thereof, and the great waters were stayed; and I caused Lebanon to mourn for him, and all the trees of the field fainted for him. I made the nations to shake at the sound of his fall, when I cast him down to hell with them that descend into the pit; and all the trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, all that drink water shall be comforted in the nether parts of the earth. They also went down into hell with him, unto them that be slain with the sword; and they that were his arm, that dwelt under his shadow in the midst of the heathen." This is a highly figurative description of the temporal destruction of Pharaoh, and the Egyptian nation. Their fall is described as a descent into hell, into the "nether parts of the earth," where they are said to meet those who had been slain with the sword. The whole is unquestionably a metaphor, founded upon the views which prevailed at that time concerning hades, or the under world. But a still more striking passage is found in Isaiah xiv., where the overthrow of the king of Babylon is described in the most glowing language. The inhabitants of hades rise up to meet him at his approach; the kings of the lower regions rise from their thrones, and address him. See the passage; Thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, how hath the oppressor ceased," &c. ... "Hades from beneath is moved for thee, to meet thee at thy coming; it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations, - all' they shall speak, and say unto thee, Art thou also 'become weak as we? art. thou become like unto us?" verses 4, 9, 10. Now let the reader reflect upon this passage one moment. The scene of it is laid in hades, or hell. The inhabitants are the dead.. The dead rise up and taunt the king of Babylon at his destruction, saying, "Art thou become like unto us?" This is literally untrue, and impossible; because the dead know not any thing. The whole passage. is a prosopopoeia, designed to represent the fall of Babylon. No one supposes, that the views of hades here intro

.

duced by the prophet, were literally correct; all agree that he used. them metaphorically, to give force and beauty to the subject of his prophecy. We take the same ground in regard to the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus; and the argument is precisely as good in the one case as in the other. We maintain, that Jesus did not refer to the vulgar notions of hades to acknowledge them correct, any more than Isaiah did; they both.. employed them by way of metaphor. Very few people. are aware how often the sacred writers draw their figures from hades. "Thou Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, (the highest state of temporal prosperity,). shall be brought down to hades," Matt. xi. 23; that is, the lowest temporal degradation. "On this. rock, I will build my church, and the gates.of hades shall not prevail against it." Matt. xvi. 18. Here, gates of hades is a metaphor for the powers of wickedness. See: also Luke x. 15.; Rev..xx. 14; and others.

Now, when we see, that it was common for the sacred writers to draw their metaphors frem hades, referring even to the gates, and representing the dead as talking to each other; and welcoming the approach of those who went down to. destruction; and when we consider, that the literal sense of the parable of the Rich Man. and Lazarus sets reason at defiance, and contradicts, essentially, the Christian doctrine of the future state, we find. that we are obliged to adapt the same principle in the interpretation of this parable, that we adopt in interpreting other passages of Scripture, in which the views of the heathen concerning hades are referred to metaphorically.

We have not room for further comments in this place. Those who desire to see the parable more fully explained, are referred to my "Illustrations of the Parables," pp. 210-249. See also Ballou's "Select Sermons," pp. 37-50. Also his "Notes on the Parables," 4th edition, pp.. 253-283; and his more re-· cent work, Examination. of the Doctrine of Future Retribution," pp. 97-102. Also Balfour's "First

Inquiry," 3d ed. pp. 59-84. See also the excellent work of Rev. Menzies Rayner, being nine Lectures on this Parable, Boston, 1833. This is the largest publication that we have seen in regard to this parable. LII. Luke xviii. 17.

See remarks on Matt. xviii. 3, Section XIX. of this chapter.

LIII. Luke xviii. 24, 25.

See remarks on. Matt. xix. 23, 24, Section XXII. of this chapter.

LIV. "But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; neither can they die any more; for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of. the resurrection." Luke xx. 35, 36.

Our attention is called to this passage as containing a serious objection against the doctrine, that all men will live again, in the future state, and finally be happy. It cannot, indeed, be brought against our views by believers in the endless misery of the wicked; because the whole force of the objection lies as much against that doctrine, as against ours, the objection being, that none but the good will be raised from the dead; consequently the wicked will not exist to be miserable at all. The argument from the passage is this, the text speaks of such, and only such as are accounted worthy to obtain that world and the resurrection;" the inference is, that some are not worthy, and therefore will not be raised, in which case they are annihilated at . death.

The difficulty presented is on the words," they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain," &c. Now, .to get all the light we can, it may assist us, first, to look into the other Evangelists and see how they have recorded this conversation of our Lord. Perhaps the same language may not be alike attributed to him; at least, we should hardly expect either to omit a very important, if not the MOST important qualification in the conversation. Let us then see how Matthew has recorded it:

"Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." Matt. xxii. 29, 30.

Here, it will be perceived, that the language of our Lord, as reported by Matthew, is almost identical with that recorded by Luke, excepting the qualification in the text from Luke, about the "worthiness," which is wholly omitted. Let us look also at Mark:

"Do ye not, therefore, err, because ye know not the Scriptures, neither the power of God? For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven." Mark xii. 24, 25.

Here, again, that qualification is totally omitted; and the language, with that exception, and the interrogatory form which is given to the first part of the passage, is very like that in Luke.

John makes no record of our Lord's conversation with the Sadducees on this subject at all. Now what shall we do? We find, that two out of three Evangelists who report this discourse, make no mention of the qualification found in Luke. But what then? Are we, therefore, to say what Luke reported is not true? No, - certainly not. What we are after is, the weight of evidence as to the importance of that qualification. And that weight is as two to one against the importance of the words in question. We say against the importance, because, had Matthew and Mark considered them important, (as the objection we are noticing certainly is,) it is hardly rational to conclude they would have omitted them altogether. The most probable conclusion is, that, whatever we may understand by the words now, Luke did not intend by his report to give a sense to the conversation, which the other Evangelists did not receive or record. They all ought to be understood as harmonizing.

Now, in relation to the phrase "worthy to obtain," we find, that learned translators, since King James's

day, do not render the passage as it stands in our common translation. Instead of the word worthy, Dr. Campbell uses the word "honored" and the other appropriate connecting words, which make the text speak of the honor of the resurrection, In view of all the information we can obtain, we make no doubt, but that the passage should be understood as saying in effect, that, in reference to that honorable, glorious, and most worthy end, the resurrection of the dead, (in which all are to share,) they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels in heaven. We adopt this conclusion, for the following reasons: 1. Matthew and Mark say nothing of the.qualification of worthiness. as a pre-requisite to insure a resurrection; nor, indeed, anywhere in the Scriptures (unless we except the common translation of Luke) is the resurrection spoken of as the reward of merit in this life. It is ascribed exclusively to the grace and power of God. 2. Because learned modern translators have rendered the passage in a different way; which does not suppose the necessity of the objection that has been raised. And 3. Because, if there is any one point clear in all the Bible, it is, that all men shall be raised from the dead; and no one pas-. sage must be so interpreted or understood, as plainly to contradict the general tenor of Scripture testimony: As evidence of the fact, that all are to be subjects of the.. resurrection, we ask the reader to look at only the. second verse after the text quoted at the head of the article; and he will see, that even Luke himself did not understand his language as sanctioning the inference (for it is an inference at most), that all will not live in the resurrection. It will be recollected 'our Lord had quoted from Exodus iii. 6, to show that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are still living, since God, who is God of the living only, is their God. Now read verse. 38, For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living, For ALL live, unto him," that is, all who, like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are dead as to the flesh, live in the resurrection.

.