the law of JEHOVAH. They were therefore given up to blindness of mind, and hardness of heart.

The parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus was intended for a two-fold purpose. Its imagery contained the whole, in reference to the judgment of God, in relation to the final event. The parable not only portrayed, in its imagery, the idolatry and wickedness of the Jews, but it denounced them as victims to their iniquity. On the one hand, their true character is delineated, by a choice of imagery that reflects, as from a mirror, their infidelity and rejection of the truth; and on the other hand, the consequences to them of their rebellion against the true God, who had favoured them for many centuries, pre-eminently above all the residue of the nations.

The true relation is now seen, and the law of parabolic representation, or similitude, is in perfect harmony with this relation. As I have already stated, it is a reality that constitutes the groundwork of the parabola; and the imagery is all predicated on facts; which facts, in their relation to the patient of the parabola, exhibit the intention of the speaker, by their faithful representation, in a similitude, of the patient of the parabola. The reality, or groundwork, or facts, in the parable before us, I have stated in detail; to consist of the moral declension of the Levitical priesthood, and the worshippers under that priesthood at Jerusalem; together with the infidelity and heathenish errors of the Jews. Consequently, the imagery portrays these facts-the relation that exists, is between the facts themselves, and the true character of the patient, which they portray also, the intention of the speaker is manifested by the consequences to the patient, which his imagery affirms, portrays, and illustrates. Therefore, the facts, imagery, and intention of the speaker, in the language of the parabola, are one-the patient, his moral turpitude, and the consequences of that moral turpitude to the patient, are one. But, the patient is not the parable, and the parable is not the patient. In other words, these two exhibitions are distinct and separate. The thing that portrays, is not the thing portrayed. The figures which exhibit in a simile, are not the patient, who is the subject of the things exhibited. The relation is precisely the same, according to the parabolic law in this instance, as in the case of the relation in the parable of the leaven hid in the three measures of meal. The leaven is not the truth of the gospel, neither is the truth of the gospel the leaven.

The three measures of meal, are not the three dispensations, or aions, or ages; neither are the three dispensations, aions, or ages, the three measures of meal.

A parable exhibits truth, for a simile, and to illustrate a simile by a simile, as profile likenesses are taken. There are three things.* First, the light—second, the object to be delineated-third, and in regular succession, and in a straight line, the shadow of the object, exhibited by the light. And on a larger scale of illustration, an eclipse of the Sun. The Sun answers to the imagery—the moon the patient-the earth the location where the shadow falls, and the consequences are seen; as in the case of taking a profile likeness by describing the lines of the shadow, the likeness is the effect or consequence. Hades, therefore, is no more the location of the rich man, than the leaven is the word of truth—or the shadow, the delineated shade, portraying a man's features, is the light which cast it—or the shadow on the earth, observed when the Sun is eclipsed by the intervening of the opaque moon, between the Sun and the earth, is the Sun itself. But, if there were not a real light, there would be no shadow-if there were not a real patient, there would be no features delineated-if there were no Sun, there would be no eclipse— if there were no moon or patient, there would fall no shadow of that moon upon the earth.

That portion of Luke xvi. contained in verses 16th to 18th inclusive, correctly understood, as collateral imagery, is deserving of serious attention. Jesus affirms, that "The law and the prophets were until John; since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it." The next verse is explanatory, for Jesus immedi

* Christ's coming, (Matt. xxv.) is metaphorical, to the same extent, and in the full sense of the imagery, viz: Sheep and goats are sheep and goats-men are neither sheep nor goats-but men are as much sheep and goats, as a metaphorical coming, or manifestation in a figure, is a real parousia, personal coming, or presence. Therefore, the imagery used in the parable, is the only data by which the parable is to be explained, or understood. Also, the Devil and his angels, the fire, and the kolasin aionion, are to be considered in a tropical, or, rather, in a metonymical sense.

+ The translators have rendered καὶ πᾶς εἰς αὐτὴν βιάζεται, “ and every man presseth into it," (i. e. into the Kingdom of God.) Here rãs is rendered indefinitely every; but I understand pas auten in this passage, to signify, not "every man," but every one in the premises, as the case may be. And biazetai, as biazomai, that signifies to use violence; or, passively, to be invaded by force. The law and the prophets constituted the mean of knowledge to the Jews, until John appeared. Then a new mean, viz: the preaching of the coming of the Son of God, as the Messiah of the

ately adds" And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail." That is, (and the imagery clearly expresses this,) Not one tittle of the LAW shall fail; but heaven, the Jewish Church or ceremonial worship, and earth, the Jewish dominion, can pass away, without affecting the spirituality of the LAW. Therefore Christ's declaration in his Sermon on the Mount, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." And he prefaced this declaration, by affirming, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." (Matt. v. 17, 18.) Again-"Heaven and earth [the Jewish Church and dominion] shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matt. xxiv. 35.) The Jews had no authority for putting away the law. Therefore Jesus accused them, saying, "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" Again, "thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." (Matt. xv. 3, 6.) And this was the burden of the prophets. See Jer. iii. from 1st to 20th verses inclusive. How emphatic is the declaration, "Surely as a wife departeth from her husband, so have ye dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith the LORD!" The Jews made the commandment, or law of God, of none effect, or void, by their tradition, or doctrine. Hence the declaration of Jesus, quoting from Esaias, "In vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." "In this manner they put away the law of God. Therefore says Jesus Jews, and the Saviour of the world; and this event is characterized as the kingdom or reign of God in the world. Now the simple truth is thisthe Jews opposed the new mean, or dispensation of the Gospel of Christ, of which John was the pioneer, and the forerunner of Christ.

The reader is requested to examine Matt. xi. 12, 13, etc., "And from the days of John the Baptist until now, the Kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. For [gar, because] all the prophets and the law prophesied until John." The adverb ws occurs in both verses, and the reason assigned, with the character given of the violent captors of the Kingdom of Heaven, in the connexion, is a sufficient comment! It is, gar, because, etc. The simple import of the phraseology is, that, until John appeared, the law (of God,) and the prophets (of God,) were preached since John appeared, the Kingdom of God is preached. The phrase, "The violent take it by force," is explanatory; and purports, that the Jews, to whom the Kingdom of God or Heaven, was preached, instead of that moral repentance that John preached, inculcating submission to God, his law and commandments, and receiving the truths of God, as "little children," violence characterized the Jews, in all they did, in relation to Christ and his Gospel, etc.

(verse 18,) "Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth`adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband, committeth adultery." And the Jews were guilty in both senses of the figure. First-They put away the law. SecondThey married, that is, received, instead of the law, the commandments or doctrines of men; for they even substituted the errors of the heathen, or pagan nations! Then, immediately follows, the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, which I have commented on, etc.

The Gospel of Christ, correctly understood, and the law, also correctly understood, are not opposed to each other. Jesus Christ never accused the Jews of rejecting the gospel by their adherence to the law, giving the law a preference over the gospel. The fact is as notorious as the sun at noonday, that the Jews rejected both, the law and the gospel. Hence the emphatically explanatory declaration of Jesus, on this very subject, “Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father; there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" (John v. 45—47.) It was the commandments or traditions, or doctrines of men, that the Jews substituted for the commandment or law of God; and put away God's law, and married another. The declaration of Christ, that "the law and the prophets were until John,” is of the same import with Paul's declaration, “Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster, (eis Christon) to Christ:" until Christ came. (Gal. iii. 24.) The abverb ws, rendered until, (John,) marks the continuance of an action (the dispensa, tion, or aionos of the law,) up to the time of another action. Now what is the other action? Ans. The preaching of John, the forerunner of Christ, who said, “Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matt. iii. 2.) Did John tell the Jews that they must put away the law? By no means: He told them, when they inquired, “What shall we do?" as follows: "He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do likewise," etc. (Luke iii. 11.) It is notorious that the dispensation of the law was not to end until the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the Temple; when Christ should come in power and glory, establishing his Gospel in its stead. And the happening of this event, brings us again to the parable.

The aionos closes, or ends. The Rich Man is dead and buried. The parabola now describes, in its imagery, the consequences to the Jews, of their rejection by their Creator, and their blindness to the truth. The Rich Man lifted up his eyes in Hades, and, behold, Abraham is afar off! This phrase is significant of the moral condition of the Jews in their cast off, and dispersed state. Objects that are beheld afar off, at a great distance, are only indistinctly seen. A very significant figure of the blind condition of the Jews. But they discern the beggar Lazarus, the Gentiles, in Abraham's bosom. A very expressive metaphor, significant of unity of sentiment, familiarity of converse, and agreement in views and disposition. In a word, of the existence of the closest friendship, and the utmost harmony.

But the Jew will be a Jew, under any and all circumstances, so the Rich Man-but he is now become a very poor Jew-well, he sticks to his Judaism, and cries, "Father Abraham, have mercy on me!" His God has rejected him. His priest, yea, the whole tribe of the sacerdotal order, together with all that appertained of the elements of the worship of the Levitical priesthood, all were buried beneath the ruins of the temple, when the ter rible catastrophe overwhelmed the guilty nation within the walls of Jerusalem. Therefore the Jew has now no other resource, than to cry, "Father Abraham, have mercy on me!" How significant was John the Baptist's declaration to the Jews! "Think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our Father; for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham." (Matt. iii. 9.) And God cast off the Jews, and raised up children unto Abraham of the Gentiles; and the Jew in his rejected state, lifted up his eyes, and he saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus, the Gentiles, in his bosom. Therefore, as his last, and only resource, he cried, "Father Abraham, have mercy on me.'

How expressive is the Jew's request, of the utter destitution of rejected Israel! "Send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame!" It is the tongue, metonymically, that is the cause of all the mischief. Recollect what James says of the tongue; and the prophets, of wickedness burning as the fire. Also, that water is the Scripture metaphor for truth. Hence the declaration of the prophet to the house of Israel-"For my people have