IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 |^|2.8 
 
 | 50 "■■ 
 
 ^ m 
 
 2.5 
 2.2 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 1-4 IIIIII.6 
 
 V] 
 
 /) 
 
 ^1 
 
 
 *%^/ 
 ^ 
 
 '/ 
 
 /A 
 
CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 1 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historique* 
 
 1980 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Covers damaged/ 
 Couverture endommagde 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gdographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge intdrieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6t6 filmdes. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppl6mentaires; 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la methods normaSe de filmage 
 sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. 
 
 I I Coloured pages/ 
 
 D 
 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 
 D 
 
 Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages d6color6es, tachetdes ou piqudes 
 
 I I Pages detached/ 
 
 n 
 
 Pages ddtachdes 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Qualitd in6gale de ('impression 
 
 Includes supplementary materii 
 Comprend du matdriel supplementaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 r~5 Showthrough/ 
 
 r~l Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 I — I Only edition available/ 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6t(§ filmdes d nouveau de fa^on d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 D 
 
 10X 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film6 au taux de rdduclion indiquA ci-dessous. 
 
 14X 
 
 18X 
 
 22X 
 
 26X 
 
 30X 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grSce d la 
 g6n6rosit6 de: 
 
 Bibliothdque nationale du Canada 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettetd de l'exemplaire filmd, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimde sont filmds en commengant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont filmds en commenpant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol ^^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED "), or the symbol y (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE ", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 film6s d des taux de reduction diffdrents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmd 6 partir 
 de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche & droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n6cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la m6thode. 
 
 1 2 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 : 4 ■ 
 
 8 
 
 6 
 
c 
 
 rfn^*--t/ 
 
 / i^^-^t/ » 
 
 wX^^ 
 
 ''Cc^ 
 
 -«t..-.-IJi"l»«'-fc^ 
 
 Zt^ 
 
 h 
 
 Me descended into MelV 
 
 OR AN INTERPRETATION 
 
 Based on Eeason and Scripture, 
 
 AS STATED BY 
 
 REV. W. HENDERSON, A.M. T.C.D. 
 
 ^^Quia nisi infidelis nega/verit fuisse apud inferos Christum ?" 
 (August Epist. 99, Cap. 2.) 
 
 FOR SALE BY 
 
 S. E. MITCHELL, Pembroke, Canada, 
 
 AND 
 
 DAWSON BROTHERS, MONTREAL. 
 
 PRICE TEN CENTS. 
 
 im^ 
 
 PEMBROKE: 
 
 PBINTSP AT THE "OBSBBVBR" OHSAP BOOK AND JOB OFFICB. 
 
 1868. 
 
 * 
 
 / 
 

 
 
,'IJlJ(j(J'W»9f I I. im»mivm'' "^m 
 
 "HE DESCENDED INTO HELLf 
 
 OR, AN INTERPRETATION BASED ON REA- 
 SON AND SCRIPTURE. 
 
 " The significant omissions in the service which struck him, were 
 tile article ' He descended into Hell,' from the Apostles creed." 
 
 This extract, taken from an English newspaper, sufficiently 
 proves the necessity for vindicating the doctrine contained in 
 the article " He descended into Hell." The exposition of it 
 given in the following pages is not new, for it is, at least, as 
 old as the article itself — in other words, 1,400 years and more. 
 Nevertheless, it is not now generally received. Nor should it 
 be, if it rested on antiquity alone. But resting, as it does, on 
 reason and scripture, in addition to antiquity, it deserves the 
 serious consideratipri of all who would know " the certainty of 
 those things wherein they have been instructed," 
 
 The interpretation referred to is that our Oaviour's human 
 soul descended into a state of suffering after death, as distin- 
 guished from iiiGjinal state of the lost j or the state of happi- 
 ness ; or the grave. 
 
 The generally received opinion supposes Christ's soul to have 
 gone into that place and state of rest where departed spirits go. 
 The interpretation given hero, likewise supposes him to have 
 gone to a place and state of departed spirits ; but not to a place 
 and state of rest. He (i. e. his disembodied soul,) went to a 
 place in which lie remained in a state of suffering until he was 
 released therefrom on tlie morning of the Resurrection. In 
 support of this interpretation, I observe, first, that there are 
 only two states into which it is possible to enter after death — 
 the one a state of unchangeable happiness ; the other a state of 
 unchangeable miseiy. Both of these states admit of degrees of 
 happiness and misery, respectively ; and the final issue of one 
 is the endless misery of the lost in gehenna — the final issue of 
 the other is the endless happiness of the Ijlcssed in Heaven. — 
 All alike, enter into these states immediately after death ; we 
 shall leave them at the resurrection from the dead. 
 
 It may be asked what authority is there for asserting that 
 there are only two states after death ? The authority of reason. 
 — for if there bo an intermediate state in which happiness and 
 misery co-exist, as on earth, then it is a state of misery. If 
 there be no such state, then there is none other conceivable, for 
 
 ^:- 
 
 <*. 
 
2 
 
 ,, tlic only other conccivul)le state is one in which tlicrc would 1x3 
 : an absence of both liappiness and misery. But tiiin i.s ineoncciv- 
 . able in connection with the iminoi"tal sjiirit, which cannot be- 
 '■ come unconscious, cannot die. The authority of Scripture con- 
 firms the authority of reason, for the Scriptures do not represent 
 the departed spirit as being in an unconscious state after death. 
 On the contrary, they teach us that it increases in knowledge. 
 ^'''iFor example, Abraham is represented as believing what did not 
 'Happen till long after his death. Viz.: Tliat Moses and the 
 •. ' Prophets were written for our learning upon earth ; and not 
 ';;oo^ly so, but that they were sufficient for our sa,lvation. The 
 ' Scriptures also uniformly represent the soul as passing imme- 
 r^jdiately from the present state of existence to a future and fixeil 
 ,y^t&t^ of either happiness or misery. See the jiarablo of the rich 
 ,)• man and Lazarus (Luke XVI,) and the words, " From lience- 
 ;;, forth blessed ai'e the dead who die in the Lord ; even sosaith 
 the spirit, for they rest from their labors." Therefore, although 
 ■ there is no intermediate state between the state of happiness 
 and misery, there is an intermediate state of happiness and 
 , misery between our earthly state on the one hand and our 
 , ;gehennal and heavenly state, as the case may be, on the other. 
 .'This, so far at least as I am aware, has never been denied by 
 "Christians, nor can it be consistently by any who acknowledge the 
 .authority of reason and Scripture. For reason teaches that this 
 intermediate state is not our earthly state, nor yet is it our final 
 s<fl,te. It differs materially from both in this respect— that this 
 is a disembodied state — but both the extreme states are em- 
 ' bodied states. Scripture also confirms this teaching when it 
 Bays "Death and Hell delivered up the dead which were in 
 them, and Death and Hell were cast into the lake of fire." — 
 Rev. XX, 13 and 14 v. Where I suppose Death refers to the 
 body, and Hell to the soul. i ' 
 
 ' , Observe next, that our word I/ell is the translation of the 
 '• Greek woi:d Hades, and that the Greek word Hades is used to 
 denote both of these states (see Vs. 89, 48, Rev. 20, 13.), like 
 the corresponding Hebrew word ^^ Schetd" and also our own 
 word Heath. We speak indiscriminately of the death of the 
 righteous and the death of the wicked, ^ut, in the majority of 
 instances, the word Hades is used in a bad sense in both the Old 
 and New Testament Scriptures. And it is specially woi-thy of 
 notice that our Saviour himself invariablv uses it in a bad 
 sense, viz.: To denote the Hades of suffering. In the follow- 
 ' ing passages it cannot mean anything else : " And thou Caper- 
 uauip, which art exalted linto Heaven, shait be 
 brought down to Hell." (Mat. XI, 23.) "Upon thi« 
 rock I will Iniild my church, and the gates of Hell sball not 
 
3 
 
 |)rov;uI against it." (Mat. IG, IS.) "In Hell lie lifted up 
 his eyes, Ijeing in torment." (Luke 10, 23.) 
 
 Having thns proved that there are only two states possible 
 after death, and that this word Hades is strictly applicable to 
 the state of snffering. I might even go further and say the 
 jjlace of snffering, for the idea of place was invariably associat- 
 ed with the word Hades. (See Pearson, Art. V.) The next 
 enquiry will l)e, into wliich of these two places and states did 
 our Saviour's human soul enter after death 1 Did he go to the 
 hades of rest or the hades of unrest ? the hades of happiness or 
 the hades of suffering] If he went to a place of suffeiTiig he 
 must have gone to a state of suffering. According to reason 
 and Scripture and, hs I l)elieve, the testimony of the Church of 
 England in the Creed, he went to the hades of suffering ; but 
 before I bring forward direct proof of this position, it may 
 be pi'oper to observe that it is not necessary to a belief of this 
 article to hold this i)articular interpretation of it. If it be in- 
 ter})reted to mean the Jtades of happiness, it still refei-s to some 
 hades, and this, as I have said, is a legitimate use of the word. 
 Nevertheless, if it be revealed in Scripture that it means the 
 hades of suffering it must be profitable for us to know it and 
 in so far as it is profitable, it niust be necessary. 
 
 I wish to say also that all other interpretations cannot fail 
 to be unsatisfaetory to the thoughtful mind. It is alleged, e.g., 
 that it means " He descended into the grave." But did Ke' 
 descend into the grave 1 His body did ; but his soul was not 
 buried with his body ; and the soul, traly speaking, is tlio liv- 
 ing person, as the conversation of Abraham with the rich man 
 proves. ; Therefore that is iinsatisfactory. -^'''^ 
 
 It is said again that it means simply the state of the dead, 
 but this does not solve the difficulty, for the chai'acter of the 
 state is not determined thereby. Besides, to say that ho de- 
 scended into the state of the dead, is to say no more than that 
 he died. Whereas, in the Creed, it is distinguished both from 
 the death and the burial. We believe that he was dead and 
 buried, and aLso that he decended into Hell. So in Scripture 
 it is written " he bowed his head and gave iip the Ghost. But 
 it is algo. written, "Thou wilt- not leave my soul in Hell." — 
 Still, tjlierefore, the question remains what is meant by de-^^ ■ 
 scendiiig into Hell ? Consequently that also is rmsatisfactory.-'** 
 
 ^et; 
 
 again, it is said that it means " He descended into 
 
 the place of departed spirits." This interpretat ^n is called by 
 Pearson, the general opinion of the Church, ana this^ like the 
 preceding, is true — as far as it goes— but it fails to go faro'^ 
 enough. , It does not determine the character of 
 the place referred to. Is it the pl«,cc and state 
 
 the state 
 of 
 
 the good' 
 
4 
 
 departed spirits, or of the evil 1 To way in reply that it means 
 jjimply the place of the departed spirits, is no more satisfactory 
 than to say, It is in America, in answer to the question — Is it 
 in Nortn or South America ? or is it in Ireland or Englpnd 'i 
 and it should be said it is in the United Kingdom. It is need- 
 less to discuss many other fancifid theoi-ies, and among them 
 the theory which identifies Hell with Purgatory ; for the doc- 
 trine of Purgatory is not only not in accordance with, but 
 directly contrary to many passages of Holy Scripture, par- 
 ticularly the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Lest, how- 
 ever, the simple denial of a doctrine so generally received, 
 should not be considered sufficient, it may be well to add that 
 not only is there no ground for believing that Purgatory is 
 possible in an intermediate jjand'disembodied state, but also in 
 order ^^0 establish the doctrine of Purgatory, it is necessary to 
 prove the possibility of passing from the one disemhodied state 
 to the other. This, however, is impossible, unless our Lord bo 
 deceiving us, when he says that between the two there is a 
 ^eat gulf fixed, that the one is afar off from the other, and 
 that they who would pass cannot. (Luke 16, 23, 26.) 
 
 Finally, it has been said (by Calvin, according to Pearson,) 
 that it means descent into Hell in the popular sense of the 
 word, and that Christ did really and truly suffer all those pains 
 due to the darned. If this be really Calvin's meaning, which 
 may reasonably be questioned, then, as the Bishop observes, 
 this explication cannot be admitted, partly for the reasons giv- 
 en by himself — chiefly because it is contrary to the teaching of 
 both reason and Scripture — of reason for the state of the damn- ' 
 ed is an embodied state. (See Mat. X, 28.) ** Fear him which 
 
 able to destroy both soul and body in Hell" ; but Christ was in 
 a disembodied state, therefore he could not have been suffering 
 then, at least, all the pains due to the damned — of Scripture 
 alsot for Christ is nowhere said to have gone to " gehenna" but 
 to hades. 
 
 Seeing then that Christ went into some disembodied state-some 
 place of departed spirits — it only remains to discuss the ques- 
 tion whether he went into the place or state of the good depart- 
 ed spirits or the evil. My opinion is that he went into, the 
 latter state. In order to prove this it will only bo necessary 
 to prove that he went into a state of suffering. It will not be 
 necessary to determine either the degree of suffering to which 
 he was subjected, or the locality where that suffering was en- 
 dured ; if, however, in the course of the argument both these 
 additional points should be decided, it must be confessed that 
 the ailment will be so much the stronger. Why theh^, let me 
 askjshould this interpretation not be received ? I Imow not why, 
 
except for reasouH which cannot be su^inciJ. Tlieio aro,in(lcecl, 
 apparent objections, but to my mind they are only ap})arent ; 
 and my ]iext step will bo to endeavor to make this ])lain to 
 others also. It is ol^jected, o.g., that our Saviour himself said, 
 *' To-day shalt thou bo with me in Paridise ;" lie did, indeed, 
 say so, but it by no means follows that the interpretation usual- 
 ly put upon these words is the correct one. In the first place 
 it is not wholly unworthy of our profession as believers in the 
 Bible to consider the teachings of intuitive theology. Certainly 
 not, when it accords with the analogy of Scripture on any 
 particular point. Now it cannot be denied that we intuitively 
 associate the idea of happiness with an upward direction, and 
 the idea of unhappiness with a downwai'd. I think, also, 
 it is true to say that when we entertain the idea of our Saviour's 
 Imioan soul going into Paradise, we intuitively bclie\'e that lie 
 ascended and therefore did not dcsctiul • In so far then as the 
 usual interpretation agrees with the view that Paradise is above, 
 I believe it to be correct. " The souls oi" the slain whom St. 
 John saw under the altar," Rev. G. 9., were surely above and 
 not below ; but so far as the usual intei'pretation makes the 
 words of our Saviour to refer to his human soul, I ])elieve it 
 to be in-correct, for in that case not only will these words 
 disagree with the words of the creed, which say that " ho de-!J 
 scended," and therefore did not ascend, but also with the words 
 of Scripture, which say the same, " who shall descend into the 
 deep ? (that is to bring up Christ again from the dead.)" Rom. 
 10, 7. It will not solve the difficulty to say that Christ did 
 both ascend and descend during the interval between death and 
 resuri'ection — that he existed in two different states — in other 
 words that he passed from the one to the other, for as already 
 quoted, he himself declared that they who would pass from 
 either side cannot. 
 
 Our Saviour did indeed say, to-day shalt thou be with me 
 in Paradise, but in what capacity did he say so ? Was he speak-^. 
 ingatthe time as manor as God? It cannot be denied that 
 he spoke sometimes exclusively as man, viz.: " My Father is 
 greater than I,'' John 14, 28, " I can of mine own self do 
 nothing," John 5, 30 ; but sometimes also he spoke exclusive- =; 
 ly as God, viz., " I and my Father are one,'' John 10, 30; 
 *' My Father worketh hitherto and I work," (John 5, 17) which .. 
 latter words were understood by the Jews to imply a confcs- ,o 
 sion of equality with the father. We find him also on ono " 
 occasion speaking in such away as to distinguish between the 
 manhood and Godhead,whiIe at the same time ho acknowledg- 
 ed the perfect union of both in.his own person. " No man hath 
 ascended up to Heaven, but he that came down from Heaven, 
 
^im 
 
 even the Son of Man — 2vho is in Ilcwvcn'''' — fvccordingly, wo 
 are warranted to beliove that the son of man was both in 
 Heaven and upon earth at one and the same timn, for he who 
 spoke these words was on earth while he spoke them, but be 
 was at the same time in Heaven ; as man he was on earth, as 
 God he was both in Heaven and on earth. Seeing then that 
 our Saviour was in the habit of speaking in this way, it is to- 
 say the least, Hot contrary to the analogy of Scripture, to 
 believe that he spoke to the penitent thief as God and not as 
 man, and when we consider the circumstances under which 
 these words were spoken, is it not more agreeable to reason 
 to suppose that he spoke as God and not as man 1 The dying 
 malefactor had just confessed his faith in the divinity of his 
 dying Saviour. It is the most remarkable example of faith 
 in this truth upon record, and should put to shamo the infi- 
 delity of Arians, Socinians, &c. That faith was 
 expressed in the rebuke- given to his fellow malefactor. " Dost 
 not thou feir God, seeing thou art in the same condemna- 
 tion ?" It was also breathed in the prayer, " Lord remember 
 me when thou comest into thy kingdom." It was therefore 
 unquestionably as God, that the thief spoke of and addressed 
 the Saviour in prayer. Can we then have any difllculty in 
 believing that it was as God the Saviour spoke, when ho 
 answered that prayer and said. Today shaltthou be with me 
 in Paradise. To-day shalt fhou be with me, whom you have 
 confessed before man to be God 
 as Lord. I am even now there 
 
 me there. Thus we are not only able to reconcile the Creed, 
 with the Scripture, but also the Scripture with itself. 
 
 It is objected again that our Saviour said, " It is finished," 
 (John XIX, 30.) But I ask what was finished 1 Js it said 
 the work of Redemption ? Scarcely can this be true, for it is 
 not finished yet. " We wait still for the adoption to wit 
 the redemption of our bodies." (Rom. 8, 23.) Or is it said 
 — the sufferings? — he had still to die, yet this interpretation 
 might appear admissable, wore it not for the context in which 
 the words occur. It must be plain to the most superficial 
 scholar that the words translated ' accomplislied' and fulfilled 
 in the 28th verse,and the one translated/ finished' in the 30th 
 verse, are from the same root. The two latter evidently refer 
 to otie and this same thing ; not because I say so, but because 
 our Saviour thirsted, that the Scripture might be fulfUlcd, and 
 betaiise he said that what happened after ho thirsted was 
 the fulfillment of it. (See Ps. 69, 21.) Jesus, that the Scrip- 
 ture!^ might be fulfilled, saith, " I thirst." They filled a 
 sponge with vinegar and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his 
 
 whom you have addressed 
 ; to-day shalt thou be lolth 
 
• mouth. When Josiis, Ihcrofore, bad received the vinegar, 
 - he said, " fulfilled ;" i. e., the Scripture is fulfilled ; or 
 ' more strictly, perhaps, the action is completed by which 
 " the Scripture is fulfilled. For, as Bengel observes, telco is 
 
 • spoken of things, but tdeioo of the sacred Scriptures. In 
 •either case, however, the word refers to the fulfillment of this 
 
 Scripture ; and therefore, although it may be accommodated 
 
 • to other things, it is not true to say that it refers primarily to 
 •» either the completion of the work of Redcmptiou, or the 
 
 termination of the Saviours sufferings. 
 ''■ Once more it is objected that our Saviour said, " Father, 
 into thy hands 1 commend my spirit." Hence it is argued 
 that the spirit of Christ must have ascended to his father, 
 
 • for his father is in heaven ; but surely the hands of the father, 
 ■'SO to speak, can reach even to hades. Can we deny the tes- 
 '•^ timony of the Psalmist on this point, when he says, " If I 
 ■ ' make my bed in Hell, behold thou art there." If he de- 
 scended into Hell, was there not more need that he should 
 commend his spirit into the hands of his father, than if his 
 spirit had gone to Paradise. So far then from these words 
 militating against this view, they rather establish it. 
 
 No other objections occur to me as requiring a special refu- 
 tation here. Those urged by Pearson against Calvin's view 
 are manifestly irrelevant to this ; and therefore I would ask 
 aciain, why should we not believe this view % If it be replied 
 ■why should we ? Because there is a very strong presumption 
 in favor of its truth. I refer to the concurrent testimony of 
 ecclesiastical history, for the last 1,400 years and more which 
 is compressed into the few words " He descended into Hell." 
 During all that time, that solitary sentence has borne its silent 
 witness to the failh of those who constructed it at the first, 
 and by its continued presence tlierc,it teaches us that not all the 
 spiritual and intellectual might of intervening ages has boon 
 able to show sufficient cause for either its modification or 
 rejection. Unless such cause can be shewn, our faith should 
 certainly continue the same as theirs. This, however, is a 
 contingency which, as it has not occurred in the past, so it is 
 not likely to occur in time to come. Many alterations have 
 taken place in liturgies and modes of failh ; but as yet, none 
 in this. Many scoflfers have arisen who have shot out their 
 arrows in different directions, and one has chosen this for a 
 target, and another that ; but among all those who have put 
 forth their puny efforts to undermine the walls of our beleagu- 
 ered Zion, I do not know that any have been able to shake 
 the foundation of this battlement. I do know that none have 
 been able to overthrow it ; still it stands secure and unim- 
 
paired. I will not say, like some projecting promintoryy 
 founded by the God of nature, which alike, unmoved and 
 immovable, bids defiance triumphantly to the fury of the rest- 
 less and ungovernable waves beneath. But this 1 do &ay that 
 it is like a fortress built upon that promontory lor the preser- 
 vation of people and land in connection with it. It was 
 built, indeed, by the hand of man, but it rests upon the foun- 
 dation of God ; and if this be so we arc sure it will stand yet 
 for many an age, and continue to breast the violence of all 
 opposition. It and the rest of the lituigy will dash back the 
 continually recurring waters of objection in ineffectual foam, 
 and will serve as a lasting memorial, both of the necessity of 
 having such defences as these, and also of the superior skill 
 of those who constructed them at the first. 
 
 Such is the nature of the historical presumption in favor of this 
 view — a presumption which might be strengt hened if necessary, 
 by a reference to the original Latin of the Greed, which is 
 variously descendit ad inferos or ad mferna, and to the deri- 
 vation of the word inferi (see note in Pearson), which means 
 properly " the souls of men in the earth," not the bodies. It 
 might also be strengthened by the words of the third article 
 of religion — which reiterates the same truth after an interval of 
 several centuries, and reiterates it in such a way as to induce 
 the belief that it was composed expressly with a view to 
 exclude every other inteipretation. *' As Christ died for us 
 and was buried, so also is it to be believed that he tvent down 
 into Hell". The words " as'* and •' so" teach us that he sus- 
 tained the same character in what he did alter death and 
 what he did before. " For us," viz.: as our substitute, he died 
 and was buried ; ** so,'' also as our substitute he went down 
 to Hell. In like manner the retention of the words " down" 
 and " Hell" appear to confirm the rpdlity of the intention to 
 retain the same doctrine. . ,.;•(,-,?.:'?)« 
 
 This, however, it will be said, is not proof. Consider, 
 therefore, the following proof from reason and Scripture : — 
 Our blessed Saviour was the sinners substitute. As such it 
 was necessary that he should do and suffer — but especially 
 suffer — in the sinners stead. Not indeed all that the sinner 
 should have suffered, but all that God considered sufficient 
 for a full atonement. The nobility of the victim counter- 
 balanced any deficiency in the kind of the punishment inflict- 
 ed, or the degree or duration. For this reason it w^as not 
 necessary that Christ should either obey or suffer eternally. 
 Nothing more is required than fulness of obedience, during 
 the time appointed in each department of action, and I would 
 add in each state oi existence. On what grounds can it be 
 
it be 
 
 maintained that Christ should not act as . the sinners substi- 
 tute, in every state in which the sinner might be called upon' 
 to exist. Why should he not undergo the condition of a dead 
 man as well as of a living ? in its fullest sense; in soul as 
 well as in body? If Christ on our bclialf passed through the 
 state which precedes our natural birth, and the state which 
 precedes our natural death, why should he not also act for iia 
 in the state which precedes our final condemnation. Ajniori 
 we should be inclined to ihink that if he came to deliver man 
 from condemnation by takin^i; his place, he should take his 
 place in every stage of existence previous to the date of his 
 • final execution. Unless,, indeed, it can be proved that loe 
 could not have committed sm in that disembodied state from 
 which we have been saved by the substitution of our Sa- 
 viour, and therefore could not have needed a substitute with. 
 reference to that state. If in his /bciws and embodied state 
 he sufiered with and for man, why not also in his disem- 
 bodied state ? Else what reason can we give for liis " fak- 
 ing man's nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin." Why 
 pass through this state — or the state of helpless infancy? 
 Why not be created at once in the fulness of manhood?" — 
 "Why? But because it was necessary as man's substitute 
 that he should be so in every state in wkich substitution was 
 admissablc. Evidently he made himself responsible to suffer 
 in every state in which man made himself liable to suffer, 
 except the last. Else would his substitution have been in- 
 complete. Not only so, but if as the sinners substitute, his 
 sufferings terminated in his departuue from this world. Is 
 there not ground for the theory that the sulferings of the 
 impenitent likewise terminate at the same time for a period. 
 This, however, is not the case and therefore we argue that if 
 he died as a sinner, it is net reasonable to suppose chat ho 
 would go after dea.h to any other place than the plscc where 
 sinners go, and if the place, therefore the state. If he died 
 for sin, it is natural to think that he would go after death 
 where they go who die i7t sin. It is certain that his body 
 went where the bodies of sinners go, viz.: the grave ; it is 
 natural to suppose, therefore, that his soul went where the 
 souls of sinners go ; viz.: the suffering hades. The bur- 
 den of proof lies on those who maintain the contrary. It is 
 far from probable that his body should be treated as the body 
 of a sinner, and his soul as the soul of a saint. How, in his 
 casBy would it be possible to account for such a difference of 
 treatment 1 In our case it is plain, by reason of what he has 
 done for us, and for this very 'purpose. But in his ease it is 
 diflerent ; who could make utoucmcnt iur him ? that the 
 
10 
 
 deep should not swallow him up, nor the pit shut her mouth 
 upon him. (Ps. G'J, 15.) If, howover, it be still supposed 
 that such a difference of treatment did take place, then we ask, 
 why did he die at all 1 Why was his body not treated in the 
 same way as his soul 1 Why, if ho did go to a hades of happiness, 
 was he not translated there in hodi/ and soul 1 It will bo re- 
 plied, probably, " that the Scriptures might bo fullilled, or 
 because, without shedding of blood, there is no remission," and 
 this is true, but for reasons equally sti'ong, it was necessary 
 that he should not only die, but also suffer after death. Was 
 it necessary in the former case that Scripture should be fulfilled 
 — it was equally necessary in the latter. Did the Scriptures 
 foretell the one in typo 1 they foretold the other also. The 
 double captivity of tho Patriarch Joseph foreshadowed the 
 double captivity of our Saviour on earth. Joseph in prison 
 represented our Saviour in the confinement of hades. More- 
 over, of all the offerings under the Jewish economy, none was 
 more expressive of the sacrifice of Christ, than tlao burnt offer- 
 ing. But it was not enough that it should bo slain, and that 
 there should be simply a shedding of tho blood ; surely tho 
 shedding of the blood was enough to establish the reality of 
 the death. It was also necessary that after death it sliould be 
 burned. Tho spirit of the victim could not bo made to suffer or 
 acted upon so as to signify sufferings. In this way, however, 
 there was expressed (the only way in which it could be express- 
 ed to tho senses,) the truth that the anti-type should continue 
 to suffer after death. Nor was it faintly foreshadowed only in 
 type. It was cleai'ly revealed also in the words, " Thou wilt 
 not leave my soul in hell ; neither wilt thou suffer thine holy 
 one to see corruption." Ps. 1 G, 1 0. We say clearly for God himself 
 applies these words to Christ, and tells us (Acts ii, 31,)thatthe 
 Psalmist spoke of Christ ; that Christ's soul was not left in Hell ; 
 neither did his flesh sec corruption. Wherefore, God himself 
 teaches us that the Psalms contain passages whose primary 
 reference is to the Psalmist, but whoso principal and ultimate 
 reference is to Christ. This cannot be denied, at least with 
 reference to the passage just quoted ; and from it alone we may 
 learn that Christ went to the hades of suffering ; for he went to 
 a /iarfc's which it was desirable, in his estimation, to leave. . Was 
 this then, the hades of hai^piness or the hades of pain 1 
 
 In giving this exposition of the passage, I hav^e argued on 
 the supposition that tho ordinary interpretation of its meaning 
 is correct, viz.: That Christ's soul would go into hades, but 
 would not be loft there, us long as the souls of others. It has 
 been interi)reted, however, to mean exactly tlie opposite, " Thou 
 wilt not leave mv soul " to" hades, in tlu* sense 
 
 ';. 
 
 tarn 
 
u 
 
 of " to go to" Imdcs ; neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one 
 to see corruption," an interpretiition which appears to me to 
 be inadniissaLle, for wl>atever may be said about the meaning 
 of the Hebrew prefix bciii,!,' " to" rather than " in." It cannot, 
 I think, mean " to go to," and it seems even to an English 
 reader, that as much is implied under the one clause of tho 
 sentence i.s under the other. The latter clause implies that 
 his body went to the grave, but did not see corruption. So tho 
 first clause should signify that his soul went to hades, but did 
 not remain there ; and this Avould be imjtlied equally if the 
 words were translated, Thou wilt not lea\e my soul " to" hades 
 as if they were translated, thou wilt not leave my soul "in" hades. 
 Independently, however, of all such criticisms as these, I should 
 be content to lot the true meaning of tho passage be detei'min- 
 ed by the analogy of the many other passages which must be 
 interpreted so as to coincide with the nieanmg Avhich the or- 
 dinary interpretation plainly supports. Thus tli6 G9th Psalm, 
 already quoted, jjroved to be messianic by our Lord himself, 
 (compare John 19, 28 to 30, with Ps. G9, 21,) and by his disciples 
 Avho remembered that it was written " tho zeal of thine house 
 hath eaten me up." (Compare John 2, 17, with Psalms 69, 9.) 
 How significant are the Avords of the ir)th verse, " Let not 
 tlie waterflood overflow mo, neither let the deep swallow me 
 up, and let not tho pit shut her mouth upon mo," especially 
 when we couple thorn with the corresponding words, " If it be 
 possible, let this cup pass fi*om mo. See also Psalms 
 86, 13,—" Thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest Hell." 
 It will be said, probably, that these woi'ds refer only to tho 
 Psalmist, and are only lig\irative ; but wo should have said tho 
 same of the IGth Psalm, if God himself had not interpreted it 
 for us 1 Why then should not this passage be considered 
 analogouis, and interpreted in the same way ? Was the Psalmist 
 ever so situated that these words could have been litei"ally fulfill- 
 ed in him 1 If it be said that they are a];)})iicable to all tho 
 saved as well as the Psalmist — -for all who arc being saved 
 have been delivered from Hell — it will scarcely be maintained 
 that the PsalmLst would have gone to the lowest Hell ; or that 
 all the saved would have gone there if they had not been sav- 
 ed. Again it is written, (Ps. IIG, 3,) "the pains of Hell 
 got hold upon me." liespocting which and similar passage?, 
 wo argue as above. It is only in a very subordinate and figur- 
 ative sense that they can bo applied to the person of the Psalm- 
 ist ; they have an ulterior reference to and receive their final 
 fulfilment in Christ. No mere terrestial sutterings of mortals 
 could be suitably so dosoribad, without such idtimate reference. 
 Therefore, when the Psalmist uses such words, he does so, I 
 
12 
 
 think, as personifying one who literally experienced what ho 
 expressed. 
 
 In the same way v/ould I interpret the passage in Jonah II, 
 2, "out of the belly of Hell cried I, and thou heardcst my 
 voice." It will prohahly be denied by some th;it tnere is any 
 reference here to Christ, but on what grounds 1 It is ti-uo 
 some of the passages in Jonah's prayer are applicable oidy to 
 himself; but as in the Psalms, is it not also true that some of 
 them are more properly applicable to Christ. Jonah says, for 
 example, " the earth with lier bars was about me forever." — 
 Are these words more applicable to Jonah, who was rather 
 surrriunded l)y the M^aters of the (^cean, and the body of tho 
 Avhale, than by tho ribs of the earth. Lot it be remend^ered 
 that the whole transaction was prophetical, and that our Sav- 
 iour himself recogniies it as such. How is it that those who 
 deny this, so soon forget the words, " There shall no sign bo 
 given them but tho sign of the prophet Jonah, for as onah 
 was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall 
 the Son of Man bo three days and three nights in the heart of 
 the earth." (Mat. 12, 40.) Here then we have our Saviour's 
 own ex})osition, from v/Jiich we learn that "tho whale's belly," 
 tho belly of Hell (or hades), and tho heart of the earth, were so 
 intimately associated together in his mind, that he was justified 
 in interpreting what the IVopliet ])rophctically called "tho 
 belly of Hell," to mean tho Iieart of the earth. It will be said, 
 of course, in reply, that tho heart of tho earth moans the grave. 
 But does the new toinb " hewn out of the rock" (Mat. 27, GO,) 
 — not e^^on a tomb such as we are in the habit of making — 
 deserve to bo called tho heart of the eai'tli 1 Not only so, Imt 
 the " Son of Man" must bo three days and three nights in tho 
 heart of the earth. Now, was the Son of Man in the tomb at 
 all; his lifeless body lay there, b\it not himself, for his departed 
 spirit alone is entitled to that name. This is proved by the 
 ./Saviour himself, for ho called the departed s])irits of tho patri- 
 archs and tlieir spirits alone, by tho names of Abraham, Isaac, 
 and Jacob. Seeincr then that the heart of tlie earth is not tho 
 grave, why should it not be understood in a literal sense 1 
 As I have already said, it is not necessary, to my purpose, to 
 prove wJierc this hades of sutfering is, yet I caiuiot refrain from 
 expressing my conviction tliatits Iccality is tho heart of the earth 
 (See Deut..'J2,22.) (Amos 0,2.) With this opinion (accordingto 
 Pearson,) many have coincided in primitive times, and his own 
 testimony respecting it is (when speaking of Eph. 4, 0,) that 
 '■"this exposition cannot bo disproved," (Art. V, 302, 1.) It 
 matters little, however, how many have thouglit so, unless 
 they have confirmed tho teaching of reason and scripture. — 
 
 £:: 
 
18 
 
 k; 
 
 This, however, I think they have done in this instiincc, for 
 the Propliet Ezekiel 32, til, sconis to teach tlio same tnith in 
 his Lamentation for the fall of Egypt. *' I'lio strong finiong the 
 mighty shall speak to him ont of the midst of Hell. "' All of 
 them slain, fallen h}- tlio sword, whose graves are set in tlio 
 sides of the pit. '•' There is Elam and all her multitude, 
 which are gone down inicircumcised into the nether parts of the 
 earth, yet have they borne their shame with them tliat go 
 down to the pit." Hero the Prophet speaks of the dead. Ho 
 says the graves of the dead are set in the sides of the pit. If, 
 therefore, the graves are set in the surface of the earth, the 
 surface of the eartli must be the sides of the pit. Ho also says 
 that those of whom lie speaks, were in tlie midst of Hell ; were 
 in the pit, and in the iKjther parts of the earth. In other 
 words, he distinguishes the nether i)ai'ts of the earth from the 
 grave, and identifies Hell, the pit, and the nether parts of tho 
 earth together. In like maimer, tho apostle speaks of the lov^er 
 parts of tlie earth, and (perhaps with reference to this very 
 passage) teaches us plainly that Christ, i. e., hi;i soul, not his 
 body, descended into the lower pai-ts of the eai-th. Ejdi. 4, 9. 
 Consequently, according to Ezekiel, he descended also into tho 
 pit, and was with tho uncircumcis(Hl in the midst of Hell or 
 hades. It may bo olvjccti^l, indeed, that this jdirase, " the lower 
 parts of the cartli," is used in Psalms 139, 15, in a different 
 sense. This is true of tho pi-imp>-ry application, though it must 
 be confessed in a sense very far from literal ; but what of tho 
 secondary? It has boon already proved that God himself 
 established tlie principle of secondary ap})lications, why then 
 should we not apply the principle hero, cs})ecially if we could 
 thereby harmonise tlio meaning of all the passages, in which 
 tho word occurs. If the Psalmist had been speaking of him- 
 self alone, ho, upon earth, would scai'cely have said " 1 was 
 curiously wrought in the lower parts of the earth." It must 
 therefore have a reference to some one ori^inallv above tho 
 earth, viz. : to Chi-ist • and therefore • o may regard tho 
 Psalmist, I think, when speaking thus of his condition in 
 the womb, as speaking like the Pro[)]iet Jonah, prophetically, 
 and as using language v/liose ultimate reference is to our 
 Saviour's confinement in the womb of our matei'iial earth. 
 Ho speaks of himself as being in . a state as neaily as pos- 
 sible like a disemliodiod state; as " being imperfect, as "hav- 
 ing yet none of his members," and in tho sumo Psalm we 
 find the words, "• If I make my bed in Hell, behold thou art 
 there." Similarly it is said (Ps. 03, 9,) " Those who seek my 
 soul to destroy it (query after having attempted to destroy my 
 body,) shall go into the lower parts of the earth." In confir- 
 
 N 
 
u 
 
 mation of this intcrqrctation see Wordsworth, Acts 2, 24. 
 '* As showing that death and tho grave instead of being tho 
 destruction of Christ, were, by the divine power made, as 
 it were, tho womb from wliich ho was to bo born to new life. 
 Ho is called tlie first-born from tlio dead (Col. 1,18, licv. 1, 5), 
 and to the Christian life is death, and deatli is birth. To hiiu 
 tho darkness of the tonil) is the womb of immortality." 
 
 Notwithstanding, however, Pearson's adjnission in favour 
 of this interpretation, he makes an effort to siibv'ort it, which 
 I cannot but characterize as ineffectual. Ho says we cannot 
 bo assured that when tho Ap''>stle uses tlio words, " He de- 
 scended into tlie lowor parts oi" the earth," (Ep. 4,) he speaks 
 of a descent performed after Christ's death ; or even if so, that 
 tho lower parts of the earth did signify Hell, or tho placo 
 where the disembodied souls of men were tormented. Bui, to 
 what other descent could these words bo referred 1 and thus I 
 venture to suggest that tlie impossibility should bo removal 
 from where the Bisho[) places it, to tlie opposite side ; for when 
 did Christ's human soul descend 1 From what place or to what 
 placo did it descend — previous to his death on the cross 1 I 
 cannot cease to marvel when he says " They may well refer to 
 his incarnation," for if they I'cfer to liis incarnation, they must 
 refer to the incarnation of the Godhead only. Christ's divinity 
 may bo said l)y a iiguro of speocli axithorized by himself to have 
 descended and become incarnate, but coi'tainly not this human- 
 ity. Moreover, tho point of the Apostle's argument is the 
 identity of the person ascending and descending. See 10th v. 
 " He that asccmded is the same that descended." To establish^ 
 therefore, a i^eference to the incarnation, it would bo necessary, - 
 to prove that tho liumanity, hoth iii hod]/ and soul, descended 
 as wel! as the divinity, for both body and soul ascended in 
 conjiuictioii with the divinity; and to the liumanity, in par- 
 ♦ ticular is relerence made, when we speak of the ascension. 
 On the other hand refer the passage to the descent into hades^ 
 and it not only coincides with other passages, but is consis- 
 tent with itself, for both Christ's body and soul descended, as 
 also they both ascended — the body to one part of the earth, 
 the soul to another. Hence the use of the plural number, 
 " the lower parts of the earth.-" (Soe also Elicott in loco.) 
 Turn now to Ac's 2, 24, where it is written " God hath raised 
 him up, having loosed the piiina of death." Christ then was 
 loosed from the pains of death, but when ? At his death on 
 the cross or at his resurrection ? Men say at his death on the 
 cross, but God says at his resurrection. It is written " God 
 raised him up,having loosed the pains of death, "consequently 
 he was not loosed from the pains of death until his rcsurrec- 
 
16 
 
 tion. It is vain to say that God raised him up, alter having 
 some time prcvifjusiy loosed the pains of death, viz.: at his 
 death on the cross ; for the body only is loostd from pains at 
 death in the case of a sinner, therefore also in the cnso of one 
 who died as a sinner, unless there is somo reason to think that 
 special provision lias been made (or hiS deliverance. This, 
 howoverj was not only not the case with tho S.r 'onr, as with 
 us, but conld not have been, lor as was said by some who 
 used words more significant than they were intended to be. 
 *' Himself he cannot save." Who then could render possible 
 what is impossible with God. 
 
 Another passage yet remains which, though not the only 
 remaining one, is, nevertheless, to my mind, the most conclu- 
 sive. Who shall descend into the deep, i. e.. to bring up 
 Christ again from the dead. (Rom. lO, 7.) Accoiding to 
 this passage, Christ was among tho dead, and those dead were 
 in the " deep," in Greek ahusson but this [abyss, is none 
 other than the peculiar abode of devils, for it is written (Luke 
 8, 31,) the devils besought liiin that he would not command 
 them to go out into the *' deep" — the abyss. The same word 
 is translated in Rev. 9, 1, and other places — the pit — literally 
 the pit of the abyss. Which abyss. (See Wordsworth in loco.) 
 is not the lake of fire ; neither is it the final abode of the 
 evil one and of his associate angels ; but it signifies his pre- 
 sent residence and stronghold. It is certain that Christ's body . 
 did not descend into the abyss, therefore if he descended his 
 soul must have descended, 
 
 I conclude^ therefore, that Christ's human soul did literally 
 descend into Hell. Not tho place of the finally condemned, but; 
 nevertheless a place of suffering called AarZt'5,and by us trans- 
 lated Hell ; and if this be so, we may tho better understand 
 the true signification of the words, " I am he that livcth and 
 was deady and behold I am alive for evermore." I was dead,, 
 says the Saviour ; and what did he mean by the term 1 Not 
 merely the separation of the soul from the body ; but dead ia 
 the sense in which they are dead who have began to die eter- 
 nally. This is the meaning which our Saviour himself at- 
 tached to the word whenever he used it, e. g., he said " she 
 is not dead but sleepeth." He thus distinguished between 
 the death of those who had really died, and the sleep of those 
 who have only departed ; for it is written they "laughed him to 
 scorn, knowing that she was dead." Dead the daughter of 
 Jairus undoubtedly was, in one sense of the word, but not 
 dead in tho sense in which the Saviour used the term. She 
 was of the number of those who sleep but do not die eternally 
 — in other words sulier the pains ol the painful /iaJcs— pie- 
 
h\ 
 
 vioiis to their .suflcrintrs in their final state. It nipy ho said 
 the maid was J ud, and the .Saviour intended to convey that 
 her spirit hud returned when he spoke these words. Unfor- 
 tunately, however, it is fcxpressiy stated Avhen her s^pirit 
 returned (Luke 8, b\),) it was ncit until after he had !?pokeii 
 these words, and until afcer ho had turned ihcm all out, and 
 went back and took her by the hand and said ^^ maul, arise.'''* 
 Then, but not till then, her spirit returned again, and she 
 arosa and ministered unto them. 
 
 Again, if this bo so, may wc not also the better understand 
 the moaning of onr Saviour's word? aftci- his resurrection, " I 
 nni not yet ascended unto rny I'^ather." If, ns is generally 
 supposed, Christ's soul went to the hades of happiness, wo 
 must then say according t" this passage, that the locality of 
 the hades of happiness is below and not above, or else wo 
 must say that if he were in the hades of happiness, between 
 death and resurrection he did ascend which would contradict 
 his own words, " I have not yet ascended." Wo must also 
 say that he did not descend to the deep abyss, which would 
 contradict the Apostle's words, " who shall descend into tho 
 deep ?" Moreover, if he had ascended ho might in that case 
 have said with more propriety. I am lately descended than 
 I am not yet ascended. 
 
 Several other passages might be adduced in favor of this 
 view ; but enough, I trusi, lias been said to recommend it at. 
 least to the favourable consideratiun of all. Its great practi- 
 cal importance alone, should sullice to remove the prejudices 
 of those who deny it. 'fhis truth, if it boa truth, should 
 serve to inflame our gratitude to Christ, and stimulate our 
 readiness to sudor anything (or him, rather than not crucify 
 tho flesh and comply with his easy commandments. If it be 
 not a truth, then it is a filseliood favorable to godliness, fur 
 Was the Saviour indeed delivered to the lowest hades for rac, 
 and did the pains of hadus get hold upon him then by this 
 extraordinary mercy of our God, should we not more complete- 
 ly present our bodies a living s^acriiice unto him, a holy and 
 acceptublo which is indeed our reasonable service. 11 we fail 
 to do so can we hope that wc shall ourselves be spared the 
 pains of the painful hades? Unquestionably not, for he that 
 spared not ins own son, but delivered him up for us all, 
 IS not likely to spare us. Nevcriheless, let me conclude 
 with the prayer •' spare U3 good Lord, lor Jesus' sake. 
 
 Pembkoke, September 5th, 1SG8. 
 
d 
 
 lid 
 ut 
 
 rit 
 
 » 
 
 14. 
 
 o 
 
 c 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 M 
 
 (U 
 O 
 U 
 
 H 
 H 
 ® 
 
 o 
 
 13 
 
 o 
 
 •k in 
 
 d <D 
 
 o "d 
 
 09 
 
 'd 
 
 (0 
 
 • 
 
 o 
 
 s 
 
 s 
 
 • 
 
 h 
 
 4-) 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 c 
 
 
 V 
 
 CO 
 
 "g 
 
 Q 
 
 U 
 
 n 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 d 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 • 
 
 
 S!:S& 
 
 w 
 
 V 
 
 t-l 
 
 o 
 
 4-1 
 
 ■P • 
 43 (D 
 
 a> -H 
 
 •H CO 
 
 OS 
 
 0) 
 
 CO 
 
 U 
 
 § 
 
 O 
 
 U 
 
 •4" 
 
 o 
 c 
 
 u 
 
 o 
 
 0) 
 
 CO 
 
 
 (U 
 
 4-' 
 
 Q 
 
 0) 
 
 C 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 l-l 
 
 p 
 o 
 
 
 9 
 
 O 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 ■*-> 
 
 a 
 
 c 
 
 4-> 
 CO 
 
 o 
 (-1 
 
 a 
 
 tn