2d, Because it is the place to which the good as well as the bad go, for they whose souls go upwards, descend into it. Thither went Jacob, Gen. xxxvii. 35. There Job desired to be, Chap. xiv. 13. for he knew that Sheol was his house, Chap. xvii. 13. and to descend into the dust was to descend into Hades. Is not death common to all men? Is not Hades the house of all men? Hezekiah expected to be there after he went hence, for he said "I shall go to the gates of Hades," Isai. xxxviii. 30. That is, saith Jerome, to those gates of which the Psalmist speaks, saying, "thou wilt lift me up from the gates of death." The ancient Greeks assigned one Hades to all that died, and therefore say, Hades receives all mortal men together, all men shall go to Hades.

"3d, Had the penmen of the Old Testament meant by Hades any receptacle of souls, they could not truly have declared, there was no wisdom, or knowledge in Sheol, Ecc. ix. 10. No remembrance of God there, Ps. vi. 5. No praising of him in Sheol, Isai. xxxviii. 18. For those heathens who looked upon it as the receptacle of souls, held it to be a place in which they would be punished or rewarded." Compare this with Mr. Stuart's assertion. It is, unquestionable, that Hades in its original signification, did not include in it a Tartarus, any more than Sheol. Dr. Campbell saysit signified" obscure, hidden, invisible. So did the word hell originally." Dr. Whitby has just told us,"the ancient Greeks assigned one Hades to all that died," the same the ancient Hebrews did, in regard to their Sheol. Indeed, the above quotation, stands in direct opposition to Mr. Stuart's views of both Sheol and Hades. Can he, or any other man show, that Whitby is mistaken?

I repeat the question then, what Hebrews does Mr. Stuart refer to in the above assertion? If he means the later Hebrews, the Hebrews in the days of our Lord,

his assertion is true; but the way they came to believe, that in Sheol, Hades, there is a place of torment, does no credit to the doctrine of endless Hell torments. Let us hear Dr. Campbell, one of its professed friends. In his sixth Prelim. Diss. sect. 19, he thus writes. "But is there not one passage, it may be said, in which the word Hades must be understood as synonymous with Gehenna, and consequently must denote the place of final punishment prepared for the wicked, or Hell in the Christian acceptation of the term? Ye have it in the story of the rich man and Lazarus, Luke xvi. 23. In hell, en to ade, he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off and Lazarus in his bosom. This is the only passage in holy writ, which seems to give countenance to the opinion, that Hades sometimes means the same thing as Gehenna. Here it is represented as a place of punishment. The rich man is said to be tormented there in the midst of flames. These things will deserve to be examined narrowly. It is plain, that in the Old Testament, the most profound. silence is observed in regard to the state of the deceased, their joys or sorrows, happiness or misery. It is represented to us rather by negative qualities than by positive, by its silence, its darkness, its being inaccessible, unless by preternatural means, to the living, and their ignorance about it. Thus much in general seems always to have been presumed concerning it, that it is not a state of activity adapted for exertion, or indeed for the accomplishment of any important purpose, good or bad. In most respects, however, there was a resemblance in their notions on this subject, to those of the most ancient heathens.

"But the opinions neither of Hebrews nor of heathens remained invariably the same. And from the time of the captivity, more especially from the time of the subjection of the Jews, first to the Macedonian empire, and afterwards to the Roman; as they had a

closer intercourse with Pagans, they insensibly imbibed many of their sentiments, particularly on those subjects whereon their law was silent, and wherein, by consequence, they considered themselves as at greater freedom. On this subject of a future state, we find a considerable difference in the popular opinions of the Jews in our Savior's time, from those which prevailed in the days of the ancient prophets. As both Greeks and Roman's had adopted the notion, that the ghosts of the departed were susceptible both of enjoyment and of suffering. They were led to suppose a sort of retribution in that state, for their merit or demerit in the present. The Jews did not indeed adopt the Pagan fables on this subject; nor did they express themselves entirely in the same manner; but the general train of thinking in both came pretty much to coincide. The Greek Hades they found well adapted to express the Hebrew Sheol. This they came to conceive as including different sorts of habitations for ghosts of different characters. And though they did not receive the terms Elysium or Elysian fields, as suitable appellations for the regions peopled by good spirits, they took instead of them, as better adapted to their own theology, the garden of Eden, or Paradise, a name originally Persian, by which the word answering to garden, especially when applied to Eden, had commonly been rendered by the seventy. To denote the same state, they sometimes used the phrase Abraham's bosom, a metaphor borrowed from the manner in which they reclined at meals. But, on the other hand, to express the unhappy situation of the wicked in that intermediate state, they do not seem to have declined the use of the word Tartarus. The Apostle, Peter, 2 Epis. ii. 4. says of evil angels that God cast them down to Hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment. So it stands in the common version, though neither Gehenna nor Hades are in the orginal,

where the expression is seirais zophou Tartarosas paredoken eis krisin teteremenous. The word is not Gehenna; for that comes after judgment; but Tartarus, which is, as it were, the prison of Hades, wherein crimi-nals are kept till the general judgment. And as, in the ordinary use of the Greek word, it was comprehended under Hades, as a part; it ought, unless we had some positive reason to the contrary, by the ordinary rules of interpretation, to be understood so here. There is then no inconsistency in maintaining that the rich man, though in torments, was not in Gehenna, but in that part of Hades called Tartarus, where we have seen already that spirits reserved for judgment are detained in darkness."

Such are the statements of Dr. Campbell. For a correction o his views of 2 Peter ii. 4. and some other things in this quotation, we refer to the next section. Here, we submit for the consideration of the reader the following remarks.

1st, He declares, that the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, is the only place in Holy Writ, which seems to give countenance to the opinion, that Hades sometimes means the same thing as Gehenna. We have seen already, he denies that Hades is the place of eternal punishment; and that he contends for Gehenna being this place, we shall see in the next chapter.

2d, He says" it is plain that in the Old Testament, the most profound silence is observed in regard to the state of the deceased, their joys or sorrows, happiness or misery." If the Old Testament maintains a profound silence on this subject, it ought to be inquired,

3d, How did the Jews in our Lord's day, come to consider Hades as a place of punishment for the wicked? That a change in their opinions on this subject, had taken place, is evident; for he says,-" on this subject of a future state, we find a considerable difference in the popular opinions of the Jews in our Sav

ior's time, from those which prevailed in the days of the ancient prophets." Well, how did this change in their opinions take place? Was it by some new revelation which God made to them? He thus accounts for the change of their opinions. "But the opinions neither of Hebrews nor of heathen, remained invariably the same. And from the time of the captivity, more especially from the time of the subjection of the Jews, first to the Macedonian empire, and afterwards to the Roman; as they had a closer intercourse with Pagans, they insensibly imbibed many of their sentiments particularly on those subjects whereon their law was silent, and wherein, by consequence, they considered themselves as at greater freedom. As both Greeks and Romans had adopted the notion, that the ghosts of the deceased were susceptible both of enjoyment and of suffering, they were led to suppose a sort of retribution in that state, for their merit or demerit in the present. The Jews did not indeed adopt the Pagan fables on this subject, nor did they express themselves entirely in the same manner; but their general train of thinking in both came pretty much to coincide."-This statement, is surely too plain to be misunderstood. How much plainer could he have told us, that a punishment in Hades was a mere heathen notion, which the Jews learned from their intercourse with them? He declares, that neither Sheol nor Hades is used in Scripture to express a place of punishment, and shows, that the Pagan fables teach it, and the Jews learned it from them. What are we then to think, when this is the account of the doctrine of hell torments by one of its professed friends? Had this statement been given by a professed Universalist, the cry would be raised that it was a mere fabrication of his own, in support of his system. But this is the state

*But who has the freedom, to adopt, or invent opinions on the subject of a fature state? The indulgence of this freedom by others before us, occasions our difficulties now on the subject.