come into the world only to leave it again—and life, in philosophical strictness of speech, in reality to begin, where it appears to end.

The question, however, of the existence, and of the locality of Hades, resolves itself ultimately into the question of the reality, and of the locality of what is called the intermediate state. In one sense of these terms, there may be no difference of opinion among Christians of all denominations, with respect to the reality of such a state; for all Christians who agree in the belief of a resurrection to come, must agree also in the admission of some interval between every man's dying and every man's rising again—which so far as he was concerned, might be called in one sense the intermediate state. In the estimation of those Christians, however, who deny that a certain individual soul is any thing distinct from a certain individual body; or without maintaining such an hypothesis as that, are still of opinion that a given individual soul, though essentially distinct from a given individual body, loses all sense of its being by the act of dying, and recovers it only by the act of rising again, the intermediate state is little better than an empty name. But in the sound and orthodox meaning of the terms, the intermediate state is the state of the soul, in her condition of disunion from the body, and until her reunion to it; a condition, not simply a mere lapse or transition of time of such and such an extent, but a life, or positive existence of one kind or another, for the same length of time.

We know that the soul was not yet united to the body, before it was born; and we have reason to believe that it is no longer united to it, after it is dead:

and we have reason to believe that it will some time be united to it again. We know, moreover, that it lived, for the period of its union with the body, in the strictest sense of the term; and scripture has taught us to believe that it lives, for the period of its disunion from the body, in the strictest sense of the term also. This state of temporary disunion from the body, without any interruption in the essential vitality of the soul, I call the intermediate state. The point where it begins is consequently the moment of the individual's death; the point where it ends is that of his rising again: the former of which experience shews us to be perpetually varying, the latter we have the assurance of scripture, will be one and the same to all, or to great part of the dead at once: to all, if there be but one common or general resurrection, to a part at once, on two several occasions, if there be a double resurrection of the dead.

Assuming, then, the fact of an intermediate state, understood in this sense-all mankind must have more or less the same personal interest in it, who are destined to die, and to continue for a greater or a longer time in a state of death; and their interest in this state will be consequently greater or less, in proportion to the greater or less duration of the state itself, as beginning from the time of their death: but this interest can be absolutely nothing to any part of mankind, except those who may be destined never to die, (as some perhaps may be,) or not to continue for any time however short, in the state of death (which is perhaps not so probable). In the mean time, this intermediate state must be transacted in a proper locality, and after a proper manner, as

well as by a proper subject, who is capable of existing both in that locality, and after that manner. The precise mode of this subsistence may be beyond the reach of our discovery at present-both from the nature of the case, and because scripture or revelation may have thrown no light upon it; but the precise locality of the subsistence may perhaps admit of being ascertained, if not from the nature of the case, yet by the help of the testimony of scripture, which may have given us the means of investigating and determining it.

The sense in which I propose to use the word Hades, through the whole of the ensuing discussion, unless where the contrary is specified, is that of the supposed receptacle of the souls of men after death; in which general sense, we have the authority of our Saviour for the use of the term; as I shall have occasion to shew elsewhere. The two points which I have chiefly in view to determine, if possible, concerning it, are, first, the existence of such a receptacle, somewhere or other; and secondly, its locality.

And with respect to the proper method of the discussion-it appears to me the only safe and satisfactory course of proceeding on questions like these, to treat each of the above points, and any others that may be connected with them, purely as questions of fact; to be decided like every question of that description, by competent testimony; which testimony, in a case like the present, can be nothing but the testimony of inspiration, or the revealed word of God. Without entering, therefore, into speculative or metaphysical discussions, the tendency

of which might be to shew the individual distinctness of the soul from the body, the immateriality of the one, as contradistinguished to the materiality of the other, the probability that the soul survives the dissolution of the corporeal frame, that it retains its consciousness, and the other powers and capacities of its proper nature, after death as much as before; I shall confine myself solely to this one consideration, What scriptural assurance we have to believe in the existence of an appropriate habitation for the soul after death? by what name it is to be called? and where, or in what region of space, in all probability, it is situated?

Upon the decision of such questions as these, I shall appeal indifferently either to the Old or the New Testament as the occasion may require; assuming only that the testimony of either is to be received on the ground of the deference due to the ipse dixit of a competent authority, understood according to the plain, grammatical, and unsophisticated construction of the language in which it is conveyed. The doctrine of a supposed accommodation in the words of scripture, on such and such points, to certain preconceptions or prejudices of men themselves—to certain popular or current opinions of the time-or the like; I utterly disclaim and repudiate, as subversive of the authority of scripture, and inconsistent with the truth and simplicity of revelation, under all circumstances. Besides which objections, the nature of the present questions is such, that, supposing the hypothesis of an accommodation to preexisting opinions, even in the language of revelation, to be admissible in other instances, it would not be so in this; because there

could be no preconceived opinions on points like these, not derived from revelation itself. Without information communicated mediately or immediately, from some other quarter, what could mankind have known respecting the existence and mode of disposal of the human soul after death-respecting the intermediate state, as the state which immediately succeeds to life, but continues only until the resurrection-respecting the provision of a proper habitation for the disembodied soul-the locality of that habitation-or the like? That opinions have been current upon such subjects among all nations, from the most remote antiquity-and opinions remarkably uniform, and consistent with each other— opinions too, not very different from the truths which revelation itself has made known on the same points -it would be absurd to deny, against the evidence of the fact but it would be just as difficult to prove that they were notions and ideas, struck out by mankind originally for themselves.

I shall begin the discussion, with stating a number of propositions, each of them to be supported by the necessary scriptural proof in its order; the effect of which will be to bring the proposed inquiry within a narrower and narrower compass, until it terminates in the desired result at last. For example, with a view to the proof of the first of our general assumptions, that there is some such place as Hades, understood in the sense explained above; though I should not think it necessary to premise the scriptural proofs of a point so plain, upon scriptural testimony, as this, that men have souls as well