ny, that the Devil among Christians, answers the same purposes to them, that Osiris did to the Egyptians, and Pluto to the Greeks and Latins?

But again, in pp. 235, 236, the following account of an Egyptian burial, is quoted from Spineto. Mr. Stuart assigns this reason for the quotation. "We quote the whole, as it shows from whence an important part of the Greek mythology was derived." It runs thus"the common place of burial was beyond the lake Acherjsia, or Acharejish which meant the last state, the last condition of man, and from which the poets have imagined the fabulous lake of Acheron.. On the borders of this lake Acherjsia sat a tribunal, composed of fortytwo judges, whose office, previous to the dead being permitted to be carried to the cemetry beyond the lake, was to inquire into the whole conduct of his life.

If the deceased had died insolvent, they adjudged the corpse to his creditors, which was considered as a mark of dishonor, in order to oblige his relations and friends to redeem it, by raising the necessary sums among themselves. If he had led a wicked life, they ordered that he should be deprived of solemn burial, and he was consequently carried and thrown into a large ditch made for the purpose, to which they gave the appellation of Tartar, on account of the lamentations that this sentence produced among his surviving friends and relations.

This is also the origin of the fabulous Tartarus, in which the poets have transferred the lamentations made by the living to the dead themselves who were thrown into it.

If no accuser appeared, or if the accusation had proved groundless, the judges decreed that the deceased was entitled to his burial, and his eulogium was pronounced amidst the applauses of the bystanders, in which they praised his education, his religion, his justice, in short, all his virtues, without, however, mention

ing any thing about his riches or nobility, both of which were considered as mere gifts of fortune.

To carry the corpse to the cemetry, it was necessary to cross the lake, and this was done by means of a boat, in which no one could be admitted without the express order of the judges, and without paying a small sum for the conveyance. this regulation was so strictly enforced, that the kings themselves were not exempt from its severity.

The cemetry was a large plain surrounded by trees, and intersected by canals, to which they had given the appellation of elisout, or elisians, which means nothing else but rest. And such again is the origin of the poetical Charon and his boat, as well as of the fabulous description of the Elysian Fields."

But again, pp. 241, 242, it is said " in comparing the Egyptian Amenti with the Hades of the Greeks and with the Tartarus of the Latins, Spineto briefly adverts to some points of assimilation, as follows; "Upon the whole, the first seems to have been the prototype and the origin of the two last. Orpheus, who had been initiated into all the secrets of the mysteries of Egypt, carried into Greece these mysteries ;* and the Greeks soon so altered the whole, as to render them no longer cognizable. Osiris became Pluto; Sme, Persephone [or rather Themis simply]; Oms, Cerberus ; Thoth, Mercurius Psychopompos; Horus, Apis, and Anubis, the three infernal judges, Minos, acus, and Rhadamanthus. To conclude the whole, the symbolical heads of the different animals under which the forty-two judges were represented, being deprived of their primitive and symbolical meaning, were changed into real monsters, the Chimeras, the Harpies, and the Gorgons, and other

* Any one who will take the trouble to compare the mysteries of Isis and Osiris with those of Ceres and Proserpine, with those of Venus and Adonis, and with those of Bacchus, will discover many striking resemblances.-TR.

such unnatural and horrible things, with which they peopled their fantastic hell; and thus the Amenti of the Egyptians, as indeed the greater part, if not the whole of their religion, became, in the hands of the Greeks and Romans, a compound of fables and absurdities."

It is very obvious from these quotations,

1st, That the Egyptian Amenti, became the Hades of the Greeks, and the Tartarus of the Latins. The first, the prototype and the origin of the two last. Mr. Stuart here, does not pretend that Tartarus had its origin in divine revelation. On the contrary, it is called the "fabulous Tartarus." Why then say it is a reality, and sanctioned by our Lord in the parable before us? Tartarus had just as little truth in it, as "the fabulous lake Acheron," the "poetical charron and his boat," or "the ideal Elysian fields." It is here admitted, Tartarus, or hell, had its origin in the Egyptian Amenti.

2d, We are told in the above quotations" that Orpheus carried this knowledge of the Egyptian Amenti, or hell with other mysteries into Greece: and in the hands of the Greeks and Romans, it soon became a compound of fables and absurdities." Was it truth, I ask, which in the hands of the Greeks and Romans, "became a compound of fables and absurdities?" Surely not. It was only absurdities, which became more absurd. The Greeks and Romans, improved on the Egyptian hell, as they did on every thing else. have not Christians adopted the Egyptian hell, with the Grecian and Roman improvements, yea have made some improvements of their own. The Grecian and Roman hell, is more like the Christian hell, than the original Amenti of the Egyptians. Does not Mr. Stuart aver, our Lord teaches a Tartarus in the parable before us, and is not this his hell?

And

3d, It seems now to be conceded, that the Egyptian

Amenti, is "the prototype and the origin of the Hades of the Greeks, the Tartarus of the Latins, and the hell of Christians." Dr. Good in his book of nature, says

"it was believed in most countries, that this hell, Hades, or invisible world, is divided into two very distinct and opposite regions by a broad and impassable gulph; that the one is a seat of happiness, a paradise, or elysium, and the other a seat of misery, a Gehenna, or Tartarus; and that there is a supreme magistrate and an impartial tribunal belonging to the infernal shades, before which the ghosts must appear, and by which he is sentenced to the one or the other, according to the deeds done in the body. Egypt is said to have been the inventress of this important and valuable part of the common tradition; and, undoubtedly, it is to be found in the earliest records of Egyptian history." The only question to be settled, is-Did the knowledge of this Egyptian Amenti, hell, or invisible world, come from God, or was it of man's invention? If this question can be fairly determined, the hell of Christians stands or falls with it. Can it then be determined, that this Amenti or hell of the Egyptians, was of man's invention? We answer yes, and that to a moral certainty. 1st, Dr. Good allows, Egypt was "the inventress" of this doctrine. Mr. Stuart admits this by his silence, for he does not intimate, it had its origin from God. 2d, what puts this out of all question is, Moses was brought up in Egypt; was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians; consequently knew all about their Amenti or hell; yet, says not a word about it in his five books. But why was he silent on such an important doctrine, if he believed it came from God? What I ask, could prevent him from teaching it, except this-that Egypt, not God was the inventress of it, as Dr. Good affirms. If it is found in the earliest records of Egyptian history, as Dr. Good affirms, why is it not found in the earliest records of divine revelation, if the doctrine is from God?

1

Mr. Stuart indeed asserts, that there was a Tartarus in the Hebrew Sheol, but assertions will not answer on a subject of this nature. Dr. Campbell, Dr. Whitby, and others, adduce evidence in point blank contradiction of his assertion. The very silence of Moses and the prophets, about an Amenti Tartarus, or hell, shows no such doctrine was believed by them. See my Essays, and Letters to Mr. Hudson, where the origin and history of hell torments is stated at length, and how this doctrine came to be embraced by the Jews, and was finally introduced into the Christian Church. Further evidence of this will appear, by considering another question; namely

2d, Is it true, as Mr. Stuart asserts- "that in Hades, Sheol, according to the views of the Hebrews, and of Jesus himself, there is a place of torment, is put out of all question by the passage now before us. This assertion I shall now examine. It divides itself into two parts.-1st, It is asserted," that in Hades,Sheol, according to the views of the Hebrews there was a place of torment, is put out of all question by the passage before us." If Mr. Stuart here by Hebrews, means the ancient Hebrews, the Scripture writers, his assertion is false. His own examination of Sheol sufficiently shows this, for not in a single text, did he show, that any Scripture writer believed, that in Sheol there was a place of torment. Dr. Whitby, in the following remarks on Acts ii. 27. proves the assertion false. He says that Sheol throughout the Old Testament, and Hades in the septuagint, answering to it, signify not the place of punishment, or of the souls of bad men only, but the grave only, or the place of death, appears-1st, From the root of it Shaal, which signifies to ask, to crave and require, because it craves for all men, Prov. xxx. 16. and will let no man escape its hands, Psal. lxxxviii. 48. It is that Sheol or Hades, whither, we are all going, Eccles. ix. 10.