9. The authority upon which our Lord's utterances rest is the testimony of apostolic men, whose memory was assisted to report them in such a manner as to insure that they should be correct representations of our Lord's meaning, by the supernatural assistance of the Spirit, in accordance with our Lord's promise.

10. Although these discourses were originally committed to writing by various persons, yet, while one recorded one discourse and one another, while different narrators introduced different additional utterances, and while in the course of transmission these utterances of our Lord have undergone considerable variation in the language in which they have been expressed, still these discourses, as recorded by all three evangelists, present a complete and perfect unity. In the whole course of their transmission no portion of the human personality of the reporter has been transfused into them. In neither of the evangelists do we find the discourses made the vehicle of teaching different doctrines from those taught by the other. However great the variations, they merely unfold, without adding to the sense. the pages of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, whatever was the diversity of the materials used by them, we see before us the same Jesus.

In

11. This preservation by the three evangelists of the identity of our Lord, free from all intermixture derived from the minds through whom his utterances were transmitted, notwithstanding the number of years which had elapsed between the utterance of the discourses and the composition of the Gospels, and the variety of the materials out of which the Gospels were composed, and the amount of human agency, as well as the number of minds which must have been employed in their transmission is without any parallel in the history of man, and forms a most unquestionable proof that a supernatural influence was exerted over the minds of those who were concerned in the composition of our Gospels, by means of which every foreign element of thought or feeling has been effectually excluded from intermixing itself with the teaching of our Lord. Every phenomenon indicates that the discourses in the Gospels contain the substance of the utterances of Jesus Christ, free from all intermixture derived from the minds of his followers. That this should have been effected, notwithstanding the mode in which our Lord's utterances have been handed down, is as strong an evidence of a supernatural influence exerted over the minds of their authors as any miracle which is recorded in their pages.

(To be continued.)

SCRIPTURE REVELATIONS ON THE INTERMEDIATE STATE OF THE DEAD.

WHETHER or not we have carried our readers with us in the conclusions at which we arrived in our former paper on "The Doctrine of Eternal Punishment and Immortality," we would ask their careful consideration of the thoughts which we would now place before them, on a subject intimately connected, indeed, with the former one, but which we shall discuss quite independently of the conclusions which we have arrived at in our former paper.

The question we mean now to discuss is, what light, if any, does Scripture cast upon the state of the dead, previous to the resurrection-day. We mean to confine ourselves strictly to these limits; we shall, therefore, not speak of the nature of the resurrection bodies of the righteous, or of the wicked, or of the various localities assigned respectively to each, nor touch upon the numerous points of interest connected therewith. The position of the dead in the intermediate state is a subject that opens up of itself so many points of interest, that we can, indeed, only lightly touch upon some of them.

We purpose, too, in our present review of the subject to confine ourselves to Scripture. It may be possible for certain portions of the subject to receive illustration from science or philosophy, but without altogether disdaining such helps in those departments which lie partly within their ken, we shall limit ourselves to the examination of "what saith the Scripture?"

The first point that strikes us in this investigation is, what does Scripture tell us regarding the soul itself in this middle state? is it in a state of consciousness or not? Do our souls sleep till the great trumpet of the archangel shall summon us in the resurrection morn? or are we even in this intermediate state in a condition of conscious activity?

66

The death of the saints is indeed called a "sleeping in Jesus" (1 Cor. xv. 18; 1 Thess. iv. 14). In anticipation thereof, Paul could exclaim, "to me to die is gain" (Phil. i. 21), and the patriarch express his assurance that "there the wicked cease from troubling; and there the weary be at rest" (Job iii. 17). The righteous are said to "enter into peace" (Isaiah lvii. 2); "to be present with the Lord" (2 Cor. v. 8); they are with Christ," which is far better than life on this earth (Phil. i. 23). Our Lord speaks of the death of Lazarus under the expression, "our friend Lazarus sleepeth, but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep" (John xi. 11), and in Old Testament phraseology the death of individuals was often spoken of under the statement, "he slept with his fathers."

Some of these expressions give countenance to the idea that the state after death is one of sleep, while others of them which speak of that state being gain, and of the righteous in it enjoying the presence of Christ, seem rather to support the view that it is a state of joyous consciousness.

One text we have purposely excluded from the above list, as it is not clear whether it refers to the intermediate or the resurrection state, namely, Rev. xiv. 11, where the words "from henceforth" may refer to the time after the destruction of Babylon the great and the final judgment, and it would take us too long to discuss the question.

There are yet two other passages which allude to this state, in relation to the condition of the righteous dead, and one that has a still more extended reference. We allude to the comforting assurance that our Lord gave the penitent thief, "this day shalt thou be with me in Paradise" (Luke xxiii. 43); and the parable concerning Dives and Lazarus in Luke xvi. 19—31, which implies unmistakeably that both the good and the evil in the middle state are conscious of their respective conditions.

Stephen, just before he yielded up the ghost, had a glorious view of the risen Redeemer, into whose hands he committed his spirit (Acts vii. 55-60), and it is hard to believe that the sleep into which he fell immediately after was more than the sleep of his mortal frame, and that he was not immediately escorted to the presence of that Saviour who so graciously strengthened his proto-martyr in his dying hour.

On the Mount of Transfiguration Moses, as well as Elias, appeared in glory, and if the case of the latter cannot be fairly cited as an example of one in the interim state, no fair reason can be assigned against the case of the former being so brought forward.

The expression, "the spirits of just men made perfect" (Heb. xii. 23), which refers to all the departed righteous, from Abel downwards, who are mentioned by the apostle as forming an essential part of the Church Catholic, loses all force and beauty of meaning, if we are to suppose those spirits to be in an unconscious condition.

Rev. vi. 9, 10 might also be cited in defence of the position we advocate of a conscious state of the righteous dead, but as it is open to many objections, we will not press it into our service. Several passages also from the Old Testament we forbear to use, as they would require considerable space in discussion.

The above passages, however, we think are sufficient to prove that the righteous in the intermediate state are in a state of blessed consciousness. That the wicked are alike conscious, and

suffer punishment, at least in anticipation, Heb. x. 26 gives us great reason to conjecture, a conjecture which is confirmed by the passages in 2 Pet. ii. 4 and Jude 6, if those passages apply to any of the unrighteous dead (as by and by we shall attempt to prove); and finally, the parable of Dives and Lazarus puts this view beyond legitimate doubt.

But that parable is capable of a much wider application, and goes far to settle the second question, namely, whether departed souls are in a fixed state or not, that is, whether the state in which they die is one which will continue without alteration, the righteous remaining righteous, and the unrighteous similarly remaining unrighteous, or whether there is a possibility of that pardon, which was not sought after and obtained on earth, being granted to those who repent on the other side of the grave.

We say, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus throws some light on this very subject. For we learn from it, that immediately after, or shortly after death, the rich man was placed in a state of misery, the beggar brought to a state of happiness. The anxiety of the rich man after his brothers on earth shews us that the scene embraces the very state we are discussing, and not the state of godly and ungodly after the judgment-day.

Both alike seem to be fully conscious, the one of his bliss, the other of his misery; and both, that their respective portions were the result of their several actions when on earth.

Two other important points are pressed upon us by the teaching of our Saviour in this parable. First, that the blessed, even if willing, are not able to alleviate the sufferings of the wicked; and secondly, that a great gulf was fixed between both to prevent any passage from either side to the other.

Now many questions may be raised about this parable and its interpretation which do not affect these conclusions. For instance, whether the whole was a real occurrence, or was merely a parable conveying deep meaning indeed, but still not to be viewed as literally true. It may be questioned, and there is very little to guide us to a conclusion on either side, whether the punishment of the wicked in this middle state, or even at the last, will consist in being punished with material fire, or not. It may be gravely questioned whether the lost and saved can hold intercourse with one another, although so described as a necessity of the parable. The introduction of Abraham, too, into the scene, is one which gave life to the picture, in the eyes of the Jews, but must not be strained literally.

a The Jews were wont, as Lightfoot has learnedly shewn, to call the state into which righteous men are admitted after death by three different names :first, Paradise; secondly, Abraham's bosom; and thirdly, lying under God's

But whatever decision we may arrive on these several points, or any others that may be raised, we do not see how we can avoid drawing the conclusion that our Lord teaches that the souls of the righteous departed this life are in rest and felicity, that the souls of the unrighteous are in a state of misery, and that both these states are final and unchangeable.

Independently of this positive Scripture proof, we might argue to the same effect from the analogy of Holy Writ. What meaning can be fairly assigned to those many passages which speak of punishments and rewards, meted out hereafter for the deeds done in the body? of all words and actions and thoughts being brought up for judgment, and punished or rewarded according to their several deserts, if we are to imagine that a time of grace and opportunity of repentance is to be given after death to those who despised the free offers of pardon through Christ's atoning blood, when in life? The case of the heathen stands on a different footing, and we are disposed to think that Scripture does not hold out any hopes of their general salvation, whatever may be the case exceptionally. This conclusion seems forced on us from a review of the various passages which speak of the awful state of man without Christ, of the blindness of his understanding and the hardness of his heart, and of the hopelessness of all attempts to get life outside that life displayed in Christ. In our former paper we have plainly expressed our ideas on this head. Their everlasting punishment, if by that term be meant a never-ending torture of their souls and bodies in hell, would be hard to reconcile with God's character of love. Their everlasting punishment, if by that term be simply meant an everlasting exclusion from heaven, and such other punishment as they may deserve, resulting in an utter loss of consciousness or an extinction of their being, is quite defensible, if the deserts of sin, its awful nature, and the justice of God, be taken into

account.

The passage in Rom. ii. 12 might, too, be cited in proof of the view we have advanced. It may, too, be argued that were it otherwise the apostles would not have laboured so energetically, nor would so many incitements be given in the New Testament to urge the Church forward to the work of missions. If, as Mr. Ker advocates in his work on Immortality and Eternal Punishment, the chance of repentance after death be afforded to all who have not heard of the Gospel in this life, then who would not

throne. Their views drawn from the Old Testament writings by laboured deduction were on these subjects correct in the main, and hence our Lord himself uses the two first named expressions. On the last compare Rev. vi. 9, 10, bearing in mind that the Jews regarded the altar as the throne of God.