p. 148 | Review and Herald, Vol. 35, No. 19. (4/26/1870)

Origin of the Names of the Days of the Week.

An inquiry into the origin of the names of the days of the week, leads us back to the remotest ages and earliest records of antiquity. The division of time into weeks can be derived from nothing else but the events of the first seven days of time, six of labor and one of rest. With the sacred writers, these days are designated by numbers, as first, second, third, &c., except the seventh, which is called the Sabbath. The heathen, however, although they doubtless derived the week from a traditional knowledge of creation, chose to designate the different days by applying to them the names of the heavenly bodies, or the names of their gods. They were at first named after the sun and planets; only six of which were known to the ancients. This was the case with the ancient Egyptians, the inhabitants of India, and the Chinese. Thus we have dies solis, day of the sun, Sunday; dies lunæ, day of the moon, Monday; dies Martis, day of Mars, Tuesday; dies Mercurii, day of Mercury, Wednesday; dies Jovis, day of Jupiter, Thursday; dies Veneris, day of Venus, Friday; dies Saturni, day of Saturn, Saturday.

Three of our days, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, plainly enough show their origin from this source. With the others this is not so apparent. From what source then are these other names derived? They have come down to us through the ancient Saxons, who gave to these days the names of their deities.

The Encyclopædia Americana is quite full on these points. Under the word Tuesday it says: "Tuesday (Latin dies Martis); the third day of our week, probably so called from the Anglo-Saxon god of war, Tuu, (gen. Tuues, whence the Anglo-Saxon Tuuesday.)" Respecting this god of war, it says: "In the northern mythology, Tuiscon Taut, Tot, Theot, Tuu, &c., is a god, from whom the Gauls and Germans believed themselves descended. . . . The ancient Germans revered Tuiscon as a man with a gray beard, clad in the skin of an animal, holding a scepter in his right hand, and stretching out the left with extended fingers. According to Julius Cæsar, they offered to him human sacrifices. The name of Tuesday has been derived from this god."

"Wednesday; the fourth day of the week (in Latin, dies Mercurii) . . . The English name is derived from the old Scandinavian deity, Odin or Wodin," whence the name Wodensdag, or Wednesday. Respecting this deity, Woden, we read that he was "one of the most powerful deities in the northern mythology. Some have derived him from the Indian Buddha. The ancient Saxons and Thuringians honored him as their god of war."

On the name Thursday, we have this information: "Thursday (in Latin dies Jovis, whence the French Jeudi); the fifth day of the week, so called from the old Teutonic god of thunder, Thor, the northern Jupiter." From this it appears that this day bears the same name in the Saxon as in the still more ancient Latin, the only difference being in their name of the god, Jupiter. Instead of having with the Latins, the day of Jove, they had the day of Thor, or Thorsdag. Under the word Thor, the Encyclopædia says: "Thor or Tir; the Jupiter of the Germans; the god of thunder. He was represented as an old man with a long beard, a crown with diverging rays, dressed in a long garment, holding in his right hand a scepter with a lily, and having around his head a circle of stars. Sacrifices were offered to him under oaks; hence the German name, thunder-oak. . . . Thursday (day of Thor) has its name from him."

Under the word Friday, it says: "Friday, with the Anglo-Saxons Frigedag, has its name from the wife of Odin, Frea or Friga." Respecting this goddess nothing more is said.

To recapitulate we thus have, 1. Sunday, the day dedicated to, and named after, the sun, by the nations who from the earliest times have worshiped that luminary. The North British Review calls it "The wild solar holiday of all Pagan times." Verstegan's Antiquities, p. 68, speaking of the idols of our Saxon ancestors, says: "Of these they had many, yet seven among the rest they especially appropriated unto the seven days of the week.

. . . Unto the day dedicated unto the especial adoration of the idol of the sun, they gave the name of Sunday, as much as to say, the sun's day, or the day of the sun. This idol was placed in a temple, and there adored and sacrificed unto, for that they believed that the sun in the firmament did with, or in, this idol correspond and co-operate."

Monday, the day dedicated to the worship of the moon.
Tuesday, the day named after the Saxon god Tuiscon.
Wednesday, the day in like manner named for the old Saxon god, Woden.
Thursday, the day dedicated to the god Thor.
Friday, so called from the goddess Friga.
Saturday, the day named by the ancient heathen from the planet Saturn.

From these facts the Encyclopædia concludes an article on the word week thus: "The English names of the days of the week, are derived from the Saxons, and are partly adopted from the more civilized nations of antiquity."

It may be of interest here to add a paragraph which we find under the word week, in the Religious Encyclopædia: "Week; a period of seven days. Under the name of a week, shabati, it is mentioned as far back as the time of the deluge, Gen. 7:4, 10; 8:10, 12; 29:27, 28. It must, therefore, be considered a very ancient division of time, especially as the various nations among whom it has been noticed, for instance, the Nigri in Africa, appear to have received it from the sons of Noah. The enumeration of the days of the week commenced at Sunday. Saturday was the last or seventh, and was the Hebrew Sabbath or day of rest. The Egyptians gave to the days of the week the same names that they assigned to the planets. From the circumstance that the Sabbath was the principal day of the week, the whole period of seven days was likewise called shabati, in Syrian, shabta, in the New Testament, sabbaton and sabbata. The Jews accordingly, in designating the successive days of the week, were accustomed to say, the first day of the Sabbath, that is, of the week; the second day of the Sabbath, that is, Sunday, Monday, &c. Mark 16:2, 9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19."

How the Bible Speaks of the Commandments.

“If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” Matt. 19:17. “Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” Rev. 22:14. “All Thy commandments are righteousness.” Ps. 119:172. “The mouth of the righteous speaketh wisdom, . . . the law of his God is in his heart.” Ps. 37:30, 31. “Open ye the gates, that the righteous nation which keepeth the truth may enter in.” Isa. 26:2. “Thy law is the truth.” Ps. 119:142.

A brother sends in the above texts, and asks who will comment on them. We think no comments can make them any clearer. They are plain declarations of the word of God concerning his holy, just, good, and spiritual commandments. The righteous will enshrine them in their heart's best love. And if they love them they will keep them. They are not a yoke of bondage. They are not grievous. And if they keep them, they will at last enter in through the gates into the city. The conditions of life are easy, the way plain, the end glorious. Men reject them for a little seeming good in this life, and are counted wise. But when they meet the fate of the disobedient, they will be the first to pronounce themselves fools. A few keep them in the love of them here, regardless of worldly consequences, and are counted fools; but when God shall arise to vindicate the honor of his holy law, it will be seen that they alone were wise. Let us be sure we are numbered with the righteous nation that keepeth the truth. The pathway of this people for a little time leads through humiliation and reproach, but it soon emerges into heavenly honor, and unending glory.

Righteous Measurement.

By John Nevins Andrews

“With what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again.” Matt. 7:2.

THESE words were uttered by our Lord as a warning to his people. He wished them to understand that wrong doing should bring calamity and sorrow upon the wrong doer. Now he even declares that the very kind of evil which we cause others shall come back upon ourselves. We have many notable instances of this in the Bible.

Jacob acted an extremely unbrotherly part toward Esau, and an inexcusable and wicked deception toward his father. He had to flee for his life. He fell into the hands of Laban, who, though his own uncle, acted toward him in the same deceitful and cruel manner that he had acted toward Esau. In fact, the deception of Laban was the cause of lasting misery in the family relations of Jacob, till it finally brought about the sale of Joseph as a slave to be carried into Egypt. For some twenty-two years, Jacob supposed his son torn in pieces of a wild beast. For Joseph was 17 years old when his brethren sold him, and was 30 years of age when he stood before Pharaoh. Shortly after this the seven years of plenty came on, and in the second year of the famine Jacob came into Egypt.

The sorrows of Jacob’s life, and some of them were very serious, cover a period of more than fifty years, and are distinctly traceable to his own wrong acts. His sorrows seem to have ended when he found Joseph in Egypt. But how long a period it was before his captivity was turned! What a man sows, that he shall reap. It never can pay to do wrong.

David is another example of receiving back in kind for the wrongs committed. Read his wicked conduct toward Uriah. Then read the retribution that followed through all the rest of his life, and principally

in his own family, too. See the sad history of Amnon and Tamar, of the rebellion and unnatural crimes of Absalom. See 2 Sam. 11–19. Even Adonijah’s rebellion and death may be considered a part of this retribution. Sin never pays only in its own kind.

J. N. A.

Buffoonery in the Pulpit.

What can be more inappropriate, rather, more sacrilegious, than to act the harlequin in the pulpit? to entertain the people, under a profession of sacred things, with jokes and puns, and contortions, and grimaces, and all the clownish paraphernalia of low and vulgar amusement? What greater outrage could be offered to the sacred office of an ambassador for Christ? “Like people like priest,” says the prophet. What, then, must the people be with such leaders? Yet this evil has reached such a magnitude in some places as to provoke a remonstrance from the religious press. Says the Methodist of April 16, 1870:—

“In the effort to detach the pulpit from the old-time dryness and dullness, some have gone to the opposite extreme, and have sought to make the pulpit attractive by sallies of wit, laughable hits, amusing anecdotes, grotesque gestures, vile puns on sacred texts, and a general airiness more suggestive of a place of amusement than of the house of God. The old mannerisms of the pulpit are discarded, it is true; but new mannerisms are introduced which are even more offensive to good taste, and greater stumbling-blocks to usefulness. We make equal protest against whining, canting, drawling and the flippant, salesman style of preaching which would present before the people the serious truths of religion as though they were of no more consequence than dry goods or vegetables. Harlequin in the pulpit, with cap and bells, and party-colored clothes, and comical grimaces, would scarcely be more out of place than some men who have intruded themselves therein. ”

“To play the harlequin might bring as many people around the pulpit of an inferior man as an anointed genius could gather by its most masterly efforts; but while in the latter case the attentive throng would be drawn toward a purer, higher life, in the former the gaping crowd would smile and be merry, and fail to see any difference between the truths of religion and the jests of a buffoon.”

Interesting Incident.

By T. M. Steward

ON my way home from Conference I was distributing tracts on the cars, and handed one to a man sitting behind me. As soon as he saw what it was, he wished me to give him one of each kind I had. He said he had seen some of our tracts before, and was much interested in reading them. He fully agreed with us on the destruction of the wicked. We then spoke of the Sabbath. He said that his father was a Baptist preacher, the first man that baptized by immersion in Scotland. He was imprisoned in England, for his faith; and after he was released, he claimed that the Bible Sabbath came on the seventh day of the week, and began to keep it; and as this was to bring new troubles to him, he concluded to emigrate to this country; so he did, and settled in the State of New York, and was a Seventh-day Baptist till he died. This man wants you to send him the Review, and he will send you the pay when he gets it, so he can see the address.

I shall never forget the solemn and interesting meetings I enjoyed while in Battle Creek. The work of the third angel's message looks more sacred to me than ever, and I want all my energies consecrated to the work. I want to meet the mind of the Spirit of God, and thus be in harmony with his people and his work. I mean to study his word more, to realize more the solemn realities of this time, and to store my mind with useful knowledge, that when the Lord calls for the loud cry of this message, I may be ready to engage in it understandingly. Now he is drilling us that we may form a veteran corps for the final issue of this message. Pray for me. T. M. STEWARD.

Report from Bro. Morrison.

By J. H. Morrison

I HAVE visited some of our scattered brethren in Shelby, Harrison and Monona counties, Iowa, and found quite a number of good brethren who have taken hold of the truth and are trying to walk in the light of it as far as they have learned. May the good work be carried on in their hearts, and practiced in their lives, that others may be brought to the saving knowledge of the same.

In company with Bro. Bartlett, I crossed over the Missouri River into Nebraska, near Decatur, Burt Co., where we held a short series of meetings, at the house of Bro. Beck. There was a good interest to hear and learn the truth. The leaven was already at work. They had heard considerable upon the truth before from Bro. Bartlett and Myers, who live near there. The roads being very bad, and it being thinly settled, we had small congregations. The Lord seemed to back up his truth by his Holy Spirit, and wrought in a wonderful manner. Eleven, during our short stay, decided to keep the commandments of God and faith of Jesus, ten of whom were heads of families, making, in all, some thirty-five Sabbath-keepers there.

One of these was brought to the light of the truth, by reading a package of old REVIEWS which had been left at his house by some thoughtful brother. He first attempted to burn them; but it seemed that they had gathered dampness and would not burn. In the meantime he picked up one and became interested, and, consequently, took them out of the fire. He then read and re-read them, until he wore them out, then he subscribed for the paper. How many could be brought to the light of the third angel's message in this way, if we all were diligent and persevering in our efforts in the scattering of these publications? The Lord has a people in Nebraska. Brethren, let us earnestly pray the Lord to raise up and send efficient laborers into the harvest field; for the field is great, and the laborers few.

J. H. MORRISON.

Sowing and Reaping.

By John Matteson

“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” Gal. 6. How reasonable that the harvest will be of the same kind as the seed, only more abundant. Who expects to reap a harvest of grapes, when he plants thorns? Or a rich crop of wheat, where nothing but grass seed was scattered? But the husbandman, who plants his corn, waits patiently for the early and latter rain. By-and-by his expectations are realized in a golden harvest.

“For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption.” The works of the flesh are plainly enumerated in the previous chapter. Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like.” They which do such things cannot inherit the kingdom of God. But they must of the flesh reap corruption. There is no alternative. Overcome and live; or be overcome and die. God is merciful. But he is not so merciful that he could turn his own word into a lie. His mercy manifests itself now in giving unto us “all things that pertain unto life and godliness.” And it is his holy will that we should be sanctified now through a proper use of those heavenly means of grace. Otherwise we must expect to reap corruption; not preservation, nor salvation of any kind, but corruption. That is a putrid state. Having gone through the pangs of the second death, the dead carcasses of all transgressors will strew the earth, Isa. 66:24, and be fuel for the all-devouring flames, when the earth shall melt “and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” 2 Pet. 3:10. The wicked are among the works that are in the old earth and pertain thereto. People, as well as animals and plants, are God’s works. They have been corrupted by sin, and are devoured by the curse Isa. 24:6.

“But he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.” “The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.” How can we sow to the Spirit? “Let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.”

“As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.”

When shall we reap? When the growing time is past and the grain is matured. The growing time is not past before probation ends. Many wild oats have we sown in the past. There they are; thrifty and still spreading. Neither can we check their progress in but few instances. Wrong words and wrong actions, that are in the past, have had their influence upon others, and how many of my fellow-men are thus influenced more or less by my past evil deeds, I know not. Like the stone that fell on the surface of the quiet water, these actions have produced larger and larger circles, which, if time should continue, would reach through coming generations until old things pass away.

Take, for instance, the seed sown by Tom Paine. What a bountiful crop of corruption his works will bring forth in the Judgment day. Whereas Luther on the other side, in the providence of God, started the mighty wheel of the Reformation, which is still rolling on, and will continue to roll, until the Judgment day will reveal an abundant harvest of the Spirit.

Our tears and prayers cannot recall those past evil things. In vain do we try to turn the mighty tide. Sin is a fearful evil. How bewitching! How deceitful! How blighting! Yet Jesus can pardon sin. Wonderful! Blessed gospel! Message from Heaven, sweet to a dying soul. And Jesus can create within a clean

heart, and renew a right spirit. If we follow his counsel and walk in his footsteps, he can cause old things to pass away and make us say, “Behold, all things are become new.” 2 Cor. 5. He can make us new creatures in Christ. He will also make the earth new. Then he will have new creatures for the new earth. And those who have not been made new creatures will perish with the old earth.

JOHN MATTESON.

Asking Advice.

By R. F. Cottrill

Many years ago, I chanced to read a remark that commended itself so forcibly to my mind that I have never forgotten it. It was this: “We ask advice, we mean approbation.” I have been frequently reminded of it when sought to for counsel by those whose special pleading for the course they wished to pursue, unmistakably indicated the advice which they wished me to give. I have sometimes thought that I could do no better than to advise such to do as they please.

In health and dress reform, each one's peculiar tastes and circumstances seem to call for a special dispensation in their behalf, but not wishing to take too much responsibility, they want some one to advise them to follow their own inclination.

My advice to each would be, If you believe you have light from Heaven, follow it; but if you do not believe, live out just the amount of faith you possess, and no more.

A sister asked my advice about putting on the reform dress; but was so eloquent with special pleadings, that she gave me no chance to express my mind. I made several attempts, but could not utter more than a few words, perhaps half a sentence, before I would be interrupted by her own views of things. So I gave it up, and listened quietly to a long talk. I got the idea when young that it was ill manners for me to talk when others were talking; and unless a person will give me about one-fourth of the time to speak, while they occupy three-fourths, I despair of expressing my thoughts, become a silent listener, and let them have it all their own way. Doubtless the sister got her case, and perhaps really thought I advised her to wear her dress a little longer than the custom, and omit the pants. I have no objection to her thinking so, so far as herself only is concerned; but I rather she would not report to others that Bro. Cottrell approved of her doing so.

But cannot the limbs be equally warmly clothed within the stockings with no pants outside? Yes; but never are. Provided the stockings are large enough, it can be done. But you will not find them willing to exhibit a tightly-dressed ankle as large as an elephant's. The fact is, the open outside pants look neat and modest, and give a chance to clothe the limbs as warm as you please within the stockings, warmer than any one will who rejects them.

Some have fully adopted this healthful costume. The hesitating may choose for themselves whether to help them with their influence, or cast their influence with the world and against these believing, conscientious and self-sacrificing pioneers in a much-needed reform. This reform answers two important ends: 1. It promotes health. 2. It distinguishes those who have moral courage enough to dare to depart from the fashions of Paris, and rank themselves with the peculiar people described by apostles, whose adorning is not outward, but of the heart.

R. F. COTTRILL.

Report from California.

By John Norton Loughborough

SINCE my last report, Feb. 25, we have closed our first public effort in Green Valley. At the close of the meetings S. B. was organized for the company in Green Valley and Sebastopol, amounting to over 100,000 per year. The Sabbath keepers in these two places now meet together at the house of Bro. Miner. The church there will probably be organized next Sunday. They now contemplate building, soon, a plain, cheap, house of worship, 24x36.

After closing our effort at Green Valley, while Bro. Bourdeau and Kellogg were laboring among the churches, I gave fifteen discourses at Hopper's district, between Santa Rosa and Petaluma. Four have already come out on the truth there, and we trust others will come out as the labors are continued in the place.

Last Sabbath and first-day our State Meeting was held in Santa Rosa. A report of this good meeting will be sent soon.

This closes the labors of Bro. Bourdeau and myself together, as he has decided that it is his duty to return East and labor among the French. It is hard for us to part; yet it seems to be the will of the Lord that it should be so.

By this move new responsibilities are laid upon me. I hope I may have grace to move in humility; and so trust in God that I may have his guidance in all things. Brethren, pray for us that God may bless Bro. Kellogg and myself in our labors, and that many in this State may prepare to meet the Lord.

J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.

Petaluma, Cal., Apr. 13, 1870.

Aion.

By Stephen Pierce

[THE following article appeared in the REVIEW in 1866. We republish it by special request:]

“And shall be tormented day and night forever and ever.” Rev. 20:10.

This, with one or two scriptures of similar import, has held the minds of some honest seekers after truth to the conclusion that the wicked must endure exquisite pangs of endless suffering.

The mind of the writer was from his youth by these scriptures confirmed, and at times forced to this dreadful conclusion for years after embracing the Sabbath. Nor was there but temporary conviction from all the brethren had then said or written in the explanation of these passages, until at a certain time while examining the word AGE in Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary, to ascertain its duration, I found, to my surprise, as a corresponding word in the Greek, the word aion (aion), the original of the word ever, in the above passage referred to.

This led to the examination of Rev. 20:10, and chapter 14:11, in the Greek Testament; the last of which in our version reads, “The smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever.” By this examination it was found that in each case the original word translated “ever” was in the PLURAL number. This opened a field for further investigating thought. And the query arose in the mind, Can the word eternity or even forever, in the nature of things, admit of a plural? The conclusion was it can not; for no word expressing infinity can. For this reason, for instance, infinite space covers all space; hence there can be but one infinite space, because there can be no further place for a second infinite space to occupy. On the same principle, the idea of a plural is forever excluded from a word which expresses infinite duration. Because infinite duration comprehends all possible duration. Hence there can be but one. Therefore the nature of things forbids that any word in the plural, in any language, should ever express the idea of infinity. If the word in the original expresses more than one forever or eternity, ought not the translation into English to express the same?

The Encyclopædia of Religious Knowledge says, “It might as well be contended that forever cannot properly mean unlimited duration, because another ever may be added to it, as that aion must necessarily mean a limited duration, on account of its admitting a plural form of expression.” To this we reply, that though there is another “ever” added in our translation, it is not added in the original, it being a repetition there, but not in a manner to involve the idea of addition. Inspiration did not place the word “and” there, nor can it be supplied without confusing the sense. The inconsistency of applying the plural to a word expressive of infinity has just been shown, we trust satisfactorily; and this the Encyclopædia admits respecting the word eternity; and why not in respect to the word forever, if it expresses infinite duration?

This discrepancy of plural in the original, and singular in the translation, prompted to the further investigation of the word aion in other parts of the New Testament—an example of which is found in 1 Cor. 10:11: “Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples; and they are written for our admonition on whom the ends of the world have come.” An instance somewhat similar in its structure to the preceding, is found in Heb. 9:26: “Now once in the end of the world hath He appeared to put away sin, by a sacrifice of himself.” Here, again, the word aion in both these instances is in the plural, as it is in the example of the two scriptures quoted; but the word world rendered from it, in both instances is singular.

Why these things were so was for a long time a mystery; but a solution of that mystery was at length found. In all the above instances, had the translation been according to Dr. Webster’s view of the sense of that original word, there would have been no need of rendering these plural words in the singular. But before proceeding to an illustration of this point, some inquiries intrude upon the mind:

1. If the Holy Spirit, in the last two scriptures, meant to express in the Greek, the idea of a plurality of worlds, should not this idea of plurality have been conveyed to us in the English? 2. Should not two or more objects properly expressed in the Greek, when translated into English, express two or more objects in this language also? 3. If we had the history of two or three men written in the French language, conjointly in one volume, and it should be translated into English, Spanish, German, and various other languages, should it in these languages respectively mean the history of but one man?

Now it is infallibly evident to all that the two last instances could not be translated by any word which expresses endless duration, because the end of aion is most clearly expressed in both instances. To speak of the end of endless duration, would strike every mind as the height of absurdity. Therefore a word must be selected which will not wholly destroy, nor too much confuse the sense; but as the original is in the plural, it would seem to be too vague for definite instruction respecting this world, hence the plural is dropped and the singular substituted.

All this perplexity might have been saved if translators had understood, as Mr. Webster did, that “age” was the word corresponding in sense with the original. Then the plural would not have injured the sense at all, and would have read as follows: “Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples; and they are written for our admonition on whom the ends of the AGE have come.” It may be asked, What ages? We answer, All the ages of probation. Paul in this chapter is instructing Seventh-day Adventists, upon whom the ends of the ages would surely come.

Heb. 9:26, some have thought, proved Christ’s first coming to be in the end of the world; but by a transposition we see that “in the end of the world,” or ages sin is to be put away. “Now once he hath appeared” by a sacrifice of himself, to put away sin in the end of the world,” or ages. But ages in this instance closes at a later point of time than that in 1 Cor. 10:11. That closes with probation, this with the destruction of the wicked. Sin is then forever put away.

The word “ends” being plural, renders it mysterious; and the inquiry may be made, How many ends will the world have? Others might inquire, May not the world have as many ends as the age? Yes. But not as many as the “ages” have; and especially if these are the ages of probation. For there will then be as many ends as there are individuals who die in the Lord in this message; and one more. That is the time in which mercy ceases to be proffered to sinful man.

In these passages we now see what consistency of sense can be made from the original, when viewed in the light of the great Lexicographer, who, in the history of the world, perhaps, never had an equal as a philologist, nor a superior as a linguist. Not that he believed as we do—he believed in the endless sufferings of the wicked; hence his testimony bears greater weight than it otherwise would. With his sense of the word aion in the scripture which heads this article, we may give opponents the privilege of translating the Greek preposition εἰς (eis), the worst they can against our belief; for instance, they may call it for, through, or during, if they please. It will then read, “And shall be tormented day and night, for, through, or during, the ages of ages.” Not that we claim this rendering of the preposition correct; but if the most of our translations now extant are correct in the rendering of this word, then ours is; and this is the worst opponents can make it for us.

If they bring this translation to us, and ask what we understand by the expression, “ages of ages,” we reply, that the word age, means as long as the creature lives to whom it is applied. And if every man shall be rewarded according to his works, then there will be a multitude of these ages of suffering the pangs of the second death, the cause of which, is the misimprovement of the ages of probation. Consequently these ages of suffering, are with great propriety called the “AGES OF AGES;” being ages of punishment for ages of probation unimproved.

When the consistency of this expression of inspiration, which before was too horrible for contemplation, was discovered, it was an occasion of marvelous admiration.

Learned Universalists, and the author of “Bible vs. Tradition,” had previously given similar translations, without an explanation, but the great question was whether their authority was sufficiently high to be relied upon. But here we bring as high, and perhaps the highest, authority this world can give, as a foundation for our conclusion. Having recently an opportunity to see Liddell and Scott’s Greek Lexicon, it was found that after they had defined the word, they quoted the above scripture and translated it, “Unto the age of ages; or forever and ever.”

There is a proneness to force upon this expression the idea of endless duration. The peculiar sense of the preposition unto, forces this sense upon it. And by this rendering, instead of its being the time in which the wicked suffer, it is a period all beyond that time. And if that word unto is a correct rendering, then their suffering reaches only to the commencement of the eternal age; and of course their suffering must be limited in its duration, as Bro. J. N. L. has well shown. Thus we see the truth has sure defense by taking the sense of that one word according to Mr. Webster, let these scriptures in other respects be translated as they may.

Again, if unto is the right rendering, we do not see why the first instance of the word aion following should not be in the singular, there being but one age beyond, and that the endless ultimatum of all the improved ages of probation. For if the plural were admitted, then we admit a variety of ages to those concerning whom it is said, “They shall be as the angels, and shall die no more.” And if various ages of the same beginning must have various terminations, then there would be a variety of terminations to that kingdom, concerning which it is said, “There shall be no end.” Unless as the Encyclopædia would have it; that this plural is an “intensive.” But we are unable to conceive of the necessity, or even propriety, of an intensive being applied to any word expressive of infinity, since there is no possible chance for any increase or addition.

There has been a great perplexity in the minds of many in regard to the true sense of the word aion, because lexicographers have given it a variety of very different definitions; such generally as the following: duration, finite or infinite; unlimited duration, eternity; a period of duration, past or future; time, age, lifetime; the world, the universe, &c. Now if this Greek word corresponds in sense with our word eternity, and forever, as they are generally defined in our English dictionaries, then such definitions, as duration, finite time, age, lifetime, world, universe, &c., must all be incorrect; there being no terms expressive of limited duration, nor any word expressive of anything but that of time, made use of in our dictionaries to define these words; for every definition there, gives the idea of endless duration. Therefore we have satisfactory evidence that these words do not correspond in sense.

We admit, however, that in the Bible the word “forever” is used in many instances to express limited duration, as the brethren have sufficiently shown; but the reason is, that it was rendered from original words, which more usually expressed limited duration, and in many instances the subject matter is such that the sense of the word is fully shown to be but limited.

The inquiry will arise in the minds of many. How can the word age have so many definitions as are given to this Greek word? We answer, All but the last two can be very easily and consistently given to it. For instance, when speaking of a mortal being, it may be with strict propriety that any of those definitions expressing limited duration may be applied, such as duration, finite, a period of duration past or future, time, age, lifetime, &c. But when the age of an immortal being is referred to, then it is strictly proper for any of those definitions which express endless duration to be applied to them.

As it respects the last two, world and universe, it is wholly unnecessary that any such definitions be given, as there are other Greek words which amply supply their place; and if these definitions can be consistently given, they are merely an imperfect or secondary sense of the word defined; as in Matt. 13:39; 24:3, where it speaks of the end of aion, translated the end of the world. It strictly means either the end of the age of the world, or the end of the gospel age—all of which amount to nearly the same, although the words rendered from this are very dissimilar in sense.

Now aion either corresponds in sense with our words forever and eternity, or it does not. If it does, why have not the most distinguished lexicographers, such as Johnson, Webster, and Worcester, so informed us? Or rather, why have any of them informed us to the contrary? And why especially is it in many instances so used in the Bible as to forever exclude that sense from it, whereas it may invariably be translated age without discovering the least inconsistency of language?

STEPHEN PIERCE.

Stuartsville, Minn.

Continue reading: THIS I DID FOR THEE: WHAT DOST THOU FOR ME?