either as a parable-their commencement is the same. The parable under discussion is full of imagery, and as history, is equally full of improbabilities, not to add impossibilities-the other, destitute of imagery, is taken for granted as parable, nemine contradicente; and why? It does not militate against any preconceived opinions. Were no other fact perceptible, the very reason which is objected to the one as figure, is demonstrably evident as the other is concerned. But though this is considered as an entire answer to the objection now stated, you may compare at your leisure, Mat. 13: 44, 45-47-49, where you may find parables introduced in as abrupt a manner as the one under consideration. See also Mat. 20: 1. the parable of the labourers; also Mat. 25: 1. respecting the ten virgins, and that of the talents, v. 14. with others ad libitum. Of those in Mat. 13. it may indeed be urged, that "All these things spake Jesus to the multitude in parables, and without a parable, spake he not unto them." But you ought to perceive that this includes in the most ample form, the very subject un"der examination. The multitudes was contradistinguished from the disciples; this was spoken to the Pharisees; ergo, to the multitude. It is then a parable.

LETTER 13.

Having already shown, and, as we trust conclusively, that a literal understanding of this subject involves the most palpable absurdities, we shall now turn your attention to what is believed to be its true meaning. The rich man will now be considered as a type of the Jewish nation, and Lazarus as an emblem of the Gen

tile world. That this is the import of the passage, we shall now endeavour to make obvious.

The parable represents these two as contradistinguished each from the other, the one rich, and the other poor. That this relates to spiritual privileges, in which the Gentiles were far behind the Jews is a position which is soon illustrated. But perhaps we may first inquire into the propriety of using the singular number when speaking of the whole people. Let us then recur to scripture authority for a precedent. Deut. 32 9, to close of the 15th verse.

Here we observe, not only that the Lord's people are spoken of collectively in the singular number, but that they are represented as rich, even in the good things of this life through the favour of our heavenly father. Nor is this more evident than that HE was equally rich in spirituals. Paul, in answer to the question-What advantage then hath the Jew? replies,

"Much, every way: CHIEFLY, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God." And again;

"Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came.

The clothing of the rich man is described, Exod. 27: 2, 4, 5.

Thus was the rich man, the high priest and representative of the Jewish people, clothed in purple and fine linen; and that both he and the people fared sumptuously every day, we may learn by the daily sacrifices, and more specially by the peculiar demonstrations of divine favour which are expressed as follows: "And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God." What nation, then, was like that nation, "whose God was the Lord?" We see the

propriety of representing the Jewish nation as a man, a RICH man. His clothing and his fare are described in the scriptures of truth, and to this the parabolic language of our Saviour agrees. But the life of this privileged man closes. The law, which had been a lamp to his feet, and a lantern to his path, had been made void by vain traditions. He had neglected attendance on those oracles of divine wisdom, which had been his life, and he is now dead. The legal dispensation had ceased. Having misimproved his talent, the kingdom of God was taken from him and given to another, bringing forth the fruits thereof. He was consequently shut out into utter darkness, where is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Blindness in part had now happened to Israel, and shall continue until the fullness of the Gentiles shall come in. He was therefore buried in the darkness expressed by an apostleLet their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and bow down their back alway. He now saw Abraham afar off and Lazarus in his bosom. Thus was the prediction of the Saviour fulfilled, recorded Luke 13: 28, 29, 30.

"There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out. And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God. And behold, there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last."

It was at the close of the Mosaic dispensation, when the master of the house, the high priest of our profession, had shut the door on the Jews, and opened it to the Gentiles, that those which had been the first, and highly favoured people, became the last; and the Gentiles, who had been the last, were in the same sense made the first. The Gentiles came from the four quar

ters of the earth, and found life in the dispensation of the Gospel, the same gospel which had been preached to Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

We have before said, that this is the only passage in the New-Testament, in which hades is connected with punishment. You will recollect that the original term signifies unqualified darkness. If this is a parable, hell is here used to signify mental darkness, as it literally signifies physical darkness. Thus does the figure completely correspond with the fact. Hence it is obvious, that as the Jewish nation looked to the righteousness of the ritual law, which consisted of carnal ordinances, so the rich man in the parable calls to his father after the flesh for assistance. Having rejected the counsel of God against themselves, and refused to submit to the rule of a suffering Messiah, they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life, and the angels, or ministers of the gospel, turned to the Gentiles, who were thus brought into the life of the gospel, the faith of Abraham.

To exhibit the force of Abraham's closing reply to the rich man, "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither would they be persuaded though one rose from the dead," let us refer to John 5: 45, 46.

"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 what says Paul to the Romans on this subject? "For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy."

It hence appears obvious, that the unbelief of the Jews, and the faith of the Gentiles, were simultane

ous. The one died to all which distinguished them as rich in their life time-the other died to their idolatrous worship, and to their ignorance of the true God, and no wonder the Apostles exclaimed in astonishment, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life." Thus the rich man died, and was buried-the poor man needed no burial, he came to life-the life of the new dispensation.

In speaking of this passage literally, notice was taken of the entire want of character from which to infer the cause of the sudden change of circumstances related of these two men. As a figure, it is truly characteristic of the relative rituation of the two grand divisions of men. Not only were the Jews highly privileged as a people, but their exclusive claim to these privileges was so deeply rooted, that even the apostles of our Lord, had strong doubts of the propriety of teaching the way of life to the Gentiles. Nay, the Saviour of men, while under the Mosaic dispensation, afforded strong evidence of this exclusive spirit. His disciples were forbidden to preach to the Gentiles, and he declared himself not sent, but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. True, after his reurrection, the commission was extended to every creature; yet before his crucifixion, he declared it not meet to give the children's bread to dogs, alluding to the case of the Gentile woman. Here then is a case in point. The woman answered-"Truth Lord, yet the dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their master's table." What a singular coincidence! The Jews, and even Christ, at that time, considered the Gentiles as dogs.

That the Gentiles, who are here represented in the character of a beggar, were poor in the same sense in which the Jews were rich, will hardly be disputed, when reference is made to Eph. 2: 11, 12.

"Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision