bees cannot be put more than one hundred and fifty years before Christ, it is manifest that the notion concerning hell as a place of endless woe had not been long held by the Jews when he appeared. Philo, an eminent Jewish writer, often refers to the place. His works appeared about the time of the Saviour's ministry. These are the only authorities extant on which any information can be gained. We come now to the main point of inquiry under this head, namely, What was the idea entertained concerning hell? Was it supposed to be a place of fire? Dr. Ballou, in the article from which we have quoted, says: ure. "Let it, then, be carefully observed, that, during the period now under review, the crude notions which spread among the Jews, concerning future misery, seem to have been altogether unconnected with the idea of fire, either as a reality or as a figThe second book of Maccabees, the Wisdom of Solomon, and the works of Philo, the only sources of information, never describe the condition of the wicked after death, by any metaphor of the kind. On the contrary, they represent it in another light. According to the first, the pious Jews, who suffered martyrdom or fell in battle, believed that God would, in due time, restore their souls from the realms of death to their former bodies; whether on this earth or in some other region does not appear. Those, too, who died in defence of the law, though otherwise sinful and even rebellious, might expect the same favor, should an atonement be offered for their sins by the survivors. But while the faithful entertained such confidence for themselves, one of them is represented in his last moments as threatening the heathen tyrant, their ruthless persecutor, that he would · have no resurrection to life.' His soul, after his decease, would be left forever in the place of the dead; a dark and undesirable abode, according to the opinion of the ancients, an obscure region, in which perpetual confinement must have presented a dreadful idea to the living. Such are the views we gather from the second book of Maccabees. In the Wisdom of Solomon, a Jewish production from the Alexandrian hot-bed of Platonism, we meet with a doctrine somewhat different. Here, no return of departed spirits, nor reünion with their bodies is intimated. The souls of the righteous, the author represents, enter at death on a state of peace, hope and honor, and are entrusted with some kind of dominion over the living. But those of the wicked go into a darkness, of which that once brought upon Egypt was but an image. They are in tribulation, and are accounted a reproach among the dead. At a certain time, which the author calls the visitation of souls, the just will be conducted to a glorious palace, and receive a beautiful crown; but the unjust shall give in the account of their sins with fear, and behold with surprise and hopeless regret the deliverance of the godly whom they had contemned in this world. The whole creation shall fight against them. Thunderbolts and hailstones shall be discharged upon them from on high; the sea shall rage against them, and a mighty wind shall blow them away. It should be remembered that these more highlycolored representations are given by an Egyptian Jew, and not by an inhabitant of Palestine. Nearly the same are the ideas of Philo, another Egyptian Jew; if, indeed, he be not, as many account him, the identical author of the Wisdom of Solomon. Though born before the Christian era, he lived several years after our Lord's crucifixion. In the works which bear his name, the immortality of the soul is clearly taught, together with the future happiness of the righteous and misery of the wicked. The place of the impious, hereafter, he describes as a dark region, which is covered with profound night and perpetual blackness,' where they live in an eternal death. But, we think, he never represents it as a scene of fire, nor even alludes to it by that glaring metaphor, which has always been the first and the favorite one wherever the notion of a burning hell prevailed. From the few traces, therefore, which remain to us of this age, and which have now been presented, it seems that the idea of future punishment, such as it was among the Jews, was associated with that of darkness, and not of fire; and we shall have occasion to see that among those of Palestine, the misery of the wicked was supposed to consist rather in privation than in positive infliction." We will not leave the subject here, for it is important to know whether these views of hell were retained for any considerable time after the period of which we have been speaking. The only authority, except the New Testament, which we have relating to the period under consideration, are the works of Josephus, which bear date between A. D. 70 and A. D. 100. His writings, therefore, reveal the opinion concerning hell in the times of the New Testament. But we find in them no trace of the notion that hell was a place of fire. On the contrary, it was a dark, dismal prison, a deep, subterranean abode. If the reader wishes to satisfy himself on this point, he can refer to the following, which are the only places where Josephus introduces the subject: Book I., ch. 33, 2, and Antiq. B. xvIII., ch. 1, 3. See Antiq. B. xvIII., 1, 3; Jewish War, B. 1., 33, 2; В. п., 8, 10-14; B. III., 8, 5; B. vII., 8, 7, and against Apion, B. II., 31. The discourse concerning Hades, in Whiton's edition, is now generally regarded as the work of some Christian of the second or third century. We have now reached about the year of our Lord 100, and yet we find that hell was never spoken of as a place of fire, but always as a gloomy prison, an abode of darkness. Thus we have answered our first question, and shown the prevailing opinion among the Jews respecting hell in the time of Christ. We are, therefore, prepared to consider our second question, namely, what was the prevailing opinion respecting hell, when Gehenna was applied to it? 3 Before adducing authorities on this point, it is necessary to refer to the great change which took place in the condition of the Jews, when their city was destroyed by the Romans, under the command of Titus Vespasian. History, perhaps, presents no more fearful ruin than that to which they were doomed. As a nation and as a church they were destroyed, and for a long time they had no political or ecclesiastical organization; and something like a hundred years elapsed before any Jewish writings appeared that have been preserved. In this distracted and ruined condition, it is natural to suppose that great changes would take place in their opinions. Accordingly we find that they adopted various wild conceits, and among them was the idea that hell was a place of literal fire, to which they applied the word Gehenna. In the Targum of Jonathan we find such expressions as the following: “Abram saw Gehenna belching forth smoke and burning coals, and sending up sparks to punish the wicked therein." "The wicked are to be judged, that they may be delivered to eternal burning in Gehenna." "Like embers in the fire of Gehenna, which God created the second day of the creation of the world." "The earth from which springs forth food, and beneath which is Gehenna, the cold of whose snow is changed so as to become like fire." These are comments, among others, on the following passage of Scripture, "Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?"— Isai. 33: 14. These quotations show the sense in which Gehenna was employed when applied in the Targums to future woe. Other quotations might be given, but these are sufficient; they show beyond any doubt that when Gehenna began to be used to denote a future hell, the popular opinion had changed entirely in regard to the nature of its torment. Then it was not a prison of darkness, but a place of fire. In this fact, so clearly proved, we see that Gehenna could not have been employed, till long after the destruction of Jerusalem, to denote a place of future misery. The sense in which we find it always used, when thus applied, was not at all applicable to the prevailing view respecting hell, till after all the New Testament was written. This conclusively shows that when Christ was upon the earth Gehenna had not begun to be employed as the synonyme of hell. But we do not, propose to leave the subject here. We have other facts to present, which bear with equal weight with the foregoing upon the question under consideration. The works in which Gehenna is used to denote hell were all written after the destruction of Jerusalem. Dr. Ballou, in the very learned article from which we have quoted, says: 66 Through all the times of the Old Testament, which descended within four centuries of the Christian era, it is plain that Gee Hennom (such as was then the form of the expression), had, among the people, no other than its literal application. Of this long period we therefore take our leave. It is likewise plain that during the much later age in which the Septuagint was written, Gehenna denoted, at least among the Jews of Egypt, where this version was made, simply the valley of Hinnom: that particular spot to which the border of the tribe of Benjamin descended on the south side of Jebusi, or Jerusalem. So the word is used in the only case of its occurrence, as we have seen; so another word, formed on the same principle, is likewise used in two other passages; and none of this class of terms is ever introduced in any different sense. Thus far we proceed on sure ground. To how late a period do these facts conduct us, in our progress towards the times of the New Testament? "The Septuagint was begun about two hundred and seventy or two hundred and eighty years before Christ, when the five books of Moses, called the law, were translated. But the version of the other books, in which we find the usage just mentioned, was not undertaken, it is generally supposed, till within one hundred and seventy years of our Saviour's birth. Even then the work does not seem to have advanced very speedily to its completion; for, although we have no positive facts to determine the question, it would appear, from the evident marks of different hands, and from the great diversity of style, that the several books were translated at various times, without much regard to the order of the canon, and by such as engaged in the task only when occasion required or inclination induced. On the decisive authority of the Septuagint, then, we may conclude that two hundred years at most, and perhaps but a hundred and fifty, before the date of the New Testament, Gehenna retained its etymological signification among the Jews of Egypt; and, probably, likewise among all those that spoke the Greek language, since they generally used this version and adopted its phraseology. It should now be observed that these conclusions have an important bearing on the Jewish usage in Palestine. It is well known, to such as have examined the matter, that in the gradual corruption of the Old Testament religion by the admixture of heathen philosophy, and in the corresponding change of the ancient forms of |