nishes no proof of the heathen doctrine of endless punishment.

We maintain, in regard to this portion of Scripture,

1st. Supposing it to be a literal account, and not a parable, it fails to support the two principal theories of endless misery, viz. either as resulting from the decree of God, or inflicted as a punishment for sin. There is nothing said of election, or reprobation in this account. We are not informed, that the beggar was elected from all eternity to everlasting life, or that the rich man was reprobated to eternal death. There is not a word from which such an inference could be drawn. Neither does it prove, that the rich man was punished after his death for his sins. Not a word is uttered against his character; not a word in favor of the character of Lazarus. Lazarus is not said to have been good; neither is the rich man said to have been evil. All these things have been taken for granted; but there is no proof of them. For aught the parable states to the contrary, we do not know that Dives was not the better man of the two.

2d. We maintain, that the literal sense of this passage disagrees utterly with the religious views of those who put such a sense upon it. If this portion of Scripture be a literal account, then the common doctrine that the inhabitants of the fiery pit are filled with wickedness and spend their time in blaspheming God, is false. The rich man prayed to Father Abraham. He breathed forth a holy desire. Warn my five brethren, he said, that they may not come into this place. Surely this was a benevolent prayer. Again, Abraham intimates, that there were some persons in the place of happiness who desired to go to the place of misery. "Between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that they who would pass from hence to you cannot.' Now all this is directly opposed to the common views of partialists in regard to heaven and hell; and, therefore, we say, that the literal sense of the passage we are considering, disagrees utterly with the religious opinions of those who put such a sense upon it.

3d. It is evident, that the passage is a PARABLE, and not a literal account. Dr. Whitby affirms, that this parable was not original with our Lord, but was quoted by him from certain Jewish writings, in which it was confessedly used as a parable; and Archbishop Tillotson remarks, that in some ancient manuscripts, the passage commences as follows; "And he spake a parable unto them, saying, there was a certain rich man, " &c. The beggar is said to have been carried by angels into Abraham's bosom. Is this to be understood in the literal sense? Look once more. All the parties in the parable are supposed to be in possession of their bodies and all their senses. They see, they feel, they hear, they speak, they have tongues, and fingers, and eyes., How is this to be explained, on the presumption, that the account is not a parable? We do not read, that there had been any resurrection from the dead. Nothing is said, that Abraham, or Lazarus, or the rich man had been raised from the dead. We are told, that the rich man died and was buried, and there the account leaves him in the grave. The whole scene is laid in hades, the grave, or state of the dead; and the Christian doctrine of the resurrection is not introduced into the account at all. But yet in the grave, in the buried state, without any resurrection, the parties have their living bodies, eyes, ears, fingers; they converse, they reason, they see each other. Is not this clearly a parable? a parable founded on the heathen views of hades? and utterly opposed, in its literal features, to the Christian doctrine of the resurrection to life and immortality? Nothing is said in the parable of a previous judgment, any more than of a resurrection. The clergy preach much about a future judgment; but not a hint is given of it in this parable. The rich man was sent to hell without having been judged. How does it happen, that he was sent to hell before the great judgment day, about which so much has been said? Was he doomed to punish

* See his note on Luke xvi. 29.

ment before he was adjudged guilty? We wish to have some light on these matters.

4th. We are confident, that in this parable Jesus referred, not to scriptural views concerning hades, but to the views entertained by the heathen concerning Tartarus and Elysium. These heathen views had been, in part at least, imbibed by the Jews. Jesus referred to them, not to acknowledge the heathen notions to be well founded, but, by making them the base of a parable, to set forth a train of interesting facts. There can be no question, that the passage is a parable; of course, the truth to be taught is to be sought for under the imagery. Hades, or hell, and all the personages mentioned in the parable, are to be viewed as parts of the metaphor.

Hades, in the Bible, is the state of the dead, to which all men go, good and bad; a state of unconsciousness, of silence, of darkness. But among the heathen, hades, or the under world, was a place of activity, peopled with its millions of heroes, sages, and others. Hades, as it is represented in the parable before us, is highly different from the hades in which the sacred writers believed. The former is of heathen origin; and is employed by the Saviour, not to recognise the heathen notions as true, but parabolically, to set forth a train of interesting facts.

It is sometimes said, that Universalists apply a different principle to the interpretation of this parable, from what they apply to any other. But this But this is a great mistake. The interpretation in this case is by no means singular. There are several instances in the Scriptures, wherein the notions of the heathen concerning hades are adopted for the purposes of figure, and without any intention of recognising them as literally true. We find a passage in Ezekiel xxxi. 15-18, where the temporal destruction of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, is thus described; "Thus saith the Lord God, in the day when he went down to the grave, I caused a mourning; I covered the deep for him, and I restrained the floods.

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 prosopopœia, 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 staie 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. also Luke x. 15; Rev. xx. 14; and others.

See

Now, when we see, that it was common for the sacred writers to draw their metaphors from 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 adopt 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 Also his "Notes on the Parables," 4th edition, pp. 253-283; and his more recent work, "Examination of the Doctrine of Future Retribution," pp. 97-102. Also Balfour's "First

Sermons," pp. 37-50.