represented that Christ appeared to him, in some manner, while he was on the way to Damascus, and reproved him for persecuting the disciples. Evidently, this appearance was not corporeally tangible, but spiritual. Did Paul ever see Jesus in any other way, or in any dif ferent sense? He makes no distinction between Christ's appearance to him, and his manifestation to the others whom he mentions,-Cephas, the twelve, and the five hundred. Indeed, he expressly classes himself with the rest of those who are said to have seen Jesus. Observe the language:"He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: after that he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all, he was seen of ME also, as of one born out of due time."

If Jesus appeared in a material, bodily form, to the twelve and the five hundred, what evidence have we that he did not appear to Paul in the same manner? Or, to reverse the query, if he saw him only as an intangible spiritual identity, what reason have we to suppose (from any thing that Paul says) that they saw him as a literal, bodily person, clothed in flesh and blood? These questions I do not design to answer, now; but I propose them for the purpose of exciting further inquiry in the mind of the hearer.

Whoso may endeavor to solve this matter will perhaps have his mind quickened somewhat in relation to it by a

consideration of the fact, that Paul sometimes saw, or thought he saw, through other than material organs of vision, and heard with other than fleshly ears,-as appears from the following extract of one of his Epistles, wherein it is supposed he had direct allusion to himself: "I knew a man in Christ about fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth ;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth ;) how that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter." ""*

It is quite evident, to my mind, that the apostle has allusion, in this chapter, (1 Cor. xv.) to a resurrection of mankind universally. I do not propose entering upon a lengthy discussion of the views concerning this matter which characterize the Universalist denomination, or of the sentiments of those who differ from us:

*2 Corinthians, xii 2-4. The Jews cherished the idea that there were seven different heavens, or exalted regions. "The third heaven," to which Paul was "caught up," was spoken of as the residence of the Almighty; and thence the New Jerusalem descended. (Rev. xxi. 2, 10.)

"From the third heaven where God resides,

That holy, happy place,

The New Jerusalem comes down,

Adorned with shining grace."-Watts.

Mahomet borrowed from the Jews this notion of the seven heavens, and incorporated it with his theological system.

It was considered unlawful, among the Jewish people, to speak the divine name, Yehovah: and besides, they averred that the true pronunciation was lost and could not be regained without the aid of an especial, divine revelation. It is supposed that this was one of the "unspeakable words' which Paul heard while in his tranee, or vision,

but I would remark, incidentally, that I see not how any candid, thoroughly unbiassed mind can avoid the conclusion that Paul's language, in the instance we are considering, implies the resuscitation-the revival to sentient existence of the whole human race. The style is unambiguous, and the phraseology world-embracing. "Now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order; Christ the first fruits; afterward they that are Christ's, at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. [Or-as it reads when we omit the words supplied by King James' translators-"The last enemy shall be destroyed, death.'] For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, All things are put under him; it is manifest that he is excepted which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”* In what language could the resurrection of the whole race of mankind from the dead, and their spiritual subjugation to Christ and God, be more une

* Verses 20-28.

quivocally stated? If any one entertains the opinion that Paul was mistaken, that is, of course, another

matter.

Whether he intended to say that he believed all mankind would be perfectly holy and happy, after their renewal of existence, or left it to be in any way rationally inferred from his discourse that he supposed some would be irreclaimably sinful and wretched, is a question that branches off somewhat from the one we have just now sought to determine. Let those (if any such there be) who are undecided respecting the opinion of Paul on this point, consider in connection with each other the two following passages from his writings: "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."* "If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.Ӡ Let them also seriously ask their own understandings, if the idea that some of the human family will hereafter be placed utterly beyond the reach of moral improvement, and so rendered hopelessly miserable, can be reconciled with the declaration, that all intelligences shall be made subject unto the Spirit of Christ, in the same sense in which HE shall be made subject to the FATHER, "that God may be ALL in ALL !**

It is manifest, to my mind, from the chapter of which we have just been speaking, that Paul believed in a resurrection of the body,-though he evidently cherished

*1 Cor. xv. 22. † 2 Cor. v. 17,

the opinion that it would, after its resurrection, undergo an important change.

Paul was a believer in mental and moral progress. This fact is plainly evinced by the general tenor of his writings. His language was not such as we find adopted by stiffly opinionated creed-men and bigots. He said to his brethren, "I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus."* In comparing the old Jewish Law and the Gospel with each other, he speaks of the former as "our school-master to bring us to Christ."+

It is worthy of mention that the word hell does not occur in either of the fourteen Epistles which are ascribed to this apostle. In one instance‡ the word grave is translated from the Greek term which is elsewhere sometimes translated hell.

In one of the Epistles to Timothy, occurs the following passage: "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." It is generally admitted that this pas sage is a mistranslation, and, as it stands in our version, * Phil. iii. 13, 14. † Gal. iii. 24. ‡1 Cor. xv. 55. §2 Tim. iii. 16, 17.