but the one half of what they say about this be true, we may expect the Bible to be full and explicit on this subject. At any rate, the objection has no force until it is proved, that men have immortal souls exposed to such misery. But, it may be noticed, that if the above texts only describe the state of men's bodies after death, the sacred writers were at great pains to inform us about that, which was obvious from every day's observation. Is it rational to think that they would have used such language, yet believed men had immortal souls in a state of happiness or misery in a disembodied state? What orthodox man speaks so in the present day? If he ever quotes such texts, he generally does it with some explanation, guarding us against supposing that they refer to the whole man. A distinction is made in Scripture between soul and body, but it is never intimated that the former must go to heaven or hell after death. Admit it true, and how could Job say, that had he died at his birth, he would have been as an untimely birth? ch. 3: 16. And "should have been as though he had not been," 10:19. Would he not have been, if he had an immortal soul? Indeed, how could he cease to be if this was true? But at death persons are said to be no more, Gen.. 42:36. Ps. 39: 13. Matt. 2: 18. And of man it is said "shall he deliver his soul from the hand of the grave." Ps. 89: 48.

But if any part of man existed in a state of happiness or misery after death, how could the sacred writers speak as in the following passages? In Ps. 115 17. it is said, "the dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into silence." Again; "for in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks ?" Ps. 6: 5%. And it is asked, Ps. 30: 9, "shall the dust praise

thee? Shall it declare thy truth?" And Ps. 88: 10, 11, "Wilt thou show wonders to the dead? Shall the dead arise and praise thee? Shall thy lovingkindness be declared in the grave? Or thy faithfulness in destruction?" comp. verse 12, and Ps. 118: 17, and Isai. 38: 18, 19, where similar things are stated. But again, it is said, Ps. 146: 3, 4, "put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth, in that very day his thoughts perish." And in Eccles. 9: 5, 6, it is expressly declared, "the dead know not any thing," and that "their love and their hatred and their envy is now perished." At verse 10, it is added, "there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave whither thou goest." How these statements could be made by persons who believed that they had immortal souls, which at death went to heaven or hell, 1 must leave for others to explain.

But Job answers his own question. After saying, chap. 14: 10, "man giveth up the ghost and where is he?" he adds, verses 11, 12, "as the waters fail from the sea, and the flood decayeth and dryeth up: so man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not wake nor be raised out of their sleep." Here, he intimates his hope of a resurrection from the dead; but that he had no knowledge of the soul's existence in a disembodied state, is apparent from verse 13, "O that thou wouldst hide me in the grave, that thou wouldst keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, that thou wouldst appoint me a set time and remember me," see also verses 14, 15. Job's answer is in unison with all the above texts, nor is any thing said in any other part of the book, which would lead us to believe that he had an immortal soul which would exist in a disembodied

state. It will be seen in Section 3, that the immortality of the soul is not taught in the book of Job, but that future life is predicated, there, entirely on the resurrection from the dead.

On the whole of the above texts, I shall now submit the following questions and remarks, for candid consideration. Is it any honor to the sacred writers, to make them gravely and repeatedly tell us, that a dead carcass does not praise God; that it does not give him thanks? And if at death man's soul goes to heaven or hell, how could they in truth say, that "the dead know not any thing?" And that at death, "the thoughts of men perish ?" Are souls in heaven and hell destitute of all knowledge and thought? If so, how can they be either happy or miserable? Supposing a man in the present day to express himself as Job, Hezekiah, and others did in view of their death, would he not be counted a denier of the faith, and worse than an infidel? This would be dy-.. ing in the dark with a witness: and would not the religious community be roused, if possible to save his precious soul? If they did not succeed, in saving the man's soul, it is likely they might kill him with their kindness. Such would do well to consider, how those good men spoke as they did, yet died in peace. Did not they fall asleep with a hope and peace of mind as much superior to some deathbed scenes, praised among us, as the composure of a rational man is to the ravings of a maniac? But I ask again, supposing the sacred writers had intended to teach us that the whole man ceases to exist at death, what better language could they have used? The texts are many, plain, and uttered without a single word of qualification, as if men had immortal souls which survive death. Does not their language justify the views I have advanced? And if I have mistaken their

We

meaning, how are we to reconcile them with the doctrine of the immortality of the soul? But if my views be correct, it is certain Job's question is fully and repeatedly answered in the above passages. frankly admit, that if it can be fairly proved, that man has an immortal soul which goes to heaven or hell after death, they ought to be understood as merely referring to his body. But if this can not be done, prejudice herself will allow, the doctrine of disembodied spirits is without foundation in the Bible. If the Scripture writers do not inform us that men have immortal souls, and where they go at death, it is fair to conclude that they had no such knowledge to communicate. If this conclusion is deemed unfair, we then ask, how people came by all this information?

The question now comes fairly before us for consideration, What saith the Scriptures respecting the immortality of man's soul, or spirit, and its condition after death? There are five words in the original languages of the Bible rendered soul and spirit in the common version, which must now be carefully examined. Nesme, nephish, and ruah of the Old Testament; and psuhe, and preuma of the New. The reader may just notice, that if man has not an immortal soul, or spirit, it is not for want of terms to express it. And if the Bible is not full of the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and its condition after death, it is not because these terms are seldom used, for we have found it a very laborious task to examine all the places where they occur, they are so numerous. To quote them all at length would fill a large volume; and even to give book, chapter and verse, would fill from ten to twenty pages. If given they would be of little advantage to the reader. We have examined every text with some care and atten

tion, and every passage where it could be supposed the doctrine of an immortal soul or spirit, or its existence after death is taught, shall be particularly considered. We shall begin with the word

Nesme. This word and nephish are the only termsin the Old Testament rendered soul. Taylor, in his Hebrew Concordance says, that nesme signifies "the chamelion, a kind of lizard, which hath its mouth always open gaping for the air, upon which it is said to live. So in Lev. 11:30. But in verse 18, it is the owl, from semem, to admire, to be astonished, because other birds are astonished at the oddness of its figure. It is rendered the swan, Lev. 11: 30. It is rendered breath, and breatheth in the following texts, and expresses natural life, whether in men or beasts, Deut. 20: 16. Josh. 11: 11. 14. 1 Kings 15: 29. 17:17. comp. verse 21, where the breath of the child is called "his soul." See also Isai. 2: 22, where the breath of man is said to be in his nos-trils, and which agrees with Gen. 2: 7, where God is said to have breathed into man's nostrils the breath of life. And see Isai. 42; 5, where breath and spirit, are terms used to express the same thing. And comp. Josh. 10: 40. Ps. 150: 6. Gen. 2: 7. 7: 22. Job 27: 3. 34: 14, to the same effect. Nesme is rendered spirit, and applied to man, Prov. 20: 27. Job 26: 4. Also, souls, Isai. 57: 16. It is rendered breath, and applied to the Lord, Isai. 30: 33. Job 37: 10. Also inspiration, Job 32: 8. But observe, that what is rendered "inspiration of the Almighty, is in chap. 33: 4, translated "breath of the Almighty." In 2 Sam. 22: 16, Job 4: 9. Ps. 18: 15, it is rendered blast, and is called the "blast of the breath of God's nostrils," a figurative mode of expressing his ? displeasure. Such are all the places where this word occurs and how rendered in the common ver