author used verily to believe, that the word literally signified lasting, or as universalists generally define it, age-lasting. The reason he thought so, was, that he had only read universalist authors on the word, and thought them infallible on such subjects. We have taken pains to examine the subject so far as was pɔssible; and will give a candid and conscientious account of it; and the more so, because many have not an opportunity to examine it for themselves.

The Greek word aionion is an adjective, which is derived from the noun aion, which noun is itself derived from aei, (always,) and own, (being,) literally signifying, always being. Parkhurst's first definition is, "Both in the singular and plural, it signifies Eternity, whether past or to come." This, the learned author gives, as the literal meaning of the word as we might suppose from its derivation and root. But all the learned know, that Greek words, by a latitude of use among the ancients, were occasionally used in a sense differing a little from their original meaning-in a sense a little restrained or enlarged, when they become significant of a variety of ideas; but in such cases, the first or original meaning is the true one generally, and always, except where the connexion and subject show the contrary. Parkhurst goes on, and says in the second sense, it denotes, “the du

ration of this world." In the third place he quotes some cases where it means "the ages of the world." In the fourth place," this present life, this world." In the fifth place, "the world to come, the next life." And sixth, “an age, period, or periodical dispensation of divine providence." So much for the noun aion, which we shall call up again in due time; and from which the adjective aionion is derived, which is prefixed to future punishment and future happiness; and is rendered in our English Testament everlasting and eternal. Universalist criticks have condemned the translation, and defined the word to signify agelasting instead of eternal; not because aion, from which it is derived, primarily signifies an age-not because its common and first meaning is age; nor its second; nor its third; nor its fourth; nor indeed its fifth; but its sixth! Aion has been used, by a great latitude of expression, to signify an age; hence, they say aionion must mean, literally, age-lasting! Or as some would make it out, it has no meaning at all: for they say "it means more or less, without any definite signification." We might as well have such a word translated in the Testament thus, "any thing that will best comport with your theory"! But why do not those erudite criticks tell their readers, that aion, in its primary and literal sense, is eternity, and that aionion being derived from it, in its primary and literal sense, is eternal? For this plain reason, it would not suit their theory! This is the only

reason.

66

Parkhurst defines the word aionios in its first and literal sense, to mean, " Eternal, having neither beginning nor end. In its second sense, "Eternal, without end." In its third, he quotes a text in Jude, verse 7, where it is applied to the fire which destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah; but thinks it is there used figuratively, as an emblem of the future eternal perdition of the wicked. The Lexicon gives a few other instances, in which the word is used figuratively without implying endless duration. Parkhurst's Lexicon is sus