place before Gehenna was used as an emblem of it? If so, how could they speak about it? But it seems men came gradually, in process of time, to use Gehenna as an emblem of the place of future torment, before they had any revelation or knowledge about such a place. We thought places and things were always first known, and then names for them followed; but here the matter seems to have been very different. In fact, there is something here which will not bear examination. I ask again, why were not men content to speak of it by the name God had given it, if indeed he had said any thing about it? Or did men first invent this place of torment, and then change the sense of the word Gehenna to suit it, or be an emblem of it? Unless it is proved that our Lord did use Gehenna in this new sense, will it not follow that such a place of torment is not mentioned in the Bible by the names Sheol, Hades, Tartarus, or Gehenna? If it is proved that he used Gehenna in this sense, does it not follow that he adopted an idea of men's own invention, and made it a doctrine to be believed under the gospel dispensation? It is certain, if Dr. Campbell be correct, that he incorporated a heathen notion with his religion, and has made it a principal article of belief to all his followers. It may just be added, how could Dr. Campbell with truth say, that tophet came gradually to be used as an emblem of hell, the place of future torment, “and at length to be confined to it?" It might indeed be made an emblem of this by the Jews, but could not be confined to it; for, in reading the Old Testament scriptures, they could not but understand it in a very different manner. Let any one consult the places where it occurs, and see if it could be so understood by them. If they did, it was a great misunderstanding of the passages; for Dr. Camp

bell himself declares, that in this sense it does not occur in the Old Testament.

4th, Let it be noticed, that although Dr. Campbell declares in the above quotation, that Gehenna does not occur in the Old Testament in the sense of a place of torment for the wicked, yet he gives us the following information about it.-He says, "it is originally a compound of the two Hebrew words, On ge hinnom, the valley of Hinnom, a place near Jerusalem, of which we hear first in the book of Joshua xv. 8. It was there that the cruel sacrifices of children were made by fire to Moloch, the Ammonitish idol, 2 Chron. xxiii. 10. and that, as is supposed, from the noise of drums, toph signifying a drum, a noise raised on purpose to drown the cries of the helpless infants."

Here, then, is the origin of Gehenna in the New Testament, stated by Dr. Campbell himself. We see, though it does not occur in the sense of a place of torment for the wicked, yet it does occur in the Old Testament in some sense. What this sense is, and what it is there made an emblem of by divine authority, ought to be carefully considered, and not rashly departed from, unless very substantial reasons are assigned, arising from its meaning and usage in the New Testament. We do not think it at all probable that our Lord would use Gehenna in such a different sense, or make it an emblem of such a very different thing from that of the Old Testament writers, if Dr. Campbell himself may be believed in the following quotations. In his fifth dissertation, part ii. sect. 13. he says,-"Our Lord, we find from the evangelists, spoke to his countrymen in the dialect of their own scriptures, and used those names to which the reading of the law and the prophets, either in the original, or in the versions then used, had familiarized them. Our

translators, and indeed most European translators, represent him as using words, which, even in their own translations of the Old Testament, never occur, and to which, in fact, there is nothing there that corresponds in meaning." In his first preliminary dissertation, part i. sects. 1. and 2. he further says, "if the words and phrases employed by the apostles and evangelists, in delivering the revelation committed to them by the Holy Spirit, had not been agreeable to the received usage of the people to whom they spoke, their discourses, being unintelligible, could have conveyed no information, and consequently would have been no revelation to the hearers. Our Lord and his apostles, in publishing the gospel, first addressed themselves to their countrymen the Jews; a people who had, many ages before, at different periods, been favoured with other revelations. To those ancient Jewish revelations, now collected into one volume, Christians give the name of the Old Testament; and thereby distinguish them from those apostolical and evangelical writings, which, being also collected into one volume, are called the New Testament. In the latter dispensation, the divine authority of the former is presupposed and founded on. The knowledge of what is contained in that introductory revelation, is always presumed in the readers of the New Testament, which claims to be the consummation of an economy of God for the salvation of man; of which economy the Old Testament acquaints us with the occasion, origin, and early progress. Both are therefore intimately connected. Accordingly, though the two Testaments are written in different languages, the same idiom prevails in both; and in the historical part at least, nearly the same character of style.

"As the writings of the Old Testament are of a much earlier date, and contain an account of the rise and first

establishment, together with a portion of the history of the nation to whom the gospel was first promulgated, and of whom were all its first missionaries and teachers, it is thence unquestionably that we must learn, both what the principal facts, customs, doctrines, and precepts are, that are alluded to in the apostolical writings, and what is the proper signification and extent of the expressions used. Though the New Testament is written in Greek, an acquaintance with the Greek classics (that is, with the writings of profane authors in that tongue in prose and verse) will not be found so conducive to this end, as an acquaintance with the ancient Hebrew scriptures. I am far from denying that classical knowledge is, even for this purpose, of real utility; I say only, that it is not of so great utility as the other. It is well known that the Jews were distinguished by all pagan antiquity, as a nation of the most extraordinary and peculiar manners; as absoutely incapable of coalescing with other people, being actuated, especially in matters wherein religion or politics were thought to be concerned, by the most unrelenting aversion to every thing foreign, and the most violent attachment to every thing national. We cannot have a clearer evidence of the justness of this character, than of their remaining to this day a distinct people, who, though they have been for many ages scattered over the face of the earth, have never yet been blended in any country with the people amongst whom they lived. They are, besides, the only wandering nation that ever existed, of which this can be affirmed.”

No man could have written a refutation of what Dr. Campbell has said about Gehenna, so complete, as what

he has here furnished himself. It needs no comment nor observation from me.*

What we have here to inquire into then, are principally the two following things:-In what sense is Gehenna or tophet used in the Old Testament; and what do the sacred writers make it an emblem of, when they use it in this way?

1st, Then, let us inquire in what sense Gehenna or tophet is used in the Old Testament. Doubting the correctness of Dr. Campbell's statement, that Gehenna did not occur in the Old Testament in the sense of a place of eternal punishment, we have examined all the places in which it occurs. This examination has ended in the persuasion that Gehenna in the New Testament, does not refer to such a place of punishment. It has resulted in the conviction that Dr. Campbell is mistaken when he says that Gehenna in the New Testament, always and indisputably signifies the place of future misery for the wicked. This has been forced upon us from examining the Old Testament, and in finding him to be correct in saying that Gehenna is not used there to express a place of endless punishment for the wicked. The result of this examination of the texts in the Old Testament, has given us very different views of the places where it is used in

It should be kept in remembrance, that Dr. Campbell was a very celebrated minister of the church of Scotland, and principal of Marischal college, Aberdeen. The most learned, yea, the very best of men, are liable to be influenced by the places of honour and emolument they occupy. There is no doubt in my mind, that had Dr Campbell written in a situation free of all restraint, he would have given us a very different account of Gehenna and its punishment. The doctrine of eternal misery, was a principal article in the creed he was obliged to subscribe to, and by which he held his place and all its emoluments. It is rather a matter of surprise, that he ventured to write so much at variance with this doctrine, considering the time he lived, and circumstances in which he was placed.