no true adjective formed from it, unless it be existent, which is more like a participle than an adjective, and falls far short of expressing that full relation to existence for which an adjective is wanted. Had we a word expressing the same relation to existence as essential does to essence, or substantial to substance, we should then have the proper term for expressing, in English, what aivios expresses in Greek, in the greater proportion of instances. Such an adjective, applied to an enduring existence, would signify much the same as enduring; to a dispensational existence, it would express relation to the dispensation contemplated; to a spiritual existence, it would express relation to the spirit, &c. Such I believe to be the state of things in regard to αἰώνιος. when I read it, in association with a spiritual existence, I have no hesitation in receiving it as expressing the quality of spirituality; having reference to the mode of being, and the state and action of the thoughts, affections, and will of the subject; 'the inward action of mind,' within its own realm; which is the true LIFE or EXISTENCE of a spiritual being.

And

Referring once more to the noun, it is worthy of remark, how very little of the sense of duration appears in it in the foregoing instances. We have been in the habit of considering this word as relating, principally, if not entirely, to duration of some kind, either temporary or eternal. But if the preceding view be correct, aior very seldom contains the sense to duration at all. It refers to the conditions, associations, and various circumstances of that existence, which this word is at any time expressing; and the endurance is only one among the many things belonging to it. The adjective aivios, in such cases, signifies relation to the existence in question, with reference to its circumstances, conditions, and duration. Thus, for a single instance, -The Jewish state or dispensation was an EXISTENCE [air] constituted by the Divine Being. He made a covenant with the patriarchs and their posterity, with reference to that particular EXISTENCE, (an everlasting covenant, as we read it in the English Bible ;) but it was not eternal, for it has long since ceased. It was a covenant having reference to the existence then contemplated. He gave them the land of Canaan according to this covenant. He gave it to them not only as long as the EXISTENCE [air] in question should continue, but also with reference to the objects, conditions, circumstances, duties,

privileges, and every thing associated with that existence. They should have the land to possess, inhabit, use, and enjoy, with reference to the form of government, worship, discipline, divine communications, the law, the promises, the adoption, the glory,'' the service of God,' the coming of the Messiah, the dealings of providence and grace, and all things belonging to that existence, state, or condition of things, which we call the Jewish dispensation. When that existence [air] ceased, this associated covenant ceased with it.

This view of the meaning of air and aiavios might be illustrated by the very familiar examples of corporations, families, habits of the public mind, individuals, communities, nations, &c., each of which is an existence [air] in its own way; and a large community comprehending several minor ones, like our own nation comprehending several distinct states, may justly be called an existence of existences [aiov Tov aiavor]. Indeed, I see not why this name is not peculiarly appropriate to an institution of wide influence, like that of Andover, embracing within this influence many minor existences, and infusing into them its knowledge, habits, and spirit, as they float within its embracing sphere. It is an EXISTENCE, at least, if not an existence of existences. An adjective corresponding to alivios, employed with respect to either of these, would express relation to the particular existence contemplated. So likewise the human soul is an existence, a spiritual one; and an adjective describing what takes place within the soul, as the happiness or misery consequent upon a judgment, would signify spiritual, the peculiar quality of the existence to which the happiness or misery refers. But as there is no particular sense of duration belonging to the term existence, in these cases, so neither is there belonging to aid in ancient Greek, so far as the present inquiry affords evidence. I cannot now pursue the illustration farther. But if the main idea, herein advanced, can be supported, it opens an interesting field of inquiry, and for the illustration of the Scriptures.

We

Be this as it may, it is certain that the Seventy considered aior as the equivalent of Dy, with due regard to the difference of idiom between the Greek and the Hebrew. must, therefore, seek for their understanding of the Hebrew word, in the meaning of the Greek word in their age. The preceding exhibition of the habits of air may do what it

can towards elucidating their views. The question of the extent of coincidence between the two terms in Scriptural usage, can also be further tried by an appeal to ancient Hebrew, and a more extensive search in ancient Greek. My limits will not admit a discussion of the Hebrew term. But I must needs remark, that Professor Stuart's assertion, that the meanings of secrecy, something hidden, &c., belong exclusively to the verby, and not to the noun, is not at all correct. These meanings are as fully maintained by good authority in the noun, as they are in the verb. It therefore is not I who have, as he says, 'committed a radical error,' in my philological reasoning'; but it is Professor Stuart, who has affirmed concerning the word in question, what is contrary to the truth, if etymology, lexicography, and usage, are sufficient evidences of the truth. It is ill disputing facts with Professor Stuart. But when, with so much selfcomplacency, he charges me with so coarse a blunder, he must not count it uncourteous, if I defend myself against his condemnation, although by a contradiction of his declarations; being supported in so doing by competent authorities, to some of which he himself, in his writings, has referred me, and which shall be produced, if they are called for.

Nor will he deem it uncourteous, or an admission of the conclusiveness of his arguments, if I pass by for the present, if not for ever, other statements in his Appendix,' which may seem to require notice. Least of all, will he probably expect a reply to so philological and exegetical an argument for the meaning of eternal, in airios, as this, 'It is well, indeed, that the public should know how far they will be required to go, in order to get rid of the argument, to prove that aláírios means eternal. I thank the writer in question for telling them this secret.'

But as to a sense of spirituality in the Greek aior, both etymology, lexicography, and certain usage prove this meaning, among others, to have existed in this word in the age of the Seventy; and it is inconceivable, that they should have so uniformly employed it for translating, unless they perceived a similar sense in the Hebrew term. Their employing aior as the equivalent of y, is proof sufficient, that they did not consider the Hebrew word to signify positive eternity, and that they did consider it to signify, among other things,

spirituality. And as to the assertion of Professor Stuart, that it cannot be shown that any words are so appropriate to the object named,' that is, of expressing eternity, as air and αἰών alários,' I must take leave respectfully, but plainly, to contradict it entirely. It can hardly be shown, that any words could be less appropriate to this object than these, which never expressed eternity in their native tongue; if the present investigation exhibits a fair view of the habits of the one, and the comparative non-existence of the other.

Should it also prove correct, as Professor Stuart suggests with allusion to Tittman, that the Gnostic system did not exist until after the advent of the Messiah, then the very circumstance, that the Gnostics employed aior to represent a spiritual being [on], would be an additional evidence, that spirit was the ancient, if not the original meaning of this word. It is no uncommon thing for philosophers, when inventing a new system of philosophy, to recur to first principles in the meaning of words, in order to form a proper vocabulary for that system; contrariwise, it is exceedingly common. To this principle we are indebted for most of the technical names employed in every system of philosophy; and to this, in particular, are we indebted for the precise, descriptive, and it may be added, beautiful nomenclature of modern chemistry. On this principle, the Gnostic use of aior, to represent an incorporeal or spiritual existence, would be only a reviving of its ancient meaning; a restoration of the word to its original sense, after the varieties of signification, which, in the lapse of ages, it must have contracted, by reason of its different uses by different individual writers in different generations.

On the supposition, therefore, that the Gnostic system arose at the late period suggested by Professor Stuart, as above, we have an additional reason for believing, that in the more ancient days of the Seventy, the sense of spirituality still remained in air and that the word was employed in this sense in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.

I dated my former communications, and subscribed them with so much of my name as might enable any one, who desired it, to identify the author; because I know that many of my opinions are widely different from those of Unitarians, in general, and of the conductors of the Examiner, in par

ticular; and I was not willing to burden them with any part of a responsibility, which I ought to sustain alone. I do the same now, with the same intention; and I hereby protest against the employment of any thing coming from me, as evidence of the opinions of any one else, or of any sect, party, or body of men. I hold myself alone responsible for whatever is above asserted.

Yours, in true good will,

E. S. G.

Sandwich, Jan. 1, 1831.

ART. IV.-1. An Address on the Expediency and Duty of adopting the Bible as a Class-Book, in every Scheme of Education, from the Primary School to the University. Delivered at Columbia, South Carolina, December 4, 1829, before the Richland School. By THOMAS S. GRIMKÉ. Charleston. 8vo.

2. An Oration on the Advantages to be derived from the Introduction of the Bible and of Sacred Literature, as Essential Parts of all Education, in a Literary Point of View merely, from the Primary School to the University. Delivered before the Connecticut Alpha of the Phi Beta Kappa Society, September 7, 1830. By THOMAS S. GRIMKÉ, of Charleston, S. C. New Haven, Hezekiah Howe. 1830. 8vo.

'EVERY man has his hobby,' is a homely saying, but a very true one. From the great reformer of national constitutions, down to the author of the last improvement upon Murray's Grammar, every man has a way of his own, to hasten the march of mind towards the goal of perfection. If we are to believe these gentlemen, it is only necessary to adopt their plans to remove all the ills that flesh and spirit are heirs to; and it is because we belong to an obstinate and stiff-necked generation, that our condition has not been raised to an extraordinary degree of elevation long since. One of them declaims vehemently against the anomalies of English orthography,