flict no punishment, but that of casting the whole body into hell the world of woe? But,

2d, What does Gehenna in this passage mean? It is here used twice, but without the word fire being added. It is no doubt understood, however, from verse 22, noticed above, to which I here refer. Our Lord's warning here is more alarming, for he says twice, "And not that thy whole body should be cast into hell, (Gehenna)." But to understand him as meaning, that their whole body should be cast into a place of endless misery, is inadmissible. This sense of the term is entirely assumed, for nothing in the text or its context, leads to such a sense. But it does not accord with the facts of the case; for an instance was never known, of an individual having his whole body, or soul and body, cast into a place of endless misery. This is not done surely at any man's death, as every sexton in the world can testify. And to say, it shall be done at the resurrection of the dead, is not only an unsupported assertion, but is contrary to all the texts which speak of the resurrection. It does not even accord with modern preaching. What preacher tells his audience, that their whole bodies are to be cast into hell, the world of woe? If it is to be done at the resurrection, then immortal, incorruptible bodies, are to be cast into this place of endless misery. Besides, Christians are in great danger of this, for be it remembered, Christ was not speaking here to wicked people, but to his own disciples. But are modern Christians much alarmed, that their whole body is to be cast into endless misery? But, let us understand our Lord here, using Gehenna as Jeremiah did, as a source of imagery to describe the punishment God was about to inflict on the Jewish nation, and all is plain and consistant. When it came upon them, there was even a literal casting into the valley of Hinnom. Did not Jeremiah say, the valley of Hinnom was to be to the Jews the valley of slaughter; and that they should bury in

Tophet, till there was no place. And does not Josephus declare, six hundred thousand of the carcasses of the Jews were cast out of Jerusalem and lay unburied? And who will deny, God inflicted this punishment, although he used human agents to accomplish it? Viewing the subject in this light, we see a very good reason, for what our Lord here said to his disciples about Gehenna. If any thing, dear to them as a right eye or right hand, proved a temptation to sin or apostacy, they must part with it. This was profitable to them, for only he who endured to the end should be saved. If they continued faithful, and obeyed his instructions, they should escape the damnation of Gehenna, that punishment which the unbelieving part of the nation could not escape. See on Math. x. 28, and 23, 33, below.

دو

Math. x. 28. "Fear not them who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul, but rather fear him, which is able to destroy both soul and body in Hell, (Gehenna).' The following are all the remarks Mr. Stuart is pleased to make on this passage. "The body might, indeed be literally burned in the valley of Hinnom; but the immaterial, immortal soul-is that to be literally burned there?" But in reply to this question of his we answer no; for no Universalist holds any such opinion, as we think Mr. Stuart ought to know. But we ask him in turn-how is he to punish the whole body, or soul and body in his hell, without fire or some other means of torment? If soul and body are to be tormented there, why not employ fire, just as well as any thing else to do it? Was not his hell, long considered a place of literal fire and brimstone? Do not some still speak of it as such? Is his immaterial immortal soul, to be burned there? But let the punishment of his hell be what he pleases, if it is taught in this text, soul and body according to his views, are to be destroyed there. But we have shown above, that this is contrary to scripture, facts, and common opinions on this subject.

But we ask Mr. Stuart-where do the scriptures speak about an "immaterial, immortal soul? No where. Why then does he do it? Has he forgotten, that he told us psuhe, Acts, ii. 29, which is the same word for soul in this text, means me. So also its corresponding word Nephish Psal. xvi. 10. Until he proves, man has an immaterial, immortal soul, it is premature to speak of it as being burned in any place. If he can prove this, he can do more than we have ever seen done by any man, and hope he will do it without delay.

But let us attend to the passage, and see what our Lord meant to teach by it? Here, as in the preceding texts, he addressed his own disciples; and is teaching them how to conduct themselves in preaching to the world. The text and its context show, he was not speaking to them on the subject of a future state, but fortifying their minds in view of the difficulties they were about to encounter. The passage says 1st, "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul, (psuhe)." By the body, (soma), all allow, is meant the fleshly part of man, which is here, and in other places, distinguished from his psuhe, soul or life. The persons who might kill the body were many, and are designated by the plural word them. The term here rendered kill, means to slay, put to death, as its scripture usage shows. It is here said men can kill the body"but are not able to kill the soul." What then is meant by the soul? Mr. Stuart, and others assert, it means an immaterial, immortal soul, which after death, is susceptible of happiness or misery in a disembodied state. But this must not be assumed. No proof is offered that this is true. That psuhe, here rendered soul, often means the life, is evident. It is rendered life in verse 39 of the context. But it may be objected, if soul only means here the life, is not it killed, when men kill the body? We answer no, for this is most expressly denied in the passage. They-" are not able to kill the soul." In one sense they do kill it, namely; the soul or life. is na

longer in the body. But it is not killed, for at death the soul or spirit returns to God who gave it, Eccl. iii. 19-22. It returns to the fountain of life, and is to be restored to man, an immortal life, in the resurrection. After this, man shall not die any more, but shall be equal unto the angels which are in heaven. Until this period, man's life is hid with Christ in God. It is laid up for him, and will then be restored to him. can find from scripture, man is now mortal, but is to be constituted immortal in the resurrection. Indeed, if he

So far as I

was now immortal, neither God nor man could kill him, for can that which is immortal die? But we are told in the next part of the verse, that God is able to destroy both soul and body." This God can do, for if it pleased him he could blot man forever out of existence. It is added,

2d," But rather fear him, who can destroy both soul and body in hell, (gehenna)." The word him, in this part of the passage, refers to some one individual, and is the contrast to the word them, in the first part of the verse. This is obvious. The question is, to what individual did our Lord refer? If it is said, it refers to man, the question returns-what man is meant? I also ask, how could this one man do, what more than one, are said in the former part of the verse, not to be able to do? If it is said, the civil magistrate is the man referred to, I then ask, could he kill the soul or life, which others could not do? Could he "destroy both soul and body?" If so, then God himself could do no more than this. But unless it can be shown, that destroying "both soul and body in Gehenna," was a punishment inflicted by the civil magistrate in our Lord's day, it is not at all probable our Lord referred to him. Besides, why should his disciples fear the civil magistrate in this case, yet are commanded not to fear them who kill the body. Were his disciples, to have no fear of others who killed them, yet were to fear the civil

magistrate, whose power could not go much beyond this? Perhaps it may be said,-according to Schleusner above, "any severe punishment, especially a shameful kind of death, was denominated Gehenna. This the civil magistrate could inflict on Christ's disciples, and hence are here exhorted to fear him.” But if this was our Lord's meaning, his disciples paid little regard to his words, as their future history shows. In the execution of their mission, they do not seem to have feared even the civil authority, so as to be deterred from their duty. See the whole book of the Acts of the Apostles.

Who then is referred to by the word him, whom the disciples were commanded to fear? God, we think is the being, and is designated by what He is able to do in the next words. He is able to destroy both soul and body in hell, (Gehenna)." It will not I presume be questioned, that the terms rendered kill and destroy, are in this verse used as similar in import. As the word kill, cannot mean, merely to hurt or punish the body in the first clause of the first part of the verse, so neither can it mean to hurt or punish the soul in the second clause. And in the second part of the verse, the word destroy, is used as an equivelent to the word kill in the first; and what man in the first part is not able to do, God in the second is able to perform. God "is able to destroy both soul and body in hell, (Gehenna)." That the terms rendered kill and destroy, are used to express the same thing will appear from the following examination of them.

1st, Let us notice the word apokteino here rendered kill. Its general usage is, to slay, kill, or put to death. Mark iii: 4, is the only text where it is used to express the killing of the soul or life. "Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? To save life, (Psuhen), or to kill, (apokteina)." But in the parallel text, Luke vi: 9, the word rendered destroy, is used to express the same idea,

"Is it lawful on the sabbath days to