thing. So the word God and its reduplicate mean the same thing. When the Council of Nice says, "We believe in one God," did they mean any thing more, or any thing less than the true God? When the same Council say that the Lord Jesus Christ is "God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God," they speak thus, not to represent the Saviour, as more or less than God, but to express in an unequivocal manner, his essential Deity, and his peculiar and eternal relation to the Father. So we speak of heaven as God's dwelling place; and we mean no other than his dwelling-place, when we speak of the heavens and the heavens of heavens, or far above all heavens. Thus do the scriptures mean the same thing by from eternity, and "before the eternal times."

4. It is applied ten times to the future duration of Christian fraternity, of the celestial house and habitation of the saints, of their glory and inheritance, consolation, salvation, and redemption. "For perhaps he therefore departed for a "season, that thou mightest receive him for ever." “ "I say "unto you, make to yourselves friends of the Mammon of "unrighteousness, that when ye fail, they may receive you "into everlasting habitations." "Therefore I endure all "things for the elects' sake, that they may also obtain the "salvation which is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory.” "But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eter

nal glory, by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered "awhile, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you." "Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our a Father, who hath loved us, and given us everlasting conso“lation, and good hope, through grace." "The promise of "eternal inheritance." "Having obtained eternal redemp❝tion for us." "He became the author of eternal salvation " unto all them that obey him." "An house not made with "hands, eternal in the heavens." "A far more exceeding and "eternal weight of glory."a

The above passages speak of the future happiness of believers, which my opponent professes to believe eternal. They contrast that eternal happiness with these temporal afflictions; and they are intended to comfort the Christian under the calamities of time. No one ought, therefore, to doubt, that the word aionios is here used in an unlimited sense, and has been correctly rendered in our bible. But, Scarlett, knowing the consequence of such an admission, chose rather

d Philem. xv. Luke xvi. 9. 2 Tim. ii. 10. 1 Pet. v. 10, 2 Thess. ii. 16. Heb. ix. 15, 12, v. 9. 2 Cor. v. 1. iv. 17.

to transcribe than translate, and has thus spoken to the unlearned reader in an unknown tongue. A Ministerial brother in the West, once lent me a book on Universalism; in which the author, whose name I cannot recollect, supposes a case of a poor afflicted widow, endeavouring to seek in religion, an alleviation for her many and heavy sorrows. Applying to Mr. Scarlett, a professed Christian Minister, he lends her a copy of his New Testament. She opens at 2 Cor. iv. 17. "For our momentary light affliction is working out for us "a most exceeding conian weight of glory." This treats of affliction, and is probably applicable to her case; but what it means, she cannot tell. She visits her learned instructor, and says, "Dear Mr. Scarlett; what does æonian mean ?” Why, Madam, it means agical, or age-lasting.' "And may "I be so bold as to ask, what is the meaning of agical, or age"lasting?" "Age-lasting, or agical, Madam, has different sig'nifications. It sometimes means as long as the world lasts, ⚫ and sometimes, as long as a dispensation, or a man's life lasts, whether it be a thousand years or one year.” “And "dear Mr. Scarlett, is that all the extent of glory and happiness, which Christianity offers to a poor old widow, who "is sinking under the weight of more than half a century of “sorrow ?"

46

But, from my opponent's reply to this supposed case, he would be understood to insinuate that it was not found in a book, as stated, but that it was manufactured for the occasion, and the name of Scarlett used, where his was really intended. He therefore requests that his own name may be openly used in such cases. The truth is, there is very little more difference between the two, than there is between an original and a copy. This request may be complied with, as soon as I have given a becoming attention to his translation and exposition of the afflicted widow's text. "For our "present light affliction worketh for us an excessively ex"ceeding aionian weight of glory." In a note he gives us the Greek, and then speaks as follows, viz. "Now if aionion "be strictly infinite or endless, how can any thing exceed it, " even by a rhetorical figure, so as to be hyperbole upon hyperbole above or beyond it ?" The sentiment of this question he has urged before you, not only interrogatively but positively. "Excessively exceeding aionian weight of glory," is an altered translation borrowed from one who had little

εκαθ ̓ ὑπερβολην εις υπερβολην αιώνιον.

Pp

idea of the perversion which it was doomed to undergo. Its author meant exceeding to be in apposition with aionian or eternal, and would have been as well satisfied to have rendered it "exceedingly excessive eternal;" thus making it evident that the one adjective was in apposition with the other. This is consistent with the original, and leaves aionian with its true meaning, that of absolutely eternal. But my opponent treats exceeding as a participle governing aionian: thus representing the weight of glory as exceeding aionian, in such a manner as to excel it, transcend it, go "above or beyond it." If this criticism had any foundation, then might there be one place in the whole New Testament, in which aionos is used with a limited signification. But every person who understands the Greek language, will perceive, at a glance, that this is a mere artifice, intended to mislead those who could not examine the original for themselves.

I have reason to believe that my opponent has read a comment upon this passage, by Chrysostom, one of the Greek Fathers. How differently does this early and enlightened scholar interpret the words of his own language, from one who claims the character of a translator from the original Greek! In explaining this passage of the apostle, Chrysostom says, "He opposes things present to things future, a "moment to eternity, lightness to weight, affliction to glory; "nor is he satisfied with this, but he adds another word, and "that a reduplication, saying, 'kath' hyperbolen eis hyper"bolen,' that is, an exceedingly excessive greatness.”g Here this eloquent Greek Father does not represent aionian, as infinitely transcended by something else, but he considers the apostle as contrasting aionian with the moment of this life, and making it to excel it, by an exceedingly excessive greatness. As this cannot be truly said, of any thing but eternity, Chrysostom has given his decided testimony, that aionian means an absolutely eternal.

That gloss of my opponent, by which he would make exceeding to be a participle, governing aionian, and thus exceedingly limiting its duration, is probably an invention of his own. No translator or commentator, ancient or modern, within the restricted circle of my acquaintance, appears ever

f This observation was made in the debate, not from an apprehension that my opponent was familiar with the Fathers, but because the commentary in question is quoted by Parkhurst, whose lexicons I soon found, formed the horizon of my opponent's critical researches.

5 μέγεθος ὑπερβολικως ὑπερβολικών.

to have imagined such an absurdity. Even the authors of the Improved Version, who wrote for the very purpose of misleading their readers, had too much knowledge of Greek, and of the present state of society, to attempt such an imposition. Their translation is, "For our present light affliction "worketh for us a very exceeding and everlasting weight of "glory." Although this does not strongly present the antitheses of the original, it still offers the consolation of eternal happiness in heaven, to God's afflicted and poor people on earth.

66

In the next chapter of this Epistle, Paul preaches the same consolatory doctrine, without the use of those hyperboles which we have been discussing. "For we know that if our "earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal "in the heavens "h My opponent, as usual, has this, "aionian in the heavens." Now I will not send the afflicted widow to Mr. Scarlett, about this translation: but as my opponent has requested that his name may be used instead of Scarlett's, I will make application to him myself. Here is a poor, weakly, sickly sinner, who, to all appearance, is not far from his latter end. Nothing but the Gospel of Christ can give me comfort. While my earthly tabernacle is near to dissolution, I read in a certain thing, professing to be a New Translation, that there is an aionian house above. I enquire into the meaning of this word. Can you tell me, Mr. Scarlett, or, as my opponent prefers my using another name, can you tell me, Mr. Crimson, what is meant by aionian, in your translation? In the 216th page of his Lectures, he answers me "that these words do not, in any instance, "necessarily convey an idea of eternity; nor yet an endless "duration of time." Yes, these are my opponent's words: and the tendency of them to deny that the saints have any revealed charter of eternal happiness is evident. And is it a fact then, that even that house which is not made with hands, is subject to dissolution? So natural is the leaning of the doctrine of universal salvation, to that of universal annihilation, or damnation, or Atheism, that it would leave us to mere conjecture, or, at best, to unassisted reason, to ascertain whether any should enjoy eternal happiness or not.

My opponent has also objected, to my understanding of the first text quoted, in the beginning of this sub-section. It

h 2 Cor. v. 1.

46

is Philemon 15. In his 8th Lecture we find the following paragraph extracted from Scarlett; viz. "The word aionian "expresses duration or continuance; but it is sometimes of 66 a short, and at other times of a longer duration. Paul, writ"ing to Philemon concerning Onesimus, says, perhaps he 'was separated for a while, that thou mightest have him 'aionianly.' This certainly could mean, only during the life "of Onesimus." When Scarlett is the teacher, my opponent is a very apt scholar. Accordingly, his New Testament renders the passage, 66 Perhaps also for this reason he was separated for a little while, that thou mightest have him, "for life." Macknight, whom he has quoted in his favour, may be well balanced by Estius, whom Macknight has cited in our favour. But we both profess to have better evidence than any man's opinion. My opponent's argument is this;— Paul intimates that Onesimus may be the slave of Philemon aionianly;—But in the future life there is no slavery;—therefore, aionian must mean during this life. This is plausible ; and it would be unanswerable, if it were not for one thing: and that is, that the major proposition contradicts the very passage which my opponent depends upon to support it. Where does the apostle say, that Philemon may have Onesimus as a servant for ever? The Improved Version, which coincides with our translation; (and which, notwithstanding its deep depravity, is often better than Macknight, that coldhearted apostate,) the Improved Version, reads as follows: For perhaps he therefore departed for a time, that thou mightest receive him for ever; no longer as a servant, but 66 as above a servant, a beloved brother." In this world it is an inestimable privilege of Christ's mystical body, that its members are spiritually united to their common head, and to each other. But there is also a promise, that "neither death nor life," "nor things present nor things to come," shall dissolve this union. My argument therefore, is this ;Paul says, that Philemon may have Onesimus, as his aionion brother;-But Christian brotherhood is absolutely eternal ;-Therefore aionion means absolutely eternal. And so it plainly does in all the ten instances quoted in this subsection.

66

5. In the forty-one remaining instances of its occurrence, unconnected with punishment, it is always found connected with life; and in every individual text, speaks of a state of

i Rom. vii. 38, 39,