Why, then, did Judas betray his master? See Matt. xxvi. 14-16. Judas wanted the money. Perhaps he wished to appropriate it to his own use, and perhaps he intended to put it into the treasury of the church, for he kept the bag, a proof that he had been regarded with favor. The worst view that can justly be taken of the case of Judas is, that he betrayed his master, not through enmity to him, or to his cause, but for the reward which was given.

There are two accounts of Judas's death, which seem to be somewhat contradictory. See Matt. xxvii. 5; and compare it with Acts i. 18. The one writer states, that Judas hanged himself, the other, that he fell down and burst asunder. But this difficulty exists only in the translation. There is no proof, that Judas hanged himself, or committed suicide in any way. The Greek word annysto, rendered in Matt. xxvii. 5, "hanged himself," does not necessarily have that significa-. tion. Campbell renders it. strangled himself, and says it may be rendered was suffocated. Wakefield's ver sion is, was choaked with anguish. A. Clarke says, it may be rendered, was strangled. This removes the apparent contradiction.

Let us pay a brief attention to the arguments which are brought forward to prove, that Judas must be forever lost.

.

1. We read, John xvii. 12, "None of them is lost, but the son of perdition." Does this passage show, that Judas will be lost in the future state? or that he will be eternally lost? Not at all. Judas was lost; he was lost from the apostleship; he was a lost and undone man, a poor, broken-hearted traitor, abandoned of the church and of the world. "Son of perdition " is a Hebraism, signifying one that is lost. Judas had misery enough in this world; it is cruel to pursue him into eternity with the effects of his treachery.

Judas

2. Jesus called Judas a devil, John-vi. 70: was a devil, that is, he was diaßolas, an adversary to Christ. But will this prove the endless, damnation of

Judas? No, for Jesus said to Peter, "Get thee behind me, Satan," Matt. xvi. 23, and no one supposes that Peter is forever lost.

3. It is alleged, that Judas committed self-murder, and that the Bible says, no self-murderer shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. We deny both these propositions. The Bible makes no such statement in regard to the self-murderer, nor is there any proof, that Judas committed self-murder.

4. It is alleged, that Jesus said, "Good were it for that man, if he had not been born.” Matt. xxvi. 24. Now, if Judas should ever be saved, it would be good for him that he had been born; and, consequently, he can never be saved. We object to this strained and far-fetched sense of the passage. We do not believe, that Jesus intended any such inference should be made from his words. Those words are not to be strictly and literally interpreted, as they were a proverbial form of speech among the Jews, and every one knows, that proverbs are not to be literally considered. Adam Clarke has fully shown this in his Commentary, at the end of chap. i. Job (chap. iii.) cursed the day in which he was born; but no one supposes that he will be endlessly miserable. So also did Jeremiah (xx. 14-18); but Jeremiah, we trust, is not to be finally excluded from God's presence.

5. It is alleged, that Judas is gone to an endless hell, because the evangelist states, that he went "to his own place," Acts i. 25. But we deny that thèse words refer to Judas at all, as we shall show in the proper place.

Thus all the arguments, which have been brought forward to prove the endless misery of Judas, do utterly fail.

It should be remembered, that Judas fully repented of his sin. That his repentance was genuine is evident from the following considerations. 1. He confessed his guilt.. 2. He asserted the innocence of Christ. 3. He returned the money. 4. His sorrow caused

his death, which it could not have done on any other supposition than that it was sincere. We close with the words of Dr. Adam Clarke.

"The utmost that can be said for the case of Judas, is this he committed a heinous act of sin and ingratitude, but he repented, and did what he could to undo his wicked act; he had committed the sin unto death, that is, a sin that involves the death of the body; but who can say, (if mercy was offered to Christ's murderers, and the gospel was first preached at Jerusalem, that these very murderers might have the first offer of salvation through him whom they had pierced,) that the same mercy could not be extended to wretched Judas? I contend, that the chief priests, &c., who instigated Judas to deliver up his Master, and who crucified him, and who crucified him too as a malefac-· tor, having, at the same time, the most indubitable evidence of his innocence, were worse men than Judas Iscariot himself; and that, if mercy was extended to those, the wretched, penitent traitor did not die out of the reach of the yearning of its bowels. And I contend further, that there is no positive evidence of the final damnation of Judas, in the sacred text."*

XXXI. "But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation." Mark iii. 29.

We have already considered this passage, in section XIII. of this chapter, under Matt. xii. 31, 32. The reader will refer to that place for an exposition of the phrase "hath never forgiveness," and for our views, in general, on the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Those who blaspheme against the Holy Spirit are in danger of eternal damnation!" It is sometimes very confidently asked, if there is no such thing as eternal damnation; how can anybody be in danger of it? The Universalist replies, "I believe in eternal damnation in the sense those words ought to bear in

i

* Com., end of Acts, chap. i.

that passage, and in the sense the Saviour originally intended. The blasphemer was actually in danger of it." The Greek expression, which our translators render "eternal damnation," is aiariov xoiosos, literally the judgment of the age, not endless misery in the future world. All who blasphemed the power of the Holy Spirit, and resisted the evidence of the Christian religion, and joined with the Jews in persecuting the church of God, were subject to the aiariov xgioɛws, the judgment of the age.

XXXII. Mark vi. 11. For our views on this passage, see Section VIII. of this chapter, on Matt. x. 15, and Section XII. on Matt. xi. 22-24.

XXXIII. Mark viii. 35–37. For our views on this passage, see Section XVIII. of this chapter, on Matt. xvi. 25, 26.

XXXIV. "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off; it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than, having two hands, to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched; where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off; it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than, having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched; where their worm dieth not, and the fire' is not quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out; it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire; where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." Mark ix. 43-48.

The parallel places are Matt. v. 29, 30, and xviii. 8, 9.

We shall consider this passage under the three following heads.

1st. What is intended by entering into "life" (ver. 43) or "the kingdom of God" (ver. 47)?

2d. What punishment is intended by the phrases "hell" and "hell fire"?

3d. What are we to understand by the expressions, "where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched "?

1. In regard to the first question, I reply, that, to

enter into "life," or "the kingdom of God," which are synonymous terms, was to enter the moral kingdom of Jesus Christ, which he came to establish in the hearts of men, that kingdom, which came with divine power, at the end of the Jewish state. That kingdom was at hand, when John the Baptist, Christ, and his apostles began to preach, Matt. iii. 2, iv. 17, x. 7. This kingdom is not exclusively in another state of being; it was the moral reign of Christ among men. It came to them, Matt. xii. 28. It was said to be

To enter into the

within men, Luke xvii. 19, 20. kingdom of God, was to believe, profess, and obey the Gospel; and whoever did this was in the kingdom of God, let him be outwardly in any place. We will not extend our remarks on this topic, as we have already discussed this subject in Section III. of this chapter, under Matt. v. 20. See Universalist Expositor," Vol. I. pp. 3-23, on phrase "kingdom of heaven."

2. What punishment is intended by the phrases "hell," and "hell fire"?

The phrase here translated hell is yevra, gehenna, and the phrase translated hell fire is, τὴν γέενναν τοῦ πυρὸς, the gehenna of fire.

Having already fully explained the scriptural sense of gehenna, in Section IV. of this chapter, under Matt. v. 22, (to which I refer the reader,) I shall not go so fully into the subject in this place. It is very singular, if gehenna is the term by which we are to understand a place of eternal punishment, that the word was never used by any of the inspired Christian teachers, except our Lord and James. The word occurs seven times in Matthew, three in Mark, and once in Luke, all in the discourses of our Lord; and, besides these, it occurs only once, viz. in the epistle of James.

We have no evidence, in the New Testament, that the word gehenna was ever employed in allusion to the Gentiles. In the twelve times in which it is employed in the New Testament, it is addressed to Jews. John wrote his gospel for the use of the Gentiles, and he