tal body at the time of its dissolution, are, at some future time, to be brought back from the kingdom of dead matter in order to be rewarded or punished with the spirit to which they once belonged, the same justice would demand that every particle of matter that ever entered into the composition of that body at any period of its existence should be dealt with in an equally severe manner. And I am unable to see why the same law would not with equal justice and reason include every particle of matter which men have ever used in doing either good or evil. Can any man tell me why the pen which I am now using is not as justly responsible for the sentiments which I am expressing, as the hand in which I hold that pen? Each is equally subject to my will, and if the materiel of which the one is composed is to be brought into judgment for these sentiments, by what rule of justice can the other escape?
But I fear the reader may think that I am paying a poor compliment to his understanding, in detaining him so long upon a question which appears self-evident. I trust he will permit me to find a sufficient apology in the fact, that there are multitudes of men of great influence and learning, who still defend the doctrine of the literal resurrection of the material body with as much zeal as if all their hopes of salvation rested upon it. Within the last few days, I have seen a book just published, under high authority, written for the sole purpose of defending this doctrine, which is there gravely declared to be "the great central truth of revealed religion." But we may be permitted to thank God, that the divine light of heavenly truth is rapidly flowing into the human mind, and that we have reason to hope that the time is not far distant, when arguments will cease to be necessary for the purpose of showing the absurdity of the doctrine of the literal resurrection of the material body.
Such a doctrine is not only opposed to reason and the word of the Lord, but it offers direct violence to our natural
