Let us see first what he says in regard to our friends the universalists.

And so as to the devil and his angels. For to be consistent with their views, they must save them too. For they say, God is to be all in all, and being love, there can remain no misery. But if so, the devils must be saved too.

Now it is not the universalists alone that say 'GOD IS TO BE ALL IN ALL.' The whole Christian Church, since St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians, has said it upon the authority of that Apostle, who, it will be observed, uses the words in treating of the most awful and momentous of all subjects, the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.' (In doing which, be it observed, he does not say a word about the everlasting misery of the sinful, tempting as the opportunity would have been to one of J. N. D.'s school, and certainly irresistible to him.) If, therefore, God and his love being all in all involves the salvation of the devil and his angels, as J. N. D. declares must be inferred, we are indebted for it to St. Paul, and have no objection to the boon. But, leaving the question of the ultimate fate of the demons, who, now believing and trembling,' may hereafter, perchance, believe and rejoice, let us see what J. N. D. says about the fate of sinful men.

GOD [the Son of God] has said, 'These shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal.' Now, who would believe that this meant that the condemned were to go for a short time into punishment, but had, or would have, eternal life, quite as much as the others. Eternal life, and eternal or everlasting punishment, answer to one another, and mean the same in either case. THEY argue that IT means eternal in neither! b But will any one believe that eternal life does not mean life-for-ever-and-ever? If its lastingfor-ever is only to be understood from the word life, because it is Christ's life, why add the word eternal ?

Now we plain folks must not talk about Greek, or we might do so, and about Hebrew also; so we will just take the English version, and show that the words 'eternal,' 'everlasting,' or 'for ever' (since for all these but one and the same word is used in the original), does not always signify an eternal, but sometimes an indefinite, occasionally a short, and often only a long, space of time. We cannot do better than use, on this point, the words of the truly learned Dr. Thomas Burnet, tho the good doctor does talk a little about Greek and Hebrew, to be sure.

"The statutes of the Mosaic law are said to be eternal (Exodus xxvii. 21; xxviii. 43; Lev. x. 15; xvi. 34; Numb. xviii. 11; etc.), yet these statutes, with the Old Law, have been long since obsolete. We must, therefore, either soften the sense of the words, or make the Jewish law obligatory to this very day. The temple at Jerusalem was said to be an habitation of God for ever (2 Chron. vi. 2), tho it has long since vanisht, and has not one stone left upon another, or the least mark of its ever having been the habitation of God. The kingdom of David was

b This sentence displays a helpless confusion both of terms and thought, and is composed in violation of all rules of grammar. 'Eternal life' and 'eternal punishment,' it is said, answer to one another'! and mean the same in either case"! Damnation, according to this, is as good as salvation! Next, says J. N. D., They'-i.e. 'eternal life' and 'eternal punishment '-' argue that IT means eternal in neither.' What is the it? We have, in the text, to argue upon what J. N. D. meant to write, since what he has written, is unmitigated nonsense.-En.

said to be eternal, tho the kingdom passed from his family, and is now at an end (2 Sam. vii. 13). In the old law, the servant whose ear was bored by his master, was to serve for ever (Exodus xxi. 6); and yet by that law all servants were to be manumitted within half an age. Moreover, before the Mosaic law, circumcision was instituted for ever (Gen. xvii. 7), tho the divine authority has put an end

thereto.

66

The land of Canaan was given to Abraham, and to his posterity, for an heritage for ever (Gen. xiii. 15; xvii. 8; xlviii. 4), tho his posterity have been driven from the possession thereof. It is plain from these, and many other places, Eternity is not meant always by the word by ['hölam] or [Phölam], to which aiwv or alwvios relates in the Septuagint and in the New Testament, where these words must be taken in a more loose sense. See Philemon 15; Jude 7; Rom. xvi. 25; 2 Tim. i. 9; Tit. i. 2. With the profane Greeks, grammarians very well know, those words have not always so strict a sense: nor is it of any weight that the same word is applied to rewards and punishments; for the eternal happiness of the saints contradicts no attributes of God, and there we have no reason to recede, from the literal sense, and words must yield to sense, otherwise 'This is my body,' is as explicit as to say 'Go into eternal fire.' c

"I say, then, from these words no thingcertainly can be inferred concerning the eternity of hell torments. Moreover, the Holy Scriptures have given us several figurative and metaphorical touches upon Hell, too inconsistent with the nature of things to be literally true; flames, darkness, and extreme cold, do not combine well together; how can worms live in flames, or be immortal in their generations, whereas in other places they are said to die? The bodies of the damned, whatever they are, or at least if they are compounded and organical, cannot withstand the power of eternal flames without dissolution; the earth cannot remain for ever in the form it is now in, or shall be after the conflagration, and Hell [if at all] must be in one or the other.

"So far we have explained the sense of the words and the nature of things: I shall beg leave to add in the third place, that our Lord Jesus Christ on earth, having taken upon him the form of a Servant, and not of a Philosopher, spoke in the language of the sons of men, and of the Jews chiefly, to whom he was sent. Learned interpreters have made their observations of this nature upon the words of Christ; he therefore follows the phraseology of his own nation, and words most known to the people, or to their chiefs, from the law, prophets, or traditions, in his instructions to promote piety. When he speaks of hell, he uses the word gehenna, and speaks of the different degrees of punishments there, in the Jewish style, according to their common sense. Mentioning infernal punishments (Mark

e If J. N. D. had been a very learned' Grecian, we might have offered a problem for his solution concerning this text:-viz.-Why the adjective alwvios (translated eternal) is repeated in the same sentence, contrary to the genius of the Greek, as well as Latin, wherein the rule is, that one adjective shall serve both members of the sentence, if applied to them in the same signification? The only exceptions are in cases where the adjective is emphatic, which amounts to a modification of meaning; but as this is not the case in the application of aiönios (age, duration, etc.) to zöë ('life') and 'kolasis' (corrective chastisement) in this text, it seems to follow, that the term was to be regulated, in each case, by the subject to which it was attacht, for the subject cannot be altered by the term.-ED.

ix. 44), he uses the words of the prophet Isaiah lxvi. 24, as it is in the Septuagint—Ο γαρ σκωληξ αυτων ου τελευτήσει, και τὸ πυρ αυτων ου σβεσθησείαι—— For their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched.' Authors have proved it was a common and familiar phrase with the Jews, that fire and worms should have the wicked.' Christ made no alterations in these expressions, nor did he endeavor to take away the notion of the people, when it was found necessary to restrain the assurance of wicked men.'

d دو

The following passage from another learned author may also be adduced with advantage:

“I must not pass by a late opposition to the doctrine of eternal punishment, or the eternity of hell torments, by an anonymous writer of considerable learning and abilities; who not only rejects the commonly-received opinion, as built on a false translation and interpretation of Scripture, but has taken great pains to show that by means of the Christian Redemption, there will be an universal restitution or restoration of all God's rational creatures, fallen angels and fallen men, to the favor of God and that state of happiness for which they were created. I have not room to do more than lay before the reader a few of those passages of Scripture upon which his hypothesis is built, premizing, that the Greek words sözö, sötër, sötëria, etc., according to this writer, are improperly rendered by the English words save, saviour, salvation, etc., and should be translated restore, restorer, restoration, etc. The passages are these: - This is good and acceptable to God our Saviour, who will have all men to be (restored) saved'—1 Tim. ii. 3, 4. We trust in the living God, who is the (restorer) saviour of all men '-1 Tim. iv. 10. All flesh shall see the (restoration) salvation of God '-Luke iii. 6. 'The grace of God, that bringeth (restoration) salvation to all men, hath appeared '-Titus ii. 11. The Lord is long-suffering, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance-2 Peter iii. 9. Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time '-1 Tim. ii. 6. 'He is a propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world'—1 John ii. 2. By Him (Christ) to reconcile all things to himself '-Col. i. 20.

"Our author's doctrine of universal restitution, or restoration, does by no means exclude the future punishment of the wicked in hell. On the contrary, 'Restoration,' he tells us, 'implies some misery or misfortune already incurred-some distrest circumstances befallen the persons to be restored or delivered out of them"; and he acknowleges that men may for very good reasons, be damned or accurst to certain pains and penalties due to a damned and accursed creature! In short, he admits of conian (as he calls it), but not of eternal, punishment, in the world

to come.

"Nor does our author's doctrine of Restitution exclude even the devils themselves from a share in it. For after drawing a parallel, in several respects, between the condition of fallen men and fallen spirits, he concludes thus:- Since the parallel between wicked men and wicked spirits answers thrö all the accounts we have of the Lord's dispensation towards them; what can we conclude, but that one indefatigable love pursues both, and that Hades and the Abyss, and the Lake of Fire,

Thomas Burnet, LL.D. translated by Mr. Earbery.

(Master of the Charter House), On the State of the Dead: London, 1728. Vol. ii. p. 1.

exist all by the providence of God; and for this divine reason, namely, because God will be all in all-will have all intellectual creatures collected into himself, churchwise-will quicken all men, will restore all things, will be the Head of all, will have every knee bow to him, and every tongue confess him, to the glory of God the Father.'- "e

With regard to the second doctrine attackt by J. N. D., we have seen that of the mass of texts he has set in array against it, a large number appear (in their plain sense) to be in its favor, and as his attempted reasoning (for, after all, he also attempts to reason) is based on these, we shall not consider it necessary to notice it at length.

But there is one passage we cannot refrain from quoting, since it shows either the prejudiced haste, or the pious fraud, of the disputant, in overlooking or omitting all mention of the parallel text in St. Matthew-a text that goes directly against his purpose, and which, tho thrust by him into the crowd of witnesses,' is here kept in the back-ground, lest it should interfere with its more favorable fellowbearers of testimony.

Again, 'fear not them which can kill the body, but after that have no more that they can do, but fear him who, after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell.' Now here death, instead of being the whole wages of sin, tho it be its wages, is made comparatively light of, if taken alone, and what comes after in body and soul in hell, is the thing to be feared. And note, there is no such thought as a man's soul dying with his body, as they say who teach that simple death was the whole wages of sin, alleging the passage-In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.'

Substitute for the text in Luke, the more ample one in Matthew-' Fear not them which kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell'—and you will find that the very doctrine combated by J. N. D. receives support from the passage adduced by him against it!

Our readers will excuse our following the author thrö the remaining portion of his rhapsodies, which prove only how good a Priest, and how bad a Philosopher, he would make; they have seen a full and fair sample of the tract, wherein we have convicted him of palpable self-contradiction, and of dishonest suppression of such texts as tell against his own side of the question. We will content ourself with giving the closing sentence of his tract, which portrays his peculiar modesty-'the humility of mind,' and diffidence of his own powers to pronounce on the counsels of the Infinite, of which he cants-far better than could be done by any pencil of ours:

In conclusion, I say, that if God had meant to convey the idea of eternal punishment, He would not have used expressions stronger than He has used—nor do any exist.

MEN OF GENIUS.

'Characteristics of Men of Genius.' 2 vols., post 8vo. London, Chapman.

ERE is a selection of articles from the North American Review-a periodical which now enjoys an European, as well as a Transatlantic reputation. Altho it ranks high as a Journal of Criticism, its circulation in Britain is not so extensive as to make it generally known; hence Mr. Chapman has deemed these essays of sufficient interest to warrant his rescuing them from oblivion, by re-printing them. We think he will not be disappointed; we are quite sure the reading public will appreciate his endeavor, and thank him also for his able Prefatory Essay. We make an extract from the Preface, alike remarkable for its philosophical acumen, and its nervous expression.

An important element in modern civilization is the system of division and subdivision of labor; and doubtless the rapid elevation which that civilization has reacht, the splendor, wealth, luxuriance, and innumerable philosophical and mechanical triumphs which it boasts, are in a great measure attributable to the application of this system. But this mighty display has been purchased at an enormous cost, perhaps too dearly; in casting up the nett value of it all, we are apt to leave out of the account the amount of human life spent in its creation, and to complacently congratulate ourselves merely as the possessors and representatives of this great result. We estimate the action more highly than the actor, we think more of doing than of being-of the mansion than the builder-of civilization than the citizen; and therefore value each individual in proportion to his capability of contributing to the already vast accumulation, his isolated products; instead of regarding society with all its riches, as the minister of his needs, and the sphere of activity for the exercise of his various faculties, and the development of his nature.

Proceeding in this spirit, society has imposed upon its members a countless diversity of employments, so subdivided and simple, that the action needed for the performance of each is so monotonous, wearying, and purely mechanical, conjoined with the large proportion of time necessarily spent in such occupations, that instead of tending to unfold the faculties and stimulate the growth of the worker, it deadens the feelings, renders obtuse the perceptions, narrows and stupefies the intellectual powers, and frequently inflicts permanent injury upon the physical frame. It is the same in every department of industry, but more particularly in the wonderful factories of which England is proud, and the products of which have contributed so largely to her extraordinary wealth and greatness. The same principle pervades society from the lowest to the highest classes; science, philosophy, and even religion, are subject to its sway; every distinguisht man, with a few rare exceptions, is sacrificed at its shrine. The fabric of modern civilization consists of an infinite number of parts, differing in shape and size, held together by a cunning dovetailing of each with each, and thus creating a whole by mechanical conjunction; instead of being an aggregate of independent and individually perfect atoms, constituting a whole by the attraction of gravitation. This wonderful structure merging the individual in the mass, is [attempted to be] justified by its results, as having realized a far greater general progress than could have been attained in the