as this was the first time the word heaven occurred in the Bible, and as it did not mean happiness in this case, it ought not to be understood as having that meaning in any other passage, unless the writer gave special notice that he used the term in a sense different from that in Genesis. He could also quote many texts, where heaven has the same meaning as in Gen. i. 1. He might then turn to the New Testament, where he would find the word, heaven, for the first time in Matthew thirdThe kingdom of heaven is at hand," in which passage heaven doubtlessly signifies the gospel dispensation. By examining the New Testament, he would find many passages to corroborate this signification. And if he found a few passages which did not appear to coincide with his views, the same labor which Mr. B. has bestowed upon the rich man and Lazarus would solve the difficulty. He might call it parabolic happiness, and not literal enjoyment. In this manner he could prove that there will be no future happiness, as clearly as Mr. B. has proved that there will be no future misery. Whoever will read the Inquiry with attention, will, I think, be convinced that the representation of the work given above, is substantially correct. Mr. B. has also published an Inquiry concerning the Devil and Satan, and the duration of the terms, Olim, Aion, and Aionios. This work, like the former, exhibits a good temper of mind, and no small degree of patient investigation. It, however, contains nothing peculiarly original, except an exposition of the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, and a few other passages, which we regard as vague and inconsistent. Though this work contains much truth, we believe that in many respects, he carries his principles too far, and manifests a disposition to pull down rather than to build up. But this appears to be policy adopted by all the advocates for his views. 173 LETTER VI. Scripture proof of a Future Retribution. REV. AND DEAR BROTHER, In this letter I propose to call your attention to some scriptures which, to my understanding, teach the doctrine of a future retribution. I shall, however, confine myself to a few passages, as I find that I am likely to exceed my contemplated limits. The first text I shall. notice, is John v. 28, 29. "Marvel not at this; for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation." I have quoted this passage in this place in consequence of its affinity to the passages already considered, under the head of a future judgment. The passage before us teaches a future judgment, and informs us of its concomitant events, viz. a resurrection, and a state of punishment. The passage before us, I think, applies to a future state, and teaches a future retribution. I am sensible, however, that you confine the passage to this world, and apply it to the destruction of Jerusalem. But against your construction, and in favor of mine, there are many weighty considerations.* You will readily acknowledge that the passage in question holds forth the idea of a retribution-a retribution which is to take place at a specified time or period. Now the fact, that this retribution is to take place at some particular, specified time, let that time be when it may, goes directly against the doctrine which limits The substance of our remarks upon this passage has been published by the writer of these Letters, in the Christian Repository for Oct. 1825. all punishment to this world.. For, if men are punished to the full desert of their crimes here in time, it is manifest that they must be punished step by step as they pass along, so that if they be taken away at any moment, they will have received all they deserve, and so be obnoxious to no further punishment. The doctrine for which you contend, therefore, forbids the idea of any special judg ment; for it maintains that men are punished at one time, as much as at another; that they are punished daily for their sins, so that if by any accident any one should be taken away instantly at any time, the account would be squared in this state, and the subject would stand exposed to no future discipline. Now it is perfectly idle on your scheme to talk of any special judgment, that is, a judgment which is to take place at any specified time. It is totally senseless and absurd to speak of any particular time, as the day of judgment, if the judgment takes place every day at one period as much as at another. & What should we think of a distinguished philosopher, who should pretend that he had some important fact to make known to mankind, and then should gravely assert, that on a certain given day, the tide would ebb and flow at New-York? Since the ebbing and flowing of the tide is what takes place regularly, and constantly, we should conclude, that this learned man was trifling with our understanding, or else he was disordered in his intellect. Just so must our Savior appear, on your interpretation of the passage. On your scheme we must suppose that Jesus Christ called our attention to a subject, as though it were something of transcendant impor tance, and then gravely told us, that great power was given him by the Father, that he might be enabled at a certain future period to accomplish, what? Why, that which has taken place daily in all ages of the world, without any assistance on his part!! But shall we attri bute such consummate trifling to him who was incapable of deceit "who spake as never man spake " Far be the thought. It is so evident that a special judgment is taught in this passage, that you are free to acknowledge it, though this acknowledgment is fatal to your system. But you inform us that our Savior was speaking of a spiritual resurrection in the context, and has given no notice of any change of the subject.* That Jesus was speaking of a spiritual resurrection in the context, is readily admitted, but that he did give intimation of a change of the subject, we shall attempt to show. And it is worthy of special remark here, that you yourself apply the 28th and 29th verses to an event totally distinct, and entirely different from any thing taught in the context. And certainly you would not apply the different parts of this chapter to different events, in direct opposition to your own statement, unless such an application was taught in the discourse. But to proceed;-In the 25th verse Jesus says, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear, shall live." This is undoubtedly a moral or spiritual resurrection. But a spiritual resurrection admits of no special judgment to follow the resurrection. It only teaches us, that those who are dead in sin, are raised to newness of life or spiritual enjoyment. After speaking of a spiritual resurrection in verse 25th, Jesus says in verses 26th and 27th, “For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; and hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man." Here our Savior not only speaks of his ability to impart that life of which he had spoken in verse 25th, but speaks of his ability to execute judgment also. Thus we learn that he did change the subject of discourse. From that of a spiritual * 2d Reply to Merritt, p. 32. resurrection, which precludes the idea of a retribution, he changes to that of a literal one, connected with a retribution or judgment. This change of the subject is plainly taught by his speaking of executing judgment in contradistinction from raising men to spiritual life. "Hath given him power to execute judgment ALSO." Unless there is a change of the subject, the emphatic word, also, has no meaning. It is perfectly evident from the discourse itself, that there is a change in the subject. Knowing that he had introduced something in addition to what he had been treating of, the divine Teacher says, "Marvel not at this;" that is, though I have introduced something new, do not be surprised. And then, to confirm and illustrate what he had hinted relative to executing judgment, he adds the passage in question. "Marvel not at this; for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in their graves, shall hear his voice, and come forth; they that have done good unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." Now it is perfectly evident, from the manner of introducing the 28th and 29th verses, that they allude to a subject entirely diffe rent from what is taught in verse 25th. By comparing the 25th verse with the 28th and 29th, we shall discover at once that they treat of different events. 1. In the 25th verse, it is said, "the hour is coming, and now is;" in the 28th, "the hour is coming." Here then is a striking difference; one is represented not only future, but present also; the other is represented as exclusively future. 2. It is said in verse 25th, "the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God;" in the 28th, "all that are in their graves shall hear his voice." Here again is a striking dissimilarity. The former asserts that the dead shall hear. The term dead is used very frequently in the New Testament to repre T |