consciousness, since no other good reason can be assigned why that distinguished part occupies not at death the same place with the body.

Clear and striking as is the preceding evidence that bix Sheol represents the general receptacle of departed human spirits, an exposition of every passage in which this unique and important word occurs, will clearly show that it represents a place in which the soul of man dwells after death, and into which all enter with their respective characters of obedience or disobedience, according as they are obedient or disobedient to Heaven's requirements at their departure from this life; from which seems necessarily to follow a distinction there of pleasure and pain.

1. Genesis xxxvii, 35: “And all his sons, and all his daughters, rose up to comfort him, but he refused to be comforted; and he said, For I will go down," is Sheolah, "into the grave unto my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him." This is the first instance of Sheol that occurs in the Bible, employed by the patriarch Jacob after he had exclaimed, "An evil beast hath devoured him. Joseph is without doubt rent in pieces." is Sheol is here proved not to be a grave, nor any opening in the earth, by the fact that Jacob believed his "son" Joseph to be in it, while he equally believed him to be, not in the earth, but either in the "evil beast," or scattered upon the earth's surface. As the father thought that his "son" had been "devoured," he could not have expected to "go" "unto" his son's body, either in that "evil beast," or anywhere else, at least prior to the general resurrection. Nor could the venerable father have meant that at that resurrection he would "go" "unto" his "son," since he said he would "go" "unto" him "mourning," which implies that he expected to continue to be sad, till he should reach him; but this he could not have expected, had he known that after the death of his own body he would for thousands of years be unconscious, and that, accordingly, instead of going "unto" him while "mourning," he would "go" "unto" him in simple unconsciouness, or in that joy with which his body will doubtless meet Joseph's at the resurrection. He must therefore have expected to reach him as soon as he himself should die. Nor could he have meant merely that he would die, since his words, "unto my son," imply place and nearness of position; and as his body could not experience such a position relative to that of his "son," while he himself was “mourning," he must have expected that his conscious soul would in bi Sheol be associated with the undevoured soul of Joseph. The words "unto my son,"

then, condemn the assumption that after death nothing remains of man besides his body. If at death there is not immediately a meeting of departed human spirits in the spirit-world, then to say that one person who is about to die will "go" "unto" another who is already dead, and from whose dead body he will continue to be far separated, would indicate at least as much absurdity as to say that one person who is about to live, will come "unto" another who is already alive, and from whose living body he will continue to be far separated. Besides this, if Jacob did not expect to "go" "unto" Joseph except in the sense that he would soon be dead, as he thought his "son" already was-if he had no reference in his expectation to a meeting with him in the spirit-world, then he might as well have said that he was going to all the animals, and even ali the vegetables that were then dead, and from the remains of which he would continue to be far separated! And if the soul of Jacob did not at death "go' ""unto" that of Joseph, then it would be as absurd in him to say he would "go" unto his "son," as to say that one person who is about to sleep, will "go" ""unto" another who is already asleep, and from whom he will during sleep continue to be far separated. It seems also to be absurd to suppose that Jacob expected to come "unto" Joseph, without knowing it; and therefore he must have expected to continue conscious beyond death. As, according to 2 Cor. xii, 2, 3, "a man" may be "a man," "whether in the body or out of the body," so it is not strange that Jacob did not mention the soul as the part which he expected to "go" "unto" Joseph. Such circumlocution would have been alike inconsistent with the directness of deep emotion, and with the elliptical simplicity of similar statements on the part of those who are positively known to believe that man's soul has a conscious existence after death. As Jacob could not have thought that Joseph, whom he regarded as "devoured," was in earthly distress, so big Sheol, in which he believed him to be, is proved not to mean earthly distress. This is also obvious from the fact, that in such distress the "mourning" Jacob already was when he said, "I will go down into" bi Sheol, "unto my son mourning." Should it be said that, because he was "mourning," he could not expect to meet Joseph in the spirit-world, then, for the same reason, he could not expect to meet him in heaven at death. From the fact that he is represented as a good man when the words here discussed were uttered, it is reasonably inferred that he expected to enjoy happiness in the spiritworld. The word "down," in connexion with bis Sheol, no more proves that is Sheol is a place for man's unconscious dead body

שְׁאוֹל

than the word "up," in connexion with heaven, in 2 Kings ii, 1, 11, and in Luke xxiv, 51, and also in Acts i, 9-11, proves that heaven is not the place where God more immediately dwells. That word “down” indicates, if anything, that is Sheol is a place, and not a state. And to say that the soul or spirit of a man occupies after death a place, is not inconsistent with its dwelling before death in a place, nor with Solomon's prayer to God, who is emphatically “a Spirit," in 2 Chronicles vi, 30: "Then hear thou from heaven thy dwelling-place." Place, then, is not repugnant to the Scriptural idea of a spirit. Whatever may be the nature of a human spirit, it possesses not the attribute of Omnipresence, and must necessarily occupy some particular portion of space. The word "down," then, implying locality, harmonizes with the idea of a spirit-world, as does also "He local," which is here annexed to bi Sheol. The assumption that i Sheol means merely death, or a state of death, supposes that the patriarch Jacob expected to meet his "son Joseph, not in the spirit-world, nor even where he supposed the body of that "son" to be, but in the abstract state of death, which, aside from its subjects, like other abstractions, has no existence ! Where Sheol may be located, cannot be positively inferred from the word "down," which may be used relatively, not to the earth, but to heaven, which is represented to be "up." An ignorance of the precise location of bi Sheol is, however, no more strange or significant than that of the precise location of heaven. From the preceding remarks relative to i

Sheol, as first used,

it follows that it was regarded, in the times and among the people of the patriarch Jacob, as designating a place in which the soul of man dwells after its departure from the body.

2. Genesis xlii, 38: "And he said, My son shall not go down with you; for his brother is dead, and he is left alone: if mischief befall him by the way in the which ye go, then shall ye bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave," is Sheol. From the use of the words "gray hairs," it might at first seem that is Sheol represented a place designed for the reception of man's body. But this meaning of bix Sheol would be in direct opposition to that given to it by the same patriarch in the passage just discussed. Besides this, he could not have meant that his " gray hairs" would alone be brought to some place or thing, and this proves that these words are figuratively employed. As such, then, the question arises, what do they represent? The answer must be that, in connexion with the word "my," they represent me-" then shall ye bring" me "down" " with sorrow to the grave," bi Sheol. This is accord

ing to the rule of Hebrew grammar, that "The place of the personal pronouns, especially in a reflexive sense, is often supplied by the most distinguished and essential parts of either the external or internal man." The sense of Sheol in this passage is thus seen not to differ from that just discussed, since the represented me of this is the same as the "I" of that-"I will go down into the grave," bi Sheol, "unto my son mourning." Besides, he could not here have meant by Sheol any other place than that in which he supposed Joseph's undevoured soul to be, into which his own "gray hairs," or even body, could no more be brought now than before. That i Sheol here means the spirit-world, and not a literal grave, is also confirmed by the fact that the instrument by which he said that his sons would "bring" him "down" "to the grave," by Sheol, was sorrow. The influence which "sorrow" has upon the body ceases at death, and not at a subsequent burial; and as Jacob did not expect to escape "sorrow" before his arrival in i Sheol, nor to be buried at, but after death, bij Sheol is proved not to mean a literal grave, but the spirit-world. That is Sheol does not here mean death, is obvious from the fact that "He local" is here connected with it, and from the fact which Matthew x, 28, emphatically teaches, that the soul is so indestructible that neither the sons of Jacob, nor those of any one else, can kill it; and that though the body is killed, the soul remains alive-"fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul." And that is Sheol does not here mean earthly distress is evident from the fact that, if it did, then Jacob represented that as going to such distress or sorrow which was already affected "with sorrow!"

ART. VIII-PRACTICAL HINTS FOR STUDENTS OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE.

BIBLICAL helps may be divided into Geographical, Historical, Archæological, Introductory, Philological, and Hermeneutical.

1. Geographical. Of Geographies of the Holy Land, there are three of nearly equal value: Coleman's Historical Text-Book and Atlas of Biblical Geography; a Biblical Geography and History by Charles A. Goodrich, and a Gazetteer by the Sabbath-School Union. The maps and chronological tables of the first are extensive and correct, and it incorporates into its pages the recent discoveries of Rawlinson, Layard, Lynch, and De Saulcy. For a map of Palestine, Robinson's is one of the best, and can easily be procured.

2. Historical. Smith's three volumes of Sacred Annals, and Kurtz's Sacred History, are the best references on this subject. The latter is valuable as a text-book. The author was a pupil of Tholuck, and Professor of Church History in the University of Dorpat, and though the work is merely a compendium, it exhibits the hand of a scholar.

3. Archæological. In this department, which treats of everything of interest relating to the outward life of the Jews, Jahn's Archæology, and Nevin's Biblical Antiquities, are well known.

4. Introductory. Of General Introductions, Horne's is the most extensively known; but, though it exhibits vast industry, it is not, in our opinion, a well compacted, or closely critical and scholarlike performance. For the Old Testament, there are no entirely reliable introductions, since De Wette's and Jahn's are both chargeable with errors, yet, on the whole, are worthy of being consulted. Davidson's and Hug's Introductions to the New Testament are each of them extensive and critical, and the former, though expensive, deserves to be more generally circulated in this country.

The subject of the correctness of the sacred text, which is generally treated of in Introductions, is ably handled in some separate works, such as Davidson's Biblical Criticism, Havernick's Introduction to the Old Testament, and Hengstenberg on the Genuineness of the Pentateuch and Daniel. As a general reference book in the four departments above mentioned, Kitto's Cyclopædia