the same as to blot out, erase, cause to pe ish, kill, dest, sy, and consume souls. All this destruction is inreatened to that soul who eats the nephesh, the soul, or blood, with the flesh, or eats flesh unlawfully; or, that soul who touches a dead soul, and does not cleanse himself; or that soul among the children of Israel, that worked on the sabbath. These souls are all charged with bodily crimes, and they are threatened with bodily suf fering and death. How dare we say, then, that the soul is immortal, and cannot die the death that God has threatened! Remember, if these souls are ghosts, that only left the body, and fled to another world consciously to exist, then they were neither blotted out, destroyed, nor consumed. Josh. 11: 11, "And he took Hazor, and smote all the SOULS that were therein with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them, there was not any left to breathe." Do immortal souls breathe, and can they be so utterly destroyed in a city, that none are left to breathe? Who, unbiassed by his creed, after reading these texts, could believe that souls only left the body, and fled to another world? Would the inspired writers have used such language, if the dogma of the immor tality of the soul were true? They teach the contrary of such doctrine in verse 14, and explain the meaning of the term soul. "The cattle, the children of Israel took for a prey unto themselves; but every MAN they smote with the edge of the sword, until they had destroyed them, neither left they any to breathe." Thus, then, inspiration evidently, and uniformly teaches, that souls are men, and can he destroyed. See also, Josh. 10: 28-39, "Joshua utterly destroyed all the souls, (persons,) that were in those cities; aye, and destroyed these souls with the edge of the sword." Can the sword touch an intangible, immaterial ghost? Ps. 40: 14, Let them be ashamed and confounded together, that seek after my soul to destroy it." Ps. 63: 9, "But those who seek after my soul to destroy it, shall go into the lower parts of the earth." (probably eaning the bottom of the grave.) Ezek. 22: 25, There is a conspiracy of her prophets in the midst ercof, like a roaring lion ravening the prey; they have devoured souls; ..... they have made her many widows in the midst thereof." The widows of the souls or persons, they had figuratively devoured. Verse 27,"Her princes in the midst thereof are like wolves ravening the prey, to shed blood, and to destroy souls to get dishonest gain." See also, Lev. 23: 30; Prov. 6: 32; and Acts 3: 23. "And it shall come to pass that every (psuche,) soul, which will not hear that prophet, (exolothreuthesetai ek tou laou) shall be utterly exterminated out of the people." Here are thirty-four declarations, which plainly declare that souls are cut off, devoured, destroyed with the sword, or by some corporeal punishment, inflicting death and destruction: but not a word is said in any place what becomes of the body. If these souls were invisible and immortal ghosts, that could not be killed and destroyed by any corporeal destruction, but all had bodies that could, and were killed with such destruction would it be consistent with the truth, for the inspired writers to tell us thirty-four times, that it was only the ghosts who were thus destroyed, when, in fact, it was only their bodies, and not their souls or ghosts at all? Those who can believe such glaring absurdities, can believe any thing that interested preachers, or corrupted tradition, may please to impose upon them. May the Lord deliver them. To the Devil and Satan is ascribed, Rev. 12: 9, and 20:3, the "deceiving the whole earth." But, in Rev. 13: 14, the Vatican and Moscow MSS., which are the oldest and best, read, plana tous emous tous kai. It deceiveth my people. To the False Prophet, (the false propounder of the Gospel,) the beast that rose out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns is ascribed, specially, "the deceiving mine, or my people," showing that the deceiving propounders of false doctrines, are to be found within the pale of the professed Christian church: so also, Rev. 2: (Tous emous doulous,) to teach and seduce my servants." And, surely, they have been most miserably deluded! 20, Reader; will you suffer yourself to be thus deceived by these teachers of false doctrine, derived from ar apostate Church? Exert the faculties that God has given you and "try the spirits whether they be of God “ CHAPTER V. THE SOUL DIES, AND IS UNCONSCIOUS IN THE STATE OF DEATH. This proposition is diametrically opposed to the im mortal soul dogma. We shall first consider the nature of the penalty threatened for a breach of God's law. Gen. 2:16, 17, "Of every tree of the garden, eating thou shalt eat;" translated, "thou mayest freely eat ;" but denoting a continuance of eating, and not a something to be completed in a short time. "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: (ki b-ium akalek memenu, muth temuth ;) for from (or after) [the] day of thy eating of it, dying, thou shalt die." Although the most frequent meaning of the b, prefixed to ium,in bi-um, is in, yet this preposition has many other meanings, and it should always be translated in accordance with the context. Greenfield gives to b the following variety of meanings: "in, into; on, upon, at, near; concerning, out of, from; after, according to; with, by; through; to; against; among; before; for, en account of; as; when, while, since, because:" so that we are fully justified, by the context, in translating b, by from, after, or, on account of, as either of these agree with the context, while the word in does not agrce. Some translate it after, and quote Num. 28: 26, where it is prefixed to the word sebothikam, which is rendered " after your weeks;" that is, your weeks hay. ing expired," ye shall have a holy convocation." Sup posing the prefix, b, to be rightly translated, in, it will make no difference in the result, as the process com. menced on that very day; but as the prxb is suscep tible of so great a variety of interpretations, we think that from, or after, would be most in accordance with the context. Muth temuth, "dying, thou shalt die," is a literal translation. Although in some cases a repetition of the verb merely implies emphasis, yet, it likewise, as in the preceding verse, eating, thou shalt cat," implies continuation, and here denotes a process, which God himself subsequently explains in Gen. 3: 17; "Because thou hast eaten of the tree. . . 66 cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life, (i. e., all the while the penalty is in process till its completion,) in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till THOU return unto the ground; for out of it wast THOU taken for dust THOU art, and unto dust shalt THOU return. And Jehovah of the .... Elohim said. . . . now, lest HE put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of lives, and eat, and LIVE FOR EVER :" God drove out the man, and guarded the tree of lives. Gen. 5: 5, "And.... Adam lived . . . . nine hundred and thirty years, and HE died." Thus we perceive that the penalty threatened was to end in death ; and God's interpretation of it plainly declared, that it would result in death, a gradual returning to the primitive elements of his being, the dust; and the facts show that it did result in death, in the entire extinction of his being. And the Scriptures do not afford us a ray of hope that he will be raised to life again; but declare that all who will live for ever will owe their entire being to the first-born from the dead, with an incorruptible nature, a second Adam, and great head of all the living, who will impart "life and incorruptibility" to his followers ONLY. Thus we perceive that the penalty was threatened to man as a UNIT, comprehended in the appellation "THOU :" that it contemplated a gradual process, commencing in the day of transgression; that in that day, the whole of the penalty was inflicted, by depriving man of the reno vating effect of the tree of lives, which would have enabled him to live for ever, notwithstanding his mortal nature; that this penalty was inflicted by subjecting man to the natural effect of his mortal nature, without a counteracting agent; which subjection would necessarily result in DEATH; that the decaying or dying process was hastened, by cursing the ground, rendering it more sterile, and more productive of weeds, and causing an extra wear of the animal machinery by labor and anxiety; and that Adam, as a unit, did actually die, and RE-turn to the ground out of which the whole of the man was made; the breath that God imparted not being life itself, but simply the means of animating the earthy man. If it be contended that the soul is the essential man, then it was the soul that was addressed by the term THOU, and then the soul suffered the whole penalty and returned to its native earth. But if our readers are en tangled in the snares of theologians, and with them say man is composed of a soul that can live without a body, and a living body; or, as some teach, that man has a "deathless spirit," an "immortal soul," and a living though mortal body, and therefore man is not one, but two or three; then we ask, which of the three parts of man was addressed in the singular pronoun THOU ? If our readers say it was the body that was addressed, then was the body only involved in the transgression; and as no law was given to the soul or spirit, no penalty can be righteously inflicted upon either, and so soul and spirit necessarily escape, and all souls and spirits must then be for ever free from blame! Upon your supposition, the soul, that was chiefly guilty of the transgres sion, escapes the infliction of the penalty; and the body, that was constituted subservient to the soul, endures the whole penalty, which was death. Now if the soul was not meant in the penalty, THOU shalt surely die, then the soul was not meant in the prohibition, (thou shalt not eat of it,) for these are the preceding words. But the THOU in each case means the whole person; for it would have been absurd to forbid a ghost to eat, or touch the fruit of a tree. It is plain, therefore, that no soul, or spirit, or ghost, that can live abstracted from the body, was involved in either the prohibition or the penalty; and therefore no ghost sinned in the case, and no ghost fell. Why, therefore, do ye kindle the fires of endless misery, to torment the unfallen, sinless soul? But if you will still contend, that Adam's ghost sinned, and that only his body died, then we say, that the "thout" was addressed to the ghost, both in the threatening, aud in the execution, and the twice repeated тHor—“ Dust |