admitted by almost common consent, that they are not to be annihilated. Indeed, for a universalist to resort to the doctrine of annihilation, to defend himself against the arguments in favor of future or endless punishment, drawn from those scriptures which threaten the wicked with destruction, is not only an entire abandonment of their cause, but also betrays a want of honesty, by denouncing, when on the defense, the very premises they occupy themselves when they argue directly in support of their own theory. That the wicked are threatened with destruction cannot be denied; hence, when universalists urge that all will be saved, they argue on the ground that the wicked may be destroyed and saved too; and if this be true it is equally clear that they can be also destroyed and endlessly punished: hence, when they turn in defence and assert that if the wicked are destroyed, they must be annihilated, and, therefore cannot be punished endlessly, they contradict their own creed, and manifest a disregard for correct principles of argumentation.

We trust we have now removed every objection to the application of the word gehenna, drawn from its derivation and primitive use.

But, Mr. Morse says: "The word gehenna is found in the New Testament twelve times only." This circumstance can certainly form no objection to its application to future or endless punishment in the minds of those who have any confidence in the divine inspiration of the scriptures. If it were found in but one text, and that text was given by the inspiration of God, that is sufficient. But suppose the unfrequent use of this word to be an objection to its application to a future hell, and the argument may be employed with equal force against Mr. M's exposition of the term. If, because the word gehenna is used but twelve times in the New Testament, it cannot relate to a future hell, then, for the same reason it cannot have been the name in common use to designate a place near Jerusalem where a fire was kept burning to consume the filth of the city, and where criminals were executed, which must be the case to suppose that Christ referred to this place when he threatened the wicked with the damnation of hell. If, indeed, there is any force in this objection, it will annihilate some of the most prominent arguments in fa

vour of universalism. The word "restitution," which is the nucleus of universalism, is found but once in the New Testament. Acts iii. 21. There is but one text in all the Bible that says God will have all men to be saved." 1 Tim. ii. 4. But once is it said that God" worketh all things after the counsel of his own will." Eph. i. 11. But once in all the scriptures does God say "his counsel shall stand." Isa. xlvi. 10. And yet universalists declaim over these expressions with as much confidence as though they occurred as often as the wicked are threatened with the damnation of hell, with being cast into hell, with hell fire, &c. But Mr. M. says that the word gehenna "was always addressed to the Jews. Nothing is said of gehenna to the gentiles." What bearing this can have on the question at issue, is not easy to conceive. It may prove this: that the authors of the scriptures used such words as were understood, and in common use among those whom they addressed. As this word was peculiar to the Jews, it is not a marvellous circumstance that its use should be restricted to them, by men who spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, whether it mean the valley of Hinnom, or eternal torment in the future world.

We have now done with the four words in the original language, redered hell in the English translation of the scriptures; and whether or not we have proved that there is a place of punishment in the future world, called hell, and answered and removed the objections founded on the primitive use and significations of the original words, we leave the candid reader to judge. We only have to remark in conclusion, on this subject, that if we have sustained our position and proved the existence of a place called hell, a place of punishment, where the wicked receive the reward of their doings, the question of future punishment is settled. If there is a hell, in the future world, and if the wicked are punished in hell, as we think we have proved, then it is clear that the wicked will be punished in the future world, or after death.

VIII. The punishment of the wicked is so connected with the happiness of the righteous, in point of time, as to prove its existence to be in a future state. If it can be shown that the threatenings of the gospel are fulfilled in the punishment

of the wicked, at the same time that its promises are fulfilled in the salvation of the righteous, it must follow that such threatenings extend to the future state. Matt. xiii. 41-43. "The Son of Man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them that do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire; there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth: then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father." The punishment of the wicked, and the glory of the righteous are both referred to in this text as existing at the same time. Then shall the righteous shine: then, at the same time in which those that do iniquity shall be cast into a furnace of fire and wail and gnash their teeth. If the punishment here spoken of is confined to this world, then the shining of the righteous in the kingdom of their Father must be confined to this world also. On the other hand if the righteous are to shine in the kingdom of their father in the future world; if, to them, "the glory remains when the light, (of this life) fades away," then the workers of iniquity will be punished and wail and gnash their teeth in a future world. That this whole subject refers to a future world is evident from Christ's own exposition of it. In relation to the same event he says, Matt. xiii. 38, 39, 40, "the field is the world." Again, "the harvest is the end of the world." And again, "So shall it be in the end of the world." It is, then, at the end of the world that the wicked are to be cast into a furnace of fire, and the righteous shine in the kingdom of their Father. It is true that universalists attempt to evade the force of all this by equivocating upon the Greek word aion, which is here rendered world; translating it dispensation, or age, and thereby referring the whole to the overthrow of the Jews and the destruction of their temple, and end of the Mosaic dipensation. As this word will hereafter be introduced on another question, we shall spare ourselves and the reader the trouble of original criticism in this place; we will attempt to show, however, in plain English that the common translation, "end of the world," best accords with the connection. The tares and wheat, by which we are to understand the children of the wicked one, and the children of the kingdom, are represented as growing together until the time of the har

vest, verses 28, 29, 30. "Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay, lest while ye gather up the tares ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and in time of harvest I will say to the reapers, gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn." Now all this is inapplicable to the destruction of Jerusalem for the following reasons:

1. At the time of harvest the angels are to be sent forth as reapers, to collect both the bad and the good, verse 41. "The Son of Man shall send forth his angels and they shall gather out of his kingdom," &c. Now, we ask, what angels were sent forth as reapers at the destruction of Jerusalem? It could not have been the Romans; for they scattered and dispersed instead of gathering together, especially, so far as the children of the kingdom, or the wheat, was concerned; for the disciples all fled at the approach of the Roman army. Nor could the Apostles have been intended by the gathering angels or reapers, for they were of the wheat; and hence, a part of that which was to be gathered.

2. The righteous, figured by the wheat, are represented as being gathered by the same angels or reapers by whom the tares are gathered, which is false if the gathering of the tares represent the punishment of the Jews by the Romans; for it would be too absurd to be maintained for a moment, to suppose that the Romans collected all the christians and secured them beyond the reach of the ruins of the siege.

3. The wicked are represented as being first gathered"gather ye together first the tares;" which cannot be true if the harvest of the wheat refers to the preservation of the disciples from the ruin that came upon the Jews; for the disciples first fled and were all on the other side of Jordan before Jerusalem was closely encompassed.

4. Both the tares and the wheat are represented as being collected during the same harvest. "Gather ye together first the tares," &c. "but gather the wheat into my barn." Now, if the gathering and burning of the tares represent the destruction of the Jews, there is no event connected in point of time, which answers to the gathering of the wheat into the barn. It will not answer to say that the preserva

tion of the disciples constituted the harvest of the wheat; for such were the circumstances of this event as to render it altogether improperly represented by a harvest, in which the full ripe wheat is gathered into the barn, safe from the plundering herd and secure from the wasting storm. A harvest would better represent the gathering home of the saints into the garner of heaven, than the flight of the christians from the destruction of Jerusalem, in which they were turned out of their houses, exposed to the storm, and endured cold and hunger, and almost every evil but death itself; yea, much more than many suffered who lost their lives in the siege, such as were smitten dead at an early period, if, as their bodies fell, their souls leaped from the scene of action and mounted to the upper and better world. We think then that it is clear that this subject relates to a final retribution; and if so, it is equally evident, that when the righteous shall be gathered home to heaven, and shine in the kingdom of their father, the wicked will, at the same time be punished for their sins, and wail and gnash their teeth; they will therefore be punished in a future state.

Matt. viii. 11, 12. "I say unto you that many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven, but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." By "the children of the kingdom," in this text, we understand the Jews, who rejected the Saviour, "to whom pertaineth the promises, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came." By those who are said to come from the east and west, we undertand the Gentiles who believe the gospel and are saved. Now we ask, do they come from the east and west and sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob in this life? This no one can pretend is the case, unless it be in some visionary or ideal sense. Will the righteous then come from the east and west, and sit down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in a future state? This no one can doubt, who believes in the future happiness of any portion of the human family; and if so, it is in a future state that the unbelieving Jews will be cast out, and weep and gnash their teeth.

Luke xiii. 28. There shall be weeping and gnashing of