quired for many reasons. Have you as firm a ground for altering the ancient and obvious signification of the term "everlasting"? You tell me

that the reason for its restricted for its restricted meaning in its application to the destiny of the wicked is found in a comprehensive and careful survey of Divine truth, and that by "tracking the argument through all its windings," the conclusions reached necessitate the alteration. Or you tell me, that the conjunction in the text establishes a difference in the duration of the awards declared by the Saviour. Or further you say, the idea of unceasing, endless suffering is so revolting to human feelings that the doctrine of the eternity of future punishment cannot be true, and if found taught in the Bible, that particular portion of it cannot be inspired. Finally, you affirm, that the teaching of this "hideous doctrine," this "millstone tied about the neck of Inspiration," fosters infidelity and opposition to the Gospel, and that so long as this doctrine is identified with the Christian faith, disbelief and cotempt will be the consequence. These are some of the reasons adduced to set aside the solemn and positive teaching of plain words. These are the principles of hermeneutics employed to denude the words of our Saviour of their obvious signification. But I must tell you all this is mere theorizing, rather than subjecting the terms of Scripture to a satisfactory exegetical ordeal.

ALIQUIS. I am sorry our conversation must soon close. I think we must quicken our pace a little, and appear less controversial as we approach Oxford.

NEMO. Yes, there is Oxford. What a world of interests gather there. From some such prospect as this, when the city was surrounded with water, Keble once exclaimed, "thy towers are safe." May

we not add, "thy foundations are safe"? I often think, what, if all the intellectual power of this renowned university were on the side of God and His cause, how the whole world would be impressed with its beneficial influence. As some contribution towards so desirable a state, if only for ourselves, let us seek to strengthen each other's faith in the security and preciousness of the Word of God. It is now menaced by a keenness and terribleness of opposition probably heretofore unknown. Two things I deplore in connection with modern religious doubt. One is the use of words in a sense their conventional employment does not allow, that is, the emptying or half emptying of words of their legitimate meaning. The talk, for instance, about inspiration, when is meant only the inspiration of a Milton, or a Shakespeare. By all means let us understand each other, and not talk and debate in the dark. The other matter of regret is the distrust in Christianity which is harboured or avowed, as if her teachers really shrunk from controversy with modern doubt, and were unequal to grappling with a criticism, not indeed reverent and teachable, but one strictly speaking revolutionary and destructive. The theological commotion now perceptible in our midst, so applauded by some, and so feared by others, tends to chaos; yet be assured, when scepticism has settled its articles of creed, and given definiteness of battle, men will be found equal to the challenge, and establish and brighten the demonstrations of our holy faith.

ALIQUIS. Before we separate let me ask if it will be convenient to resume our conversations at an early period? If your engagements will allow, I shall be happy to visit you, or to see you at my rooms, since I own to a desire to have further information on this momentous doctrine.

NEMO. It will be quite agreeable to me to see you early next week at my study, and then we can refer to some of the books which have been quoted or mentioned.

II.

NEMO. I fear we shall not enjoy our conversation so much in this small room, as along those pleasant paths the other day. I found conversation in the balmy freshing both to body and mind. solitary walk, as a rule, is not to particular advantage. And this for several reasons,

have frequently
open
open air re-
I should say a
any of us of

but we have a different matter before us to consider.

ALIQUIS. In resuming our conversation, it has occurred to me we were only settling the preliminaries of the discussion of the weighty subject of future wrath.

NEMO. Very much so, for we kept branching off till I had not the opportunity of giving the outlines of the discourse which has led to our friendly disputation. If I remember rightly, your first proposition was, that the endless duration of future punishment was a doctrine not found in Holy Scripture. Several times, however, I took occasion to remark that this statement was disproved by the Saviour's plain words, which declared that after the decisions of judgment the two opposite characters, the righteous

H

and the wicked, the "sheep" and the "goats," would pass into opposite conditions of ceaseless existence. The punishment is affirmed to be "everlasting" the reward to be "eternal." One destiny is as long and continuous in its duration as the other, reward and punishment being enunciated in the same breath, and in identical epithets. The argument again and again adduced is this, that the duration of the one is as prolonged as that of the other, and therefore if the happiness of heaven be a happiness for eternity, the misery of hell must likewise be a misery for eternity; that is, an unbroken continuity of exist

ence.

ALIQUIS. Yes, but here I must again say that was a little more assumed than proved. How would you present your Scriptural evidence of the eternity of the punishment of the wicked?

NEMO. (1.) I should in the first place affirm, that neither the Greek, nor any other language, possesses more emphatic terms to declare the reality of an endless duration, than those which are employed to express the future punishment of the finally disobedient and impenitent. You have conceded that the New Testament has some expressions which signify an absolute eternity. The abstract idea of eternal duration transcends the power of our thought, and the nearest approach to a human conception of absolute eternity is, that it knows no

ending. This idea we can conceive and grasp. It is remarkable, as shewing the accuracy and depth of Scripture language, that the word we translate "eternity," both in the Hebrew and in the Greek, does not so much express the conception of infinity, as that of indefiniteness, that is to say, it expresses a state which knows no ending. The strongest phrase, which either the Scriptures, or any form of language can supply, is that which describes the Godhead as "living for ever." We read for ex