Three inquiries : 1. Into the Scriptural doctrine concerning the devil and Satan. 2. The extent of duration expressed by the terms olim, aion, and aionios, rendered everlasting, &c. &c. in the Bible, and especially when applied to punishment. 3. The New Testament doctrine concerning the possession of devils

Front matter

<^ PRINCETON, N. J. ^

Division Section

THREE V5j^ fl

Section i. Common opinions of the Devil and Satan briefly

Sect. ii. Remarks on Genesis iii. showing that the serpent

which deceived Eve was not a fallen angel 19

Sect, hi. All the texts m the Old Testement where the original word Shaitan, or Satan occurs, considered ----- 35

Sect, iv. The opinion that the Devil or Satan is a real being, with other connected opinions, shown to have their origin in heathenism - 64

Sect. v. All the passages in the New Testamen where the

term Satan occurs, considered - - 97

Sect. vi. All the passages where the original word Diabolos,

translated Devil is used, considered - 115

Sect. vii. All the passages considered in which the terms

Devil and Satan are used synonymously - 146

Sect. viii. All the texts considered where the Devil is supposed to be called the evil one, the tempter, the great dragon, the serpent, and old serpent, the princs of this world, the prince of the power of the air, and the god of this world - 161

Sect. ix. Facts stated, showing that the Devil is not a fallen

angel, or a real being - - . 172

Sect. x. Objections considered - - - 182

Slct. XI. Concluding remarks, pointing out the evils which have arisen from the common opinions entertained of the Devi] and Satan - - 19Q

IV CONTENTS.

^* xO

Sect, i. ..^AlWtlieigtQxLs noticed wlierqgpiimtoccTirs^n the • Old Testament, but is rendered by xvords which do not express or imply endless duration 197

Sf.ct. II. All the passages noticed where Olim is used, and '\

rendered by words which convey the idea of endless duration - - - 20;jl

Sect, hi. All the texts where Olim occurs, is rendered by words wliich convey the idea of endless duration, and applied to punishment, particularly considered .... 033

Sect. iv. General remarks on Aionand Aionios,as used in

the New Testament - - - 243

Sect. v. All the places noticed where Aion and Aioiiios are rendered ages, course, never, forever, evermore, eternal, everlasting; but which have no relation to punishment - - '25ii

Sect. vi. All the places where Aion and Aionios are rendered world, considered - - 26'>

Sect. vij. All the pl-Tces where Aion find Aionios arc used to express the duration of punishment, particularly considered, in whatever way rendered in the comncon version - - - 308

Sect- viii. Concluding remarks on Olim, Aion and Aionios, throughout the Bible, whether applied to God, to life, or punishment - - - 343

Part III

An iNQcfRv into the possession of devils mentioned in the New Testament ^^tt if

Introduction

Lv presenting the following pages to the public, were any apology necessary, I would make it in the words of Professor Stuart "to Dr. Miller. He says, p. 12, 13. of his Letters, " it is just as much our individual duty now, to bring every principle of the creed of the Protestant churches to the test of the divine word, as it was the duty of the Reformers to bring that of the Catholics to the test of Scripture. This position is absolutely certain ; unless we can prove that the formers of the Protestant symbols were inspired. If they were not, they may have erred in some things ; and if so, it is important to us, if possible, to know in what they have erred. But how shall we, or how can we know this, unless their creeds are subjected, anew and repeatedly, to the test of the Scriptures, &c.

" So long as we profess to be Protestants, and of course, profess to believe that the Bible is the sufficient and only rule of faith and practice, so long, if we act consistently, we believe in the symbols of faith which we receive, only because we find them supported by the Scriptures. It is not only lawful then to put 'them to the test ; but it is an imperious duty for every man to do it, who is able to do it. There may be a show of modesty and humility in receiving what others have believed, without examination and without scrutiny ; but in every case, where there is ability to investigate and bring to the Scripture test, a failure to do it must arise from undue regard to the authority of fellible men, or from mere inaction — from absolute sloth." &c.

According to my ability I have endeavored to bring to the Scripture test three very important articles in the Protestant creeds. Other articles, particularly those noticed in Part 1. Section iv. intruded themselves in the course of my researches, and it was deemed proper to give them a due share of attention, being very closely connected with my subject.

It may be thought by some, that if the things stated in Part i. Sect. 4. be true, the Second Part is a superfluous discussion ; for it follows, of course, that endless punishment cannot be true. This we admit ; but the texts where everlasting is applied to punishment, will not be given up by many as teaching endless punishment, until some rational Scriptural interpretation is presented, showing that their former views of them are incorrect.

VI INTRODUCTION.

1 here can speak from experience ; for I never would have relinquished the doctrine of endless punishment, unless I had come to see how such texts could be' ftiirly explained as not teaching it. I have felt the power of such previous views on Vny own mind, and make allowance for others in the same condition. On this account, if my explanations of the texts where everlasting is applied to punishment be correct, the Second Part, so far from being superfluous, is highly necessary. Many of my former friends have wondered, how I could embrace my present views with such texts staring me in the face." One object with me, in the Second Part has been, to show, that I did not shut my eyes to these texts, but obtaining very different views of them, embraced my present opinions. W^hether my present views be correct, they can now see and judge for themselves. If I have embraced error, they are requested to have the goodness to correct it.

In tJie following pages, we have expressed our opinions frankly and sincerely, and appealed to the Scriptures as the test of truth. The author "hopes, that t]\e spirit in which his remarks are made can give offence to none. He has studied to avoid all harsh language, convinced that man's wrath can never work the righteousness of God. If he has in any instance turned aside from this path, he shall regret it much more than any of his readers, for his object is to convince, not to irritate. Should it be said, some of the opinions controverted are not held now by our orthodox bretln-en, nor durst any preacher avow them, without forfeiting his station. We are glad to hear of this, but doubt if it is generally true ; and certainly, we have never heard, that anv public disavowal of them has been made. If such opinions are not held now, why not publicly denounce them .•* For it will not be denied, that they have been held by Calvinists in past ages. At any rate, we would say, it has been far from our heart to misrepresent the opinions of our brethren.

Shoul'd any one reply to the following pages, the author begs leave to say, that it will be of no consequence to point out defects in his manner of discussing the subject, or, to shi)w that he has misunderstood some texts which have come under his consideration. As to the first, had liis time and avocations permitted, he might have rendered the work freer of defects. As to the last, thougli he has used all means in his power to interpret the Scriptur(;s correctly, yet it would be surprising, if in no instance he Jiad misunderstood the sacred writers- A reply in«M-(dy bearing on these points, lie will pass over in silence. But, li(> will listen with attention to whatever maybe advanced. He will attend to argument and cvid(Mice drawn from Scripture, come from what quarter they may, whether stated in a good or batl temper of mind. If convinced he is wrong, he will be silent, but if not, he will claim the privilege of stating iiis reasons for his dissent. Who-

INTRODUCTION. Vll

ever undertakes to reply, we beg of them to give us proofs and not mere assertions., for what they may advance, and to pay particuhir attention also to what we have advanced in Parti. Sect. 4. To point out defects, without fairly meeting the grand points at issue will be considered no answer.

I make no apology for availing myself of quotations from various authors in the course of my remarks, for they are chiefly taken from writers whose religious creeds embraced the opinions controverted. None of them are taken from professed Universalists, for by most people their testimony would be deemed exceptionable, however well supported by evidence. The testimonies quoted in favor of my opinions, are from men competent to judge, and in high repute as critics and commentators among orthodox people. They are quoted, not to give sanction to my views by the weight and number of their names, but on account of the evidence which they produce.

In the present work, the strongest texts in favor of endless punishment are considered, and attention given them in proportion to the degree of stress laid on them in favor of this doctrine, in some instances, we have referred to our former Inquiry into the words Sheol, Hades, Tartarus, and Gehenna, for an illustration, which the reader will please consult. And in ail cases, we hope the texts referred to, will be turned to and read, as they confirm or illustrate the sentiments advocated.

The author is deeply sensible, that the sentiments advanced are very unpopular, and will be condemned by many without a hearing. He is sorry for such persons on their own account; for this cannotstop the advance of light and knowledge in the present day, anjMiiore than sleeping all day can stop the sun in his course. If what I have advanced be true, it must prevail against all opposition, for great is the truth, and must prevail. If my sentiments are false, the sooner they are refuted, neglected, and forgotten, the better. If this can be done, it no doubt will be done, and to the doing of it we shall add our hearty amen.

INOTICE TO THE THIRD EDITION.

In this third edition, a third partis added — "On the possessions of devils mentioned in the New Testament." Those who comphiined of the want of this, in the two former editions, will here find it supplied. This addition has considerahly increased the size of the book, being unwilling to abridge the other parts to make room for it. We have seen no reason to change our opinions, or to alter them, and of course they remain in this as in former editions. All the difference is, we have somewhat abridged the introduction, left out a few sentences and words of no importance to the argument, and made a few verbal alterations in the phraseology. But these are of so little importance, that we deem them iiardly deserving this brief notice. We hope the work is improved, and is rendered more perfect by the addition made to it. In this addition, the subject is discussed very briefly from what it might have been, for we deemed it most profitable to confine our attention to the argument from Scripture. By this test we wish our .^ientimcnts to stand or fall. If they are unscriptural, no person hitherto has attempted to refute them from the Bible. The attempt ought to be nnide soon, to benefit me, for I shall ere long go the way of all the earth, and be beyond cither men's praise or their blame. What thou doest then " do quickly" for "there is no work, nor device, nor wisdom in the grave."

AN INQUIRY fjVTO THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE J) EVIL AND ^ATAN.

SECTION L

t C;OMMON OPINIONS ENTERTAINED OF THE DEVIL AND SATAN BRIEFLY STATED.

The opinions entertained, concerning a being called the Devil a^id Satan, are many. We shall give a brief summary of them under the following particulars :

1st, The Unity of the Devil. It is the common opinion, that there is but one being properly called tAe devil. The unity of God is not more certainly be^ lieved, than that the Devil or Satan is one. Though God is said by many to be three persons in one being, yet the devil has never been supposed to be more than one person in one being. Dr. Campbell, Dissert. 6, says, "nor can any thing be clearer from Scripture than that, though the demons are innumerable, there is but one devil in the universe,"

2d. The Origin of the Devil. The common opinr ions about this are -—that he \vas originally, one of the angels of God in heaven. God did not create him 3 devil, but be became so, by bis own sin and rebellion. It is also believed, that be drew a nuiltitude of the heavenly bests into rebellion with him, who have shared his fate, are called his angels, and that he has become their chief. His sin is supposed to have been pride ; but how, or about what it arose, we have never seen properly defined. The time is not ascertained when all this took place; but it must have been before Adam and Eve sinned, as he is said to have been their seducer. Supposing all this to be true, we can answer the long agitated question — " whence cameth evil ?" It came from heaven. It originated amonii; the holy angels of God. But how it could orig?^^atein heaven, and among such holy beings, I must leave for others to explain. Admitting such opinions true, } ask, if sin once originated there and among such beings, why may it not again, yea, often ; and why not extend it to all the ransomed of the Lord ? Why may they not all finally become devils by sin and rebellion against the Lord ? What is the security given that not[iingof a like nature shall ever take place again in heaven ?

3d. His expulsion from heaven and his place of ahode since. How long the devil maintained his place in heaven after he sinned, we have never seen stated. All agree, that he was cast out of heaven, but where he was cast to, and where his abode has been since, very various opinions are entertained. Some say he was cast down to hell, and has been there in chains of darkness ever since. Others allege, that his abode is in the air, or our atmosphere. The most general opinion is, that he walks about in our world like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour, and will continue to do so until the consummation of all things. Some have thought, that he has his residence in the heart of every

AN IN(^UIRY PART I. 15

wicked man, and is the cause of so much evil being devised by it. These opinions cannot all be true, which creates a suspicion they may all be false.

4th. The nature and character of the Devil. The devil is universally believed to be a spirit. God is not more certainly believed to be a good spirit, than he is believed to be an evil spirit. Not one good quality is supposed to be in his nature or character. On the contrary, every evil, and that in the highest degree, is found in him. He is a perfect compound of all that is evil, and the irreconcilable enemy of God and man. As he is incapable of being made better, it is believed he is so bad tliat he cannot be made worse. To say a person or thing is as bad as the devil, is saying the worst that can be said concerning them.

5th. The extraordinary powers ascribed to him. — Many people consider him almost omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. He is supposed to know the thoughts, words, and actions of all men ; that he is in all parts of the world at the same time; and effects things by his power, little inferior to God himself. God is the only being in the universe who is able to control him. He can assume any form, shape, or color; and tliough an angel of darkness, can transform himself Into an angel of light. One would be almost led to think, he had greatly increased his powers by his sin and rebellion, for no good angel is ever represented as possessing such extraordinary powers as Christians ascribe to the devil. If his powers have been curtailed by his rebellion against God, what must they have been before it ?

6th. How the Devil is employed. It would be an endless task to enumerate all the various work in which he is supposed to have engaged, since his expulsion from heaven. One of the first things he engaged in, was to tempt our first parents to sin, and thereby ruined them and all their posterity. Ever since, he has been seducing every son and daughter of Adam to all kinds of sin, fomenting all sorts of mischief, and producing misery in our world. He is supposed to be walking about seeking whom he may devour, deceives the whole world, and accuses the very best of men before God. He infuses evil thoughts and desires into men's minds, and is ever ready to assist them in the execution of their wicked purposes, and the gratification of their sinful lusts and passions. He is supposed not only to inflict many severe bodily diseases, but to harrass the mind, so as to drive persons to distraction and suicide. He is believed to have been the cause of all .Job's afflictions, to have bound a woman eighteen years with an infirmity, and urged Judas on in his course of wickedness until he betrayed Jesus, and was finally led to hang himself. He is also allowed to blind men's minds about the gospel, and harden their hearts, and is at work in the heart of every child of disobedience. He not only picks up the seed of the word when sown, lest men should believe it and be saved, but those who do believe it, are the objects of his particular malice, whom though he cannot ruin forever, he is determined to render as miserable as possible. All wicked men are his, and his care is, to keep them under his power and dominion. Some marvellous accounts have been given, of his torturing and torEiiCnting good people, and of some who sold themselves soul and body to him. At the stipulated time, he has come and carried them away bodily to hell. It is the belief of some, that at death, the devil carries off the souls of wicked men to the same place. Those who wish to inform themselves more fully may consult Boston's works.

AN INQ,UIRr PART 1. 17

Edwards, Jeremy Taylor, Godwin, and many other authors on this subject.

Ttli. The various names hy ivhich he is designated. What the devil's name was before he sinned in heaven we have never been able to ascertain ; but if we cannot ascertain who or what the devil is, it is not for want of names, which are supposed to distinguish him from every other being. He iy called in Scripture, as many suppose, satan, the devil, the evil one, the tempter, the old serpent, the god of this world, the prince of this world, and the prince of the power of the air. These are his principal titles, with a few others which are of less consequence, and do not require any particular notice. He has also a great variety of vulgar names, which to put on paper, would only be to promote the laughter of fools, which is no object with me in writing. If such a being does exist, we are called to weep, rather than to laugh. If he does not, I wish soberly and seriously to expose such a false and pernicious opinion. We protest against the common use of such names in daily conversation, whether the people believe or disbelieve his existence. One thing we remark, that all such vulgar names are desio;ned to desio;nale a real beino; or fallen angel, by people who thus use them.

8th. His endless existence and future prospects. It is not only believed the devil does exist, but that he will forever exist, the same wicked and malignant being. It is the common opinion, that no Saviour has, or ever will be provided for him. He is considered beyond the limits of God's mercy. This door is forever closed to him, and his repentance and return to his former allegiance and happiness is considered utterly hopeless. Nor is it thought that he will ever desire it, but would scorn such a proposal ; for his mind is made up, rather to reign in bell than serve in heaven. Some have held the opinion, he will finally be restored, but will be the last being in the universe, who shall be delivered from future misery.

But it is the general opinion, that however miserable the devil is, he has nothing better to hope for ; nor is he concerned for his miserable condition. As God can^ not, or willnotd\iev it, so he disdains to complain, or to sue for mercy. With such an endless, dreary prospect of intolerable misery before him, yet he scorns to submit, and his stout heart, supported by malice and revenge, is consoled, that if God is to be his eternal tormentor, to the same duration he shall be the tormentor of a large portion of mankind.

Such is a brief summary of the common opinions entertained of the Devil and Satan, and are by some still preached to the world. It is true, the ancient zeal for such opinions has considerably abated, but still enough remains to prevent me from being a favorite with the religious public for calling them in question. From early life such opinions have been imbibed; they have been nourished and strengthened by religious instruction in after life ; and from the universal influence of public opinion in their favor, people have been deterred from inquiring — are they true! But, let any sober-minded man sit down and seriously reflect on such opinions, and we think he must be satisfied they cannot all be true. They are at variance with each other, and some of them are incredible and literally impossible, unless the devil be nearly equal to God himself. When brought to the test of Scripture and examined, we think they will be found wanting; having no better foundation than the doctrine of witchcraft, which is now almost exploded. The evidence of this we hope will appear in succeeding Sections.

Section II

REMARKS ON GEN. ill. SHOWING, THAT THE SERPENT WHICH DECEIVED EYE WAS NOT A FALLEN ANGEL.

In considering the Scripture doctrine concerning the devil and satan., Gen. iii. first claims our attention. Those who are not famiharwith its contents will please turn to it, and read it. The common opinion is, that the serpent which deceived Eve, was a fallen angel, and is throughout the Bible called the devil and satan. This is taken for granted, and it will be considered vaia and impious to call it in question. But I shall proceed to state facts and arguments, proving, that in whatever way this chapter ought to be understood, it gives no countenance to such opinions.

1st. Moses in the two preceding chapters of Genesis, makes no mention of an angel, who fell from heaven. If such an event had happened, he was either ignorant of it, was not authorised, or deemed it unnecessary to mention it. We may with equal truth assert, that God created the devil, as assert, that an angel had become so, from any thing Moses has said in these chapters. But ought not this to have been announced in them, if it be true, that he is spoken of in the third as the cause of the fall of man ?

2d. It is a fact equally indisputable, that Moses in this account, does not say that the serpent was a fallen angel. It is from what he does say, that we can learn what he believed, and not from his silence on the sub-

20 AN IN<^UIRY PART I.

ject. It is not easily conjectured, how such an opinion came to be inferred from this account. The circumstances related lead to a very different conclusion. — Observe the connexion between the second and third chapters. In chapter ii. 19, 20, it is said, ''And out of the ground the Lord God formed every heast of the field, and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam, to see what he would call them : and whatsoever Adam called every Irving creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him." The third chapter begins thus — " Now the serpent was more subtle than any heast of the field which the Lord God had made." — Any one reading these two passages, would conclude that the serpent was a beast of the field, whicli the Lord brought to Adam, and which he had named serfcnt. The connexion leads to this conclusion, unless we suppose God brought a fallen angel among the beasts of the field to Adam, and that he gave him this name. But it would be foolish to assert this.

Again, let it be observed, that the woman did not accuse a fallen angel as her deceiver, verse 13. God says to her — " What is this that thou hast done ?" She answers him, "the serpent beguiled me and I did eat." Had either Eve or Moses believ'ed such an evil being was the cause of her disobedience, would they have imputed it to a beast of the field ? When God made inquisition, he traces the evil from Adam to the woman, and from the woman to the serpent, and here both stop. But had there been any other agent concerned, I ask, would either of them ha/e slopped here? But again, Moses does not represent the serpent as a fallen angel in the punishment inflicted.

verses 14, 15. It is evident God calls the deceiver of Eve, serpent. If a fallen angel used this reptile as a cover for his deception, it is certain he is not accused of the crime, nor doe-s he suffer any punishment. From any thing said in the account, we may as justly accuse the angel Gabriel of deceiving Eve, as a fallen angel, and the punishment inflicted, fell on, and was as much suited to the former as to the latter. Was this fallen angel to go upon his belly and to eat dust all the days of his life ?

3d. But another fact is, Moses in no part of bis writings, gives us any information about an angel who fell from heaven and had become a devil. Let any one read the five books of Moses, and he must be convinced, that such a being is not once mentioned by him under any name. Had Moses only recognized the existence of such an evil spirit, there might be some ground for supposing that he used the serpent as a tool to effect the deception of Eve. But his entire silence on this subject, throughout his whole writings, forbids such a supposition. For m.ore than two thousand years then, such an evil being was unknown among men. Was Moses afraid to speak out on this subject ? But pray, what temptation had he to conceal such information ? Let any candid man say, if Moses knew such an evil being existed, had deceived Eve, was such an enemy to God and the human race, whether he would have been silent about him. Such an important article we might naturally expect, would be conspicuous in his writings. But will any man affirm that this is the case ?

4th. Another fact strongly confirms all the preceding. No Old Testament writer says, Moses by the serpent. Genesis iii., meant a fallen angel. — They never speak of such a being by the name serpent, so that all foundation for such a supposition is out of the present question. But 1 ask, had they believed as people do now, would this have been the case ? It is true, there are seme texts in the Old Testament, from which it has been concluded that such a being is called satan. These will be fully considered in the next Section. Here, let the reader only notice, that no Old Testament writer considered the serpent a fallen angel, the devil of Christians. They frequently use the term serpent, but never insinuate that a fallen angel used this reptile in deceiving Eve. For four thousand years, then, no such opinion seems to have been entertained by any sacred writer.

5th. What shows that the serpent. Genesis iii., \vas not a fallen angel is, in the Bible there are both allusions and direct references to the account of Eve's deception and the entrance of sin, but no intimation is given, that a fallen angel was the cause of either. We shall briefly notice the principal of them. Paul, 2 Cor. xi 3, says — -'But I fear lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ."