ple also shall be all righteousness: they shall inherit the land forever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands, that I may be glorified." "Thine eyes shall see the king in his beauty; they shall behold the land that is very far off." When Elisha saw Elijah taken up into heaven by a whirlwind, he cried, "My father, my father! the chariot of Israel, and horsemen thereof." And if the chariot and horsemen by which Elijah went up into heaven, were called the chariot of Israel, would it be out of the way to say, that the place where he went, was the land of Israel? But they were to be brought into their own land.

And so is heaven often called their own land. Is not the same thing meant by their own land, as by their own border? Now let us look at Jeremiah xxxi, 15-17. "Thus saith the Lord; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rachel weeping for her children, refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not. Thus saith the Lord; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears: for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy. And there is hope in thine end, saith the Lord, that thy children shall come again to their own border." This prophecy referred to the time when the children were slain by the order of Herod; and their mothers were comforted by the promise that they should embrace them again in the resurrection. If it is contended that the words, "I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves," does not mean a resurrection, I really think that some more substantial reason ought to be given, than merely because it says that they shall be brought into the "land of Israel." Especially as no reasonable man can have a face to say that all the prophecies connected with it, has ever been fulfilled in this world. What it is that makes every one so determined to have all the passages

in the Bible that speak of the resurrection, be understood to mean something else, I do not know. Sure I am that it is taught in almost every page; and yet if half a dozen verses were taken out, it is my opinion that the doctrine would be discarded altogether. As it is, the heathen notion of the "immortality of the soul," is much more relied on, as the hope of a future life, than the christian doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. In reply to what I said about the Saviour's not meaning all, in what he said to the Sadducees about the resurrection, Mr. S says, "Well, this is a question between him and Christ, and not between him and me. Our Saviour says they are." And how does he make out that Christ said that he meant all the dead. Only hear him. "We have shown that the context shows that he did." If the Rev. gentleman would have his readers satisfied, that his premises are correct, it is not enough to say the context shows it, without quoting a word of the context, or giving any explanation upon it. The passage in question is in Luke xx, 35, 36.— And what is there in the context which goes to show that Christ alluded to all the dead, both the just and the unjust? It is a very easy matter just to say, "the context shows," but not always so easy to make it appear so. Let us have the whole conversation of Christ to the Sadducees, and let every reader judge for himself whether it proves that he meant all the dead or not. Luke xx, 27-38. "Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection, and they asked him, Saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man's brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brothThere were, therefore, seven brethren and the first And the second

er.

took a wife, and died without children. took her to wife, and he died childless.

:

And the third

took her; and in like manner the seven also: and they

left no children, and died. Last of all the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection, whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife. And Jesus answering, 'said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: 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. Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living for all live unto him." What is there here which proves that all the dead, both just and unjust, are meant? And if the Saviour had allusion to all the dead, why did he say, 'they which shall be accounted worthy?' This question has never been satisfactorily answered, nor ever can be. And I deny that the question lies between me and Christ. Mr. S. in order to show that 'they which shall be accounted worthy,' means all, whether accounted worthy or not, says, "He spake in reference to the will of his Father." "The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hands." And then he says, quoting another passage: "And this is the Father's will who hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing, but raise it up again at the last day." Thus by taking one verse in the 3d, and another in the 6th of John, I suppose he thinks he has made out that God gave both the just and the unjust, to Christ; and that he will raise all up, equal in glory and in happiness, at the last day. Well, let us follow him on, and see if the passages which he has quoted can be fairly understood to favor his views. John iii, 35. "The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hands." I admit that this

If so, what are we "He that believeth on that believeth not the

proves that all are given into the hands of Christ. But does this prove that all were to be accounted worthy to stand before the Son of man at his coming? or to have part in the resurrection of the just? to understand by the next verse? the Son, hath everlasting life: he the Son, shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." Now let us examine his other passage. John vi, 39. "and this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day." I admit that the ones that Christ should not lose, but should raise up again at the last day, means the same as they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world. and the resurrection, in Luke xx, 35. But I do not think it fair, to connect it with a passage in another chapter, and upon entirely another subject, to prove that "they which shall be accounted worthy," means they which shall not be accounted worthy. I am willing, however, to consider it in connection with the context, and see what it does mean. Verse 40. "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one that seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life and I wil! raise him up at the last day." Now here is a questiondid all believe on Christ? Certainly not. And unbelievers were the ones which would not be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection of the dead. Verse 53-56. "Then Jesus said unto them, verily, verily I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.— Whose eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me,and I in him." Thus we see that it was believers which dwelt in Christ, that he was to raise up at the last day.

Now look at 1 Thess. iv, 16. "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the arch angel, and the trump of God and the dead in Christ shall rise first." Again, 1 Cor. xv, 23. “But every man in his own order; Christ the first fruits; afterward they, which are Christ's (or in Christ) at his coming." If there is any mystery about it, it appears to me that these two passages explains it all, clearly and satisfactorily. Christ in this passage, as well as in what he said to the Sadducees, alluded to such as dwelt in him, and he in them. They which should be accounted worthy, and should be found in him at his coming.And the reason, I suppose was, that they might embrace the opportunity before it was too late, to believe in him, become subjects of the special salvation, and be found in him at his coming. Verse 64. "But there are some of you that believe, not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who that believed not, and who should betray him." What then, were they to be raised up again at the last day, in the same sense as believers? If so, why did he say, "This is the will of him that sent me, that every one that seeth the Son and believeth on him, may have everlasting life and I will raise him up at the last day?"Says Mr. S. "Suppose we admit that some are damned after their resurrection to immortality, it appears to me that we shall also have to admit the Orthodox definition of the term, for where in the Bible do we read of deliv erence from damnation in the immortal world." I do not object to the Orthodox definition of the word damnation, because they believe there will be no deliverance from it after the resurrection; but because they understand that to be damned, means to be doomed to endless misery. And I endeavored to show that if this was the true meaning of the word, every soul that has existed since the days of the apostles, must inevitably suffer this dreadful punishment. When Christ said, "the hour is coming, in