as endless in their duration, is evident from this circumstance. The parable in which they occur was spoken of Jews; and the New Testament writers teach explicitly the salvation of the whole Jewish nation. Rom. xi. 25, 26, and Heb. viii. 8 – 11.

See

The only objection which we can suppose may rest upon the mind of the reader is this: the same word is applied to life which is applied to punishment. It is rendered in one case "everlasting," in the other, "eternal"; but it is the same word in both instances. If it does not signify endless duration when applied to punishment, how can it when applied to life? On the other hand, if this life is to be enjoyed in the future state, why is not the punishment also to be suffered there?

Answer: The same word is, in the same connexion, applied to different things, in other parts of the Scriptures, when, as all acknowledge, one thing is temporal, the other endless. Hab. iii. 6; Rom. xvi. 25, 26, and others.

But the proper answer to the objection, in the case before us, is this: We consider that the life spoken of in Matt. xxv. 46, is not confined to the immortal existence into which the human race are to be raised after natural death; but is that spiritual life which the believer enjoys in this state. St. John says, "We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren." 1 John iii 14. John knew that he had then already passed from death unto life; he was then in the enjoyment of spiritual life. Jesus saith, "He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath (he then already possessed) everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death unto life." John v. 24. And the original phrase here is the same which is rendered eternal life in Matt. xxv. 46. We believe that the "everlasting life," in John v. 24, and the "life eternal," in Matt. xxv. 46, are one and the same thing. This view of the subject completely removes the ob

jection last introduced. For, if the punishment and the life are both allowed by us to be in the same state, the objection loses all its force.

Those who wish to examine this subject more fully, are referred to the author's "Illustrations of the Parables," pp. 314-354. See also the first American ed. of "Smith on Divine Government," pp. 217-227. "Winchester's Dialogues," ed. of 1831, pp. 53–61. Balfour's "Second Inquiry," ed. of 1827, pp. 311 – 340. See also Ballou's "Lecture Sermons," Lecture XVIII. For an examination of the subject of endless punishment, see Universalist Expositor," Vol. I. pp. 55-61; also Vol. II. 325 - 350. Skinner's Universalism Illustrated and Defended," pp. 196–211. Examine also“ Universalist Expositor," Vol. IV. 149.

XXX. "Woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man, if he had not been born." Matt. xxvi. 24. Mark xiv. 21.

It has long been asserted by believers in endless misery, that Judas, concerning whom these words were spoken, must be eternally damned. It has been alleged, that he was one of the most wicked of men; and that he deserved no better fate, than to be eternally excluded from the presence of the Lord. It is not expedient to pass rash judgment in this case.

Let us look for a few moments to the history of Judas. He was one of the twelve apostles; and to him, as well as all the rest, power was given to work miracles in attestation of his divine appointment. We are not informed, but that he labored as faithfully as the rest, until the time of the betrayal. Jesus did not except Judas in what he said Matt. xix. 28; though what force is to be allowed to this circumstance the reader nust judge, as that passage is involved in some obscurity.

That act of his life which has excited the most attention, was the betraying of his master. See Matt, xxvi. 14-16. 47–50.

There are some things to be said, in extenuation of

this crime. It was not done, we should think, through enmity to Jesus, or his cause. It seems reasonable, that Judas did not think that Jesus would be condemned. He probably thought, that Jesus would be cleared, if tried before the Jewish tribunal. He knew his master's innocence; and perhaps he supposed it would be apparent at the trial, as it certainly was; for even Pilate, the Roman governor, washed his hands, and said, "I am innocent of the blood of this just person. Matt. xxvii. 24.

Again, Judas might have thought, that even if his master were condemned, he could deliver himself from his enemies. He had heard Jesus say, that all

power was in his hands; he had seen him work miracles; he had known him to deliver himself from the people; and he could not have entertained a doubt, that Jesus could deliver himself at any time from the power of his enemies. One of the above reasons should be admitted. For when Judas saw that Jesus was condemned, and that he did not deliver himself, he seems to have been struck with the utmost astonishment and remorse, which shortly produced his death. See the account: "Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. * * * * * And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed and went and hanged himself." Matt. xxvii. 3-5. Is this the language of an enemy of Christ? Does it not show, that Judas thought Jesus would not be condemned? Did he not make the most explicit avowal of his own guilt, before the chief priests and elders, and assert, in the strongest manner, the innocence of Christ? He alone of all the twelve, publicly maintained, at that time, the innocence of Christ, for all the rest had "forsook him and fled," Matt. xxvi. 56; and Peter denied him three times, and cursed, and swore that he knew not the man, 69-75.

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, Lot 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 anysato, rendered in Matt. xxvii. 5, "hanged himself," does not necessarily have that signification. Campbell renders it strangled himself, and says it may be rendered was suffocated. Wakefield's version 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.

2. Jesus called Judas a devil, John vi. 70. Judas was a devil, that is, he was diabolos, 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 these

words refer to Judas at all,

proper place.

as we shall show in the

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