and there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover, the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass that the beggar died, and was carried by Angels into Abraham's bosom. The rich man also died, and was buried: and in hell he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame," &c. Luke xvi. 19-31.

We understand this portion of Scripture to teach the doctrine of future punishment, that all who live in pleasure, and die in impenitence, shall suffer misery and despair after death, therefore it is in point to prove the proposition before us. However, strong, witty, and we might say, reckless efforts, have been made to wrest it from this application. We shall, therefore, enter upon a brief examination of this subject.

We shall find, as a general thing, an intimate connection in the discourses of Christ, and in all his parables, and illustrations, derived from matter of fact, from some suitable and striking object. In the commencement of the chapter, the Savior illustrated the disposition the rich should make of their goods in order to meet the approbation of God-that they should distribute to the poor, and feed the needy, so that when they fail on earth, they, (the poor,) may welcome them into the courts of heaven. While thus blasting with the truth of heaven, the covetousness of men, the Pharisees, who were guilty of this sin, were offended and began to deride the Lord Jesus. At this the Savior sharply rebuked the Pharisees, and told them that their standard of morals was an abomination in the sight of God. To illustrate all

this, with the fatal consequences of a life of covetousness,

we are favored with the narration of the rich man and Lazarus. Though the Jews were believers in the punishment of the wicked in the future world, yet they did not seem to believe that a Jew should thus perish, because they had been the favored people of God, while the heathen were reprobates. It was therefore important to bring forth the truth, that heaven and hell were not dependent on national, but on individual character-that a Jew who was wicked and covetous would sink into the despair of Hades, without the most distant prospect of recovery.

There has been much disputation in order to determine, whether it be a narrative of matter of fact, or a parable. Universalists claim it to be a parable, and explain it in such a manner as to wrest it from any application to the spiritworld, for they perceive, that if they admit of its reference to the future world, though a parable, it is death to their theory. The orthodox expounders of the Scriptures are not, generally, tenacious whether it be called a parable, or history, for in their view it has an obvious reference to the spirit-world; if a parable, it teaches, what may take place ; and if a history, what has taken place. It is admitted on all hands, even by Universalists, that the Jewish nation believed in a future endless woe, and upon the ground that this is a wicked and fatal error, the course of the Great Teacher is passing strange and unaccountable in making use of such language and illustrations, as would strengthen and establish the people in their faith of this delusion. Yet, if we are to believe the declarations of Universalists, Christ came to teach and illustrate the doctrine of the necessary final holiness and happiness of the rational world, and that there was no future woe. Even in the admission that this is a parable, it is impossible for Universalists to give a sensible and consistent interpretation of this Scripture by ap

plying it to matters of this life. In their exposition there is no analogy, it is full of contradictions and whimsical notions, at war with other Scriptures, and matter of fact. We ask no one to believe this, because it is our opinion drawn from their exposition; but we invite every reader to a brief and candid examination for himself.

The interpretation most generally adopted is, that it is a parable, and that the Savior designed to teach the following facts. That the rich man represents the house of Israel abounding in spiritual blessings. By Lazarus, the beggar, the Gentile world, who were excluded from the privileges of the Jews. The death of Lazarus and his transfer to Abraham's bosom, the conversion of the Gentiles to the gospel. The death and misery of the rich man, the exclusion of the house of Israel from the kingdom of grace. The gulf fixed, imports the purpose of God that the Jews shall not believe the gospel until the fullness of the Gentiles.

Is such an exposition consistent with the Scriptures, with matter of fact, and even with this same Scripture? We think not. If the rich man stands for the house of Israel, when enjoying all the blessings of their covenant with God, what shall we illustrate by his five brethren? If the one stood for the house of Israel, or the Jewish nation, then there must have been five Jewish nations besides. This contradicts all sacred and profane history, therefore is necessarily false.

If Lazarus represents the Gentile world, then the character of this people is not fitly represented any more than their condition. The heathen, as a whole, were built up in large empires, possessing wealth and competence, as Rome, and Greece, &c., while in character they were poor and needy, profligate and sinful. But Lazarus was poor, in this world's goods only, while in character he was beloved and approved of God. If Lazarus stands for the

Gentiles, he ought to be represented as vicious, carnal, and unholy in every respect. The dogs came and licked his sores; the heathen were looked upon as dogs by the Jews, did the heathen then administer kindness to the heathen, that is, to themselves, as a matter worthy of note ?

If the death of the rich man represents the exclusion of the Jewish people from the spiritual blessings of their covenant their apostacy from God and the extinguishment of their glory, then they became morally dead in trespasses and sins; while the Gentiles, when they were made spiritually alive and assumed the place of the Jews in the favor of God, could not be said that they died, for the very act, by which they were transferred into the kingdom of God, made them alive. In this teaching there is but one death, while the text speaks of two, therefore this exposition is not sustained by the very Scripture it attempts to expound. They both lived simultaneously, and they both died; while the one was transferred to a place of misery and torment, the other was raised to the enjoyment of unspeakable happiness.

If the rich man in his sensible misery, and asking of father Abraham to send Lazarus to afford him the slightest blessing and kindness, is to represent the Jews in their state of exclusion from the gospel as sensible of their loss, and of the gain of the Gentile, and asking for the smallest favors of gospel mercies; then it gives an erroneous impression. For when have the Jews as a nation sought for the blessings of the gospel from the hands of the Gentiles, or even manifested a sensible knowledge of any loss in having rejected the Messiah? Up to this day the Jews are unconvinced of any loss in rejecting Jesus of Nazareth, nor are they longing for gospel mercy from the altars and temples of christianized Gentile nations. Then this interpretation contradicts matter of fact and must therefore be false.

If the impassable gulf between the rich man and Lazarus, represents "the purpose of God that the Jews shall not believe the gospel until the fullness of the Gentiles come in," or the unbelief of the Jews; then it speaketh not the truth, for it would teach, that the Jews, however desirous of the gospel, are not able to believe in Christ; that they cannot receive the blessings of salvation any more than the Gentiles can apostatize from God into their former situation. Verily, many of the Jews believed in Christ in his day, by the agency of the apostles and in latter times; the “gulf” of unbelief cannot hold them back, if they will come to Christ; and the christianized Gentiles may, and many have apostatized from God, thus they have passed over the "gulf" to the wicked and unbelieving Jews. Yet the word declares, that "between us and you there is a great gulf fixed; so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us that would come from thence." (Verse 26.) If Lazarus was in the kingdom of grace, and the rich man in unbelief among his nation, where would he have him go to warn his brethren? We cannot tell. And what does he mean by saying, that if one rose from "the dead, they would repent?" Does the rich man still intimate that Lazarus was dead, when he had been made morally alive, if he represents the Gentiles introduced into the gospel kingdom? Or was Lazarus dead in a different sense? What is it, or who can tell? All these are essential points, if this Scripture is a parable and must needs have their application.

Many things might here be said in favor of this Scripture being a history and not a parable, but we will not extend our remarks on this point.

We are inclined to believe it a history of facts, interwoven with figurative language, to describe the awful sublimity of the subject; and that it teaches the following