. texts of the doctrine of endless misery. We are very gravely told, that Jesus spoke of the sinner losing his soul. "For what is a man profited, if he gain the whole world, and lose his own SOUL? or what shall a man give in exchange for his SOUL?" This is sufficient proof, we are told, that THE SOUL may be lost. But all this imaginary proof will vanish, if it be considered, that the Greek word rendered soul here, is the same word which in the preceding verse is rendered life; and the two verses should have been translated thus: "For whosoever will save his life (uz) shall lose it; and whosoever will lose his life (yvzn) for my sake, shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own life (wyzn)? or what shall a man give in exchange for his life (ψυχή) ?' Thus we see that no reference at all is made to the spirit of man, but to his natural life only; the spirit returns to God at death. "Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was; and the spirit (πvεva in the LXX,) to God who gave it." Here we might safely leave this passage; but as we have at hand some very profitable criticisms from the pen of Rev. L. R. Paige, we shall lay them before the reader. It may be said that Jesus speaks concerning the loss of the soul; but the soul is very different from the life; and therefore the loss of life cannot be regarded as the great calamity against which he cautions his disciples. I shall not go into a long examination of the meaning of the word yuz, here rendered soul. I shall merely state a few facts which may assist the inquirer in rightly determining its import in this place. This word frequently occurs, in the LXX, or the Greek translation of the Old Testament. It is there used twice, and twice only, as the translation of Ruah, which word the Hebrews employed to denote the "Spirit, or an incorporeal substance, as opposed to flesh, or a corporeal one." But it is used six hundred and twenty-three times as the translation of Nephish, concerning which Hebrew word, Parkhurst, an Orthodox lexicographer, writes thus:—it "hath been sup posed to signify the spiritual part of man, or what we commonly call his soul; I must, for myself, confess, that I can find no passage where it hath undoubtedly this meaning." We shall do well to consider, 1. whether the learned men who translated the Old Testament into the Greek language, understood the meaning of the word puz; and 2. whether, if they judged it the most proper word to indicate the spiritual part of man, they would probably use it only twice as the translation of a word which has this meaning, and six hundred and twenty-three times as the translation of a word which Parkhurst confesses never has this meaning; or at least, he had never been able to find a satisfactory instance of the kind. In the New Testament, the usage of this word is somewhat different. It is sometimes translated soul, sometimes life, mind, heart, heartily, Ghost. It is used in all one hundred and four times; and setting aside twelve cases, in which its meaning is disputed, it signifies the whole person in eleven instances; the intellect in thirty; the natural life in forty-eight; and is expressly opposed to the spirit in three. If we include its use in a verbal or participial form, it is used in all, for the whole person, eleven times; for the intellect, thirty-one; for the natural life, fifty-two; and is opposed to the spirit nine times.* Hence there can be no necessity to understand this word to mean the spiritual part of man, in the passage under consideration, merely from its own force; for in more than half the instances where it occurs in the New Testament, and almost invariably in the Old Testament, it will not admit such a signification. It certainly indicates the natural life in the preceding verse, and is so translated: "Whosoever will save his life, shall lose - * In the places to which I refer, where something opposed to spirit is signified, the word is translated soul, 1 Cor. xv. 45. 1 Thes. v. 28. Heb. iv. 12; natural, 1 Cor. ii. 14. xv. 44, (twice,) 46; sensual, James iii. 15. Jude 19. In the first three instances, the original word is uy; in the other six, it is yuzzòs formed from yuz, and of similar signification; and it may be observed, that the last-named word occurs nowhere else in the Bible. it; and whosoever will lose his life for my sake, shall find it." ver. 25. Our translators had too much good sense to render it soul, in this case, for they saw the absurdity of saying, "whosoever will save his soul shall lose it, and whosoever will lose his soul for my sake, shall find it." I can see no good reason for giving different translations of the same word in these two verses. Its meaning appears to be the same in both. So evident is this, that Dr. A. Clarke, with all his. prejudices, protests against the common translation thus; "On what authority many have translated the word yuz, in the 25th verse, life, and in this verse, soul, I know. not; but am certain it means life, in both places. If the word had at first been translated life in both these verses, I venture to say, that no English reader would ever have suspected, that the least danger was intimated of losing the immortal soul, or exposing it to endless torment. XIX. "Verily I say unto you, except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.' Matt. xviii. 3. The parallel passages are Mark x. 15, and Luke xviii. 17. For our views of the phrase, "kingdom of heaven," see our remarks under Section III. of this chapter, on Matt. v. 20. What we have there said, fully explains the passage before us, so far as its bearing on Universalism is concerned. By a reference to the context, it will be seen, that the disciples were disputing who should be the greatest in the kingdom of heaven,not meaning the kingdom. of immortal glory, but the kingdom of Christ upon the earth. Jesus disapproved their ambition, and replied, "Except ye be converted and become like little children, ye shall not enter the kingdom of heaven; "that is, except ye curb this ambition, and cultivate the meek, lovely spirit of a little child, ye cannot be my disciples, nor subjects of my moral reign. Such is the evident sense of the passage. The best commentators give it a like construction. See Paige's "Selections," Sect. XXIX. For a very sensible article on the subject of " Evangelical Conversion," see "Universalist Expositor," Vol. II. pp. 38-58. See, also, Skinner's Universalism Illustrated and Defended," pp. 306–314. XX. Matt. xviii. 8, 9. For an illustration of this passage, see remarks under Sect. XXXV. of this chap-. ter, on Mark ix. 43-48. XXI. "Then his lord, after that he had called him,' said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me., Shouldest not thou also haye had compassion on thy fellow-servant, even as I had pity on thee? And his Lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, ᎥᏝ ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses." Matt. xviii. 32-35. This is a part of the parable of the unforgiving servant. A certain servant owed his lord ten thousand talents, a great sum. As he had nothing wherewith to pay, his lord, according to the custom of the country, ordered him, his wife, his children, and all he had, to be sold, and payment to be made. He entreated his master to have patience, and he would pay him all. To this the master assented. But this same servant went out, and found one of his fellow-servants, who owed him the trifling sum of one hundred pence; and he laid hands on him with violence, and demanded payment. His fellow-servant besought him, as he had besought his lord in his own case, to have patience, and he would pay him all. But this servant, who had been forgiven, was nothing softened by his master's exhibition of kindness, but cast his poor debtor into prison, until he should pay the whole debt. When his fellowservants saw this, they reported the circumstances to their master; and the master said, as in the words quoted at the head of this section; "O thou wicked servant," &c. The fault of the unforgiving servant was, that he did not imitate his master's example of clemency his master then punished.him, by compelling him to pay the whole debt. What is there in this to substantiate the doctrine of endless misery?... . "So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye, from your hearts, forgive not every one his brother their trespasses;" that is, God will punish you justly, for ingratitude and for a want of forgiveness. Cruelty is a greater sin in those who feel and know that they have had much forgiven; and such deserve a severer retribution, than those who are not sensible of the benefits which have been conferred on them. We are not to suppose, however, that Jesus meant, that the conduct of the Divine Being towards the unforgiving, was, in all respects, like that of the lord who thrust his servant into prison, and delivered him to the tormentors; that is, we are not, from this, to attribute any cruelty to God. For, first, nothing is more foreign to his nature; and, second, nothing is more foreign to the nature of Christ, the author of the parable; and, third, this would be charging upon God the very conduct which was so highly disapproved in the unforgiving servant. The great sin charged on him was, that he refused to forgive, and. treated his debtor with cruelty; and from this to charge the same conduct on God, would be to subvert the very design of the parable, which was to inculcate the virtue of tenderness from the divine example. We are not to suppose, that God resembles this king in his execrable cruelty, any more than he resembled the unjust judge in his injustice. Luke xviii. 2-5. There was a certain reason why God was compared to that unjust judge, and that reason was sufficient to justify the comparison; and when we have ascertained what that reason was, we should pursue the comparison no further. Thus it is said of Christ, he should come as a thief in the night." The object here is, to show that he would come suddenly. and unexpectedly, when men were not looking for him. This was sufficient to justify the comparison, and it should be pursued no further; for it would be folly to |