day may so soon come of knowledge and of justice among men, that thou shalt not be obliged to chastise them with burning flames. May wars cease, and the provocations and causes of war, and all nations at last study the welfare one of another, and the whole earth be redeemed.

And to thy name shall be the praise, Father, Son and Spirit. Amen.

THE HEAVENLY STATE.

For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.-MATT. xxii., 30.

You will recollect that this is a part of the discussion, or series of discussions, which grew up in Jerusalem, and during the progress of which every one of the schools, and almost every one of the factions had their turn in propounding to Christ their difficult questions. The philosophy of the Jews consisted largely to the whole Oriental people, of puzzles, and riddles, and enigmas, and proverbs, and dark sayings little curiosities of ingenuity which represented no solid and substantial truth.

Here is a specimen of the way in which they taught—for this was considered to be very sound by the profound of the Sadducees, who did not believe that there was resurrection; who professed to follow conscientiously the Jewish Scriptures, and to be the truest of the representatives of Moses and his institutes. According to the system of the Jews, by which the property was to be kept in the several families of the tribe, if a man died, his widow was taken to his next brother, and she became his wife; for polygamy was permitted, in the early Jewish history, at any rate. So they propounded a case. There were seven brothers, and in turn they all conveniently died, for the purpose of the story, and the woman passed from one to another, and became, in succession, according to this system of the Jews, the wife of each. "Now," say they, "in the other life whose shall she be ?-for all seven had her." The answer of the Saviour was this, substantially: "You are a set of ignorant fools!" It was couched in other language, but it came to that. He said, "Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God." It was saying, in other words, "Ye blunder; and the ignorance of your stupid blunder is two-fold--first, from a want of knowledge of your own Scriptures, and second, from a lack of understanding the law of things-the everlasting law of nature—that is, the power of God." "For," said he, "in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God."

SUNDAY MORNING, Oct. 9, 1870. LESSON: REV. V. HYMNS (Plymouth Collection) Num 1258, 1272,"Shining Shore.""

Well, how is that? He did not say.

He likened them to the an gels, but did not tell us how the angels were. It was rather negative. He declared that one potential, universal part of the economy of human life, with all its incidents and concomitants, stopped at the grave. This is the part of man out of which multitudinous history, good and bad, is derived. But useful as it is, it ceases and does not go on into the other life; and it seems very natural, since man is a double being, born for this lower life, in transition and formation for a life to come, that a portion of the powers or faculties which fit him especially for this lower life, when they shall have performed their function, will, as it were, like the calyx of a flower, wither and fall back, and that into the other life we shall carry only those parts of our nature which are highest and noblest, and which have relation to the spiritual rather than to the physical.

Therefore the reply of our Master to this question in reference to the future state is not only remarkable for what it says, but is quite as remarkable for what it leaves unsaid. For both here and everywhere you will be struck, when you come to analyze it in the light of modern inquiries and modern knowledges, with how little is actually taught us in respect to the other state, in the Bible. It is declared that Christ "brought life and immortality to light," as he did; but he certainly did not reveal them in all their metes and bounds, nor in their regnant philosophy.

It is affirmed here that the Old Testament recognizes the existence of men after death. "Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God." He knew that they were Sadducees, and that they held the doctrine that there was no resurrection of the dead, and therefore no immortality; and they based it on the Scriptures. And his declaration to them that they erred in that philosophy, because they did not understand the Old Testament Scripture on which it was based, must, it seems to me, be taken as affirming that in his judgment the Old Testament Scriptures did recognize a future existence. This may seem strange to any who have never thought of it; but an examination of the question will show you that it almost required some such affirmation as this to give us liberty to believe that the Old Testament Scriptures did teach any such thing. For the question of continued existence is only recognized in the Old Testament. It is not taught there. And from the beginning of that first dispensation to the end of it; from the opening chapter of Genesis to the closing chapter of the record of the Old Testament; the doctrine of future rewards and punishments, of immortality in bliss or in penalty in the other life, is never once explicitly taught. But a great many times it is recognized. And you will perceive that this makes a great deal of differ

ence. There can be no question, it seems to me, that a dim faith did exist.

The reasoner who wrote the Hebrews-Apollos, probably-is arguing on the subject of the faith of the patriarchs, when he declares that they endorsed what they did, not with reference to things seen, but with reference to something coming; and it indicates that they had a glimmer of faith. It breaks out still stronger in the Psalms; and in the later prophets it becomes more and more luminous. And if the question were this, Is it to be believed that the advanced moral spirits of the Old Testament history had a faith of continued existence; and that this continued existence followed the two lines of joy and sorrow, according to the foregoing character, then I think there should be no two opinions about it. And I believe they did have these glimpses and these intimations. But then, were these truths ever wrought into authoritative statements, and by inspiration made to be part and parcel of the truth, touching all the institutes of Moses and the prophets? No, no; nowhere; not once. So far from it, you may read the first five books of Moses through from beginning to end, and you shall not find one hint of it. It is an astounding fact, that that economy for the government of nations and men, including both their political and religious institutions and their history-the whole Mosaic economy-lies open before us, and there is not a single instance in which a motive is addressed to man drawn from his immortality. There is not in the Old Testament a single instance in which an authoritative motive is addressed to the human heart, saying, "If you do this, you will after death be punished;" nor is there a single instance in which it is said, "If live thus, after death you shall go on forever and forever." There were men in the Old Testament times who believed, but it never became a part of the authoritative canon; and never was it a sanction, either of joy or sorrow, in the Old Testament way of teaching men. On the contrary, all the motives were drawn from secular things. Virtue shall bring in this life its reward, and wickedness shall bring its punishment-that is the key-note of that sublime drama of Job in which, arguing from that basis, the friends of Job said to him, "Since wickedness is punished in this life, and virtue in this life is rewarded, and since you are horribly punished, it must be that you have been horribly wicked. And it is quite in vain for you to say you have not been, and to appeal to your open life. You have been a hypocrite, and have hid your conduct, and God has found it out; and that is the reason why you are now suffering." We would suppose that under such cirumstances Job would have said, at once, "Good conduct in this life does not always get its reward, but waits for it until the life to come." We should suppose that Job would have said,

that

you

"Here, we are in a growing state, and we only come to the leaf or the blossom at best: in the other life, we come to the fruit." But in an swer to the charge that he must be wicked, because rewards and punishments were confined to this life, we should suppose that Job, if he had known it, would have said indignantly, not only that the charge was false, but that the reasoning upon which the charge was based was also false. You could not imagine a modern Job. You could not imagine a man in our day who would rest under such a charge as that. Ten thousand men live in these times, borne down by obloquy, made dark by suffering, denied everything that life has to make it sweet and noble; and yet you and I revere them. Why? "Ah!" we say, "they bear sorrow and suffering for virtue's sake; and their coronation shall come hereafter." But Job's future is black. There is not a single luminous point in that direction in the whole book of Job. And the Old Testament economy, while its saints did unquestionably recog nize, individually, for themselves, the truth of continued existence after death, and had some vague notion of virtue, never took that great truth up into itself as a part of its doctrine, and never wrought it into its theology, and never made it a canon or a motive from beginning to end.

A great many men ask whether a man can be a Universalist, and be a Christian. Let them first ask the question, "How could it be that God should ordain an economy in which the doctrine of future rewards and punishments was never once taught?"

This reply of our Saviour, I repeat, is remarkable in what it says, and it is remarkable, also, in what it leaves unsaid. That will be unfolded in the progress of this discourse.

For I proceed, after these prefatory remarks, to speak of the general method of Christ and his disciples, in the new dispensation, of teaching us concerning the great future. What was the method of instruction adopted by Christ and his disciples, in regard to those principles that in his hands first came into authoritative disclosure, and were taught as positive truth?

1. They did not undertake to teach specifically or philosophically or physiologically, respecting the heavenly state. There is no attempt in the New Testament to determine whether heaven is a condition or a place. That is left for our modern speculation. There is nothing taught in the Old Testament history with regard to the relations of this condition or place to the universe,-nothing specific; nothing definite; nothing that enlightens us in regard to the New Jerusalem; nothing which answers to the instruction given later in respect to the promised land to which we are going.

Christ and the apostles did not unfold the internal economy of the heavenly state. There is no account given of its materials, of its econ