THE UNSPEAKABLE GIFT
The Gift of Eternal Life Through Jesus Christ Our Lord.
BY J. H. PETTINGELL, A.M.,
Late Chaplain at Antwerp, Belgium. Author of
“Homiletic Index”
“Theological Trilemma”
“Will Satan Live Forever?”
“Language its Nature and Functions”
“Platonism versus Christianity”
“Bible Terminology”
“The Life Everlasting”
“What did Christ Teach?”
etc.; etc.
“The Gift of God is Eternal Life Through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Paul.
With an introduction by reverend Edward White, Minister of Saint Paul’s Chapel, London, England.
I. C. WELLCOME. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania London, England:
1887.
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1884, By I. C. WELLCOME,
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington, D.C.
PREFACE.
The volume entitled The Theological Trilemma was published in 1878, though written six or seven years earlier. This was followed, in 1881, by Platonism versus Christianity, and a few months after, by Bible Terminology, and, in 1882, by The Life Everlasting, a large volume of 800 pages, including the two smaller volumes of the previous year, together with a “Symposium,” to which twenty representative men of various evangelical churches in this country and Europe kindly contributed brief papers.
My object in issuing another volume so soon on the same general subject is not that I may re-argue this question upon any new basis, for why should this be done when no one has yet answered the argument already offered, and no one can, as I am fully assured if he would deal honestly with the Word of God? Certainly, the obvious letter of its testimony is most emphatically, and everywhere, that “The wages of sin is Death, and the gift of God is Eternal Life through Jesus Christ our Lord”; and it is only by putting a scholastic and unnatural meaning upon these crucial terms, “Life” and “Death,” that the Scriptures can be made to seem to teach something contrary to what they actually declare. But in view of the very general and increasing interest in this question, and of the urgent calls for another edition of my first volume, now out of print, I have thought might better meet the wants of inquirers by putting the argument, which is mainly Scriptural, into a more compact and popular form, in a smaller volume than by re-issuing the old volume, or any of the later ones.
The Theological Trilemma was written fourteen years ago, while I was in a foreign country, under peculiar circumstances of isolation, and without ever having seen any American work or tract in advocacy of the doctrine of Eternal Life only through Christ by redemption, indeed, most of the literature on this subject has made its appearance since that time, and now, after having devoted all these subsequent years to the further study of this question, and having read everything I could lay hold of that seemed worthy of attention, on all sides of it, and after much intercourse and correspondence with Christian scholars who have embraced this doctrine, my earlier views, though very generally confirmed, have taken a more definite and congruous form on this and other questions with which it is so intimately connected. The second work above mentioned is a simple monograph; the third is devoted to the discussion of certain eschatological terms neither of them dealing with the whole question and as for the last volume. The Life Everlasting the second edition of which is now nearly or quite exhausted it is too large and too expensive for general popular circulation.
While the present volume may be considered as a new presentation of the old argument, it contains much that is new, and is substantially a new work, and takes a new title, yet it is proper to say what will be obvious to those who are familiar with the other volumes that I have not hesitated to avail myself of any matter in them that would serve my purpose in preparing this; and especially, as my argument is mainly Scriptural, I have freely employed the same textual citations, and many of the comments thereon; but I have used nothing without re- writing and condensing it as much as possible.
The use of Scripture language and forms of expression has been so frequent throughout the volume that it has not seemed important to encumber its pages with references to book, chapter and verse, in these numerous incidental and indirect quotations, unless they have been made the subject of special comment or the foundation of an argument. These quotations have generally been made from the old standard version, excepting in special cases, when new light seems to have been thrown upon any passage by the revision, inasmuch as the old version still is, and will long be, the one with which Bible readers are the most familiar for it is not so much to minute critical renderings that I would direct attention as to the plain, obvious sense of the text under any honest rendering.
The question under discussion is not one of hermeneutics and critical points, but of fair and honest dealing with the simple literal sense of the Word of God. It is not what possible meaning can be put into those numerous passages of Scripture that threaten Death as the end of sin, and promise Life, Life Eternal to all true believers in Christ? How they can be so rendered as to bring them into agreement with any popular system of philosophy? but. Do they mean what the plain, literal sense of the words import, or are they to be taken in some metaphorical, spiritualistic, ethical, unreal sense, quite different, and even contrary, to their ordinary sense? This is a question which every inquirer must determine for himself, and, happily, one which the un-lettered Christian disciple is quite as competent to determine as the scholastic theologian and learned dialectician, yea, better able to determine correctly; for when one’s mind has become sophisticated, and his processes of thought trained into any psychological or speculative system, he will be sure to read that system into the letter of God’s Word, and construe its doctrines in harmony with it.
This was the very thought of our Lord when He exclaimed, “ I thank Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them into babes.” This was the ground of Paul’s frequent and earnest warning to the early disciples: “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit and after the tradition of men,” “I fear lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.”
The manifest drift of the present age is towards a religion of science and philosophy, and away from the simple truths of the Gospel. Many well-meaning but sophisticated minds are being led away by the delusion that these truths must be brought within the scope of natural laws. They would bring the facts and doctrines which it reveals to the test of reason and science, as though the Christian religion were one of the many forms of a natural religion, only more scientific, purer and better. Here is the real source of the confusion and darkness and doubt of many who would become scientific and philosophical Christians if Christians at all forgetting that the first step in the knowledge of divine things is to become little children at the feet of the Master. The supreme truths of the Christian religion are revealed, not to our reason, but to our faith. They do not come within the sphere or scope of natural science, or human philosophy. Its great facts are altogether Divine and supernatural, and until this is apprehended and allowed, no real progress can be made in the right direction. They are above nature and cannot be explained by natural laws.
The creation of the world, in the beginning, was a supernatural act; and whatever speculations one may entertain as to the mode of this creation, to deny its supernatural character, as though it could be explained by natural laws, is to be an atheist. The same is true of the creation of man. He is not the outcome of self-operating processes, but the special object of Divine creation, which no law of progressive development can explain.
Sin itself is in opposition to all law, and nature provides no antidote to the death to which it inevitably leads, nor any way of recovery from its ruin. If there be any remedy or recovery from its fatal poison, it must be supernaturally provided. It is just here that we find the radical difference between our holy religion and all the other systems of religion the world has ever seen. This is given from heaven. As for the others, they are, at best, but human devices, “broken cisterns that can hold no water.”
The New Birth, the Resurrection from the dead, and the Life everlasting, are not the orderly steps in any natural progress, as, alas I too many in this scientific age are endeavouring to show. They are truths beyond the reach of scientific discovery. There is no law of nature that can explain, or prove, or disprove them. They are specially and divinely revealed to our faith, and are to be received because they are revealed, and as they are revealed, if at all.
It is with the earnest hope and prayer that I may be able to contribute something more, if it be only a little, to withstand the rationalizing drift and tendency of the times away from the simple Gospel of Christ, and to recall men to the faith once delivered to the saints on this question of Eternal Life, which occupies such a fundamental position in the Gospel system, that I have undertaken this new work.
I am truly thankful for the evidence I have that my past efforts in this direction have not been altogether vain. It is not indeed a pleasant thing to throw one’s self across the track of any popular sentiment, to incur the sincere pity or the reproaches of beloved Christian brethren, by opposing a doctrine which they have been educated from childhood to regard as a part of the evangelical system; to meet the contemptuous sneers of the learned leaders, or would-be leaders of orthodox doctrine, or the carping criticisms of theological dialecticians, or the dignified silence of wise conservatives who will listen to nothing that is not authorized by tradition, and the voice of the Church. “Were I to consult my own personal comfort and convenience and reputation among men, I would willingly remain silent; but when I consider the origin of this dogma of immortality apart from God and without a Divine Saviour how unscriptural it is; what reproach it casts on the character of our Heavenly Father; how it depreciates the work of Christ in our redemption, and obscures the luster of the Gospel, and hinders its progress; what a fruitful source of error it is, and always must be; and what mischief it is working at the present day in encouraging scepticism and disbelief in the Bible, and in the God of the Bible, I cannot hesitate to protest against it in the name of Him to whom I must and will be loyal, come what may. But though I speak with the earnestness of conviction, I desire to speak the truth in love. I hope that no leaven of bitterness or uncharitable judgment towards those whose false doctrine I have felt constrained to oppose, will be found in the pages of this book.
Indeed, when I remember how, under the same false training which they have had, I too led away by this delusion, and how, for a quarter of a century, I preached and contended for this error, the falsity of which I now see by the grace of God, I have no heart or occasion for bitter words. Nor do I make any complaint of peculiar
hardship undergone in this cause; nor do I feel that I have suffered more for my faith in this Gospel doctrine, and for my persistent advocacy of it, than has been the lot, in all ages, of those who have opposed any popular religious error, and have stood for the simple doctrines of the Gospel.
Indeed, I am greatly encouraged by the kind words that have come to me from unknown correspondents in all parts of this country, and from across the water, and by the assurances that this truth for which I am contending has taken possession of so many Christian hearts and minds, and already numbers in the aggregate such a host of confessors, among whom are some of the foremost Biblical scholars and earnest workers in all branches of the Church, and a goodly number of our devoted missionaries among the heathen, and by the knowledge that I have been permitted to have some agency, however humble it may be, in securing this result.
If my dear Christian brethren who now look upon this doctrine of Eternal Life only through Christ as a dangerous heresy could, by any means, be induced to lay aside their traditional notions long enough to see how perfectly this doctrine agrees with all the plain declarations of Scripture, from first to last; how it relieves the character of God of those fearful aspersions which a heathen philosophy casts upon it; how it magnifies His holy law and makes it honourable; how it exalts and glorifies the Son of God, our Saviour, who redeemed us from death, and “ brought Life and Immortality to light through the Gospel”; how it confirms and system, and throws a flood of light upon those that have been made obscure and hard to be received; how it stops the mouths of infidels and scoffers, and takes away all their plausible objections to the Bible, and the God of the Bible, and, in short, what a relief it brings to the burdened hearts of sincere believers who are wrestling with irrepressible doubts, and trying to see the justice and goodness of God through the dark clouds that a false theodicy has thrown round Him; and who do love and trust Him, in spite of all their doubts, and would fain commend Him to others if they knew how to do it, I am sure they would most joyfully accept of this truth themselves, and heartily thank me, as not a few have already done, for so persistently urging it upon their attention.
With this humble volume, my work is evidently almost, if not quite, finished. I am apprised by the infirmities of advancing age, and by the disabilities under which these pages have been written, that my course is fast drawing to its close. Would that my efforts in this cause had begun earlier, and had been more vigorously prosecuted; would that this my last work were more worthy of the cause it advocates and of the Master to whom it is dedicated. But such as it is, I send it forth with the earnest prayer that He who knows how to employ weak and imperfect means for the accomplishment of His gracious purposes, and whose pleasure it is to set forth his precious treasures “in earthen vessels, that the excellence of the power may be of God and not of us,” may be pleased to accept and abundantly bless this inadequate exhibit of His Unspeakable Gift, the Gift of “Eternal Life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
J. H. PETTINGEL
N. W. corner of Broad and Pine Streets, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
May, 1884.
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
By Reverend Edward White, minister of St. Paul’s Chapel, London, England
The Question op Human Immortality Considered in the Light of History, Reason and Philosophy.
CHAPTER 1
The Nature and Limitations of the Question.
The importance of understanding, at the outset, what the question to be discussed is, and is not.
1. It is not a question of fact as to our immortality or non-immortality; but as to the source and the grounds of our hope of immortality.
2. Not as to the nature and destiny of the Soul of man; but of man himself.
3. Not primarily concerning Future punishment; but just the opposite, The Gift of Eternal Life.
4. Not of translations or versions; but of loyalty to the plain letter of God’s Word.
5. Not in opposition to the Evangelical system; but in support of it.
CHAPTER 2
The Deathless Nature of Man Origin and History of the Dogma.
A very ancient, very plausible, very popular doctrine. The Notions of the Ancients;
Socrates; Plato;
The Hebrews; The Pharisees;
What Christ Taught; Paul;
Peter;
The Early Fathers;
Entrance of Platonic Philosophy into the Church;
Three Schools, that of the First Disciples, of Origen, of Augustine; Decree of Pope Leo X.
Note. The Three Theories of Immortality.
CHAPTER 3
Disastrous Influence of this False Dogma.
The Fathers of the Reformation accomplished much, but not everything that needed to be done. The root of the Evil not extirpated. Consequences of the belief in universal immortality; Darkness and distress of mind. Scepticism; Sanctuary deserted; Progress of the Gospel greatly hindered. The true Gospel doctrine credible; not obnoxious to the reproach which the false dogma throws upon it.
Note. From H. Constable’s Duration and Nature, etc.
CHAPTER 4
The Teachings of Nature and Reason.
The Bible, the only source of positive knowledge on this question. Impossible for science or philosophy to give any reliable information concerning it. The folly of relying on human reason when we have a Divine Revelation on the very question. Some of the arguments for universal immortality from Nature and Reason examined, and their weakness shown.
1. The Nature of the Soul.
2. The capacities and capabilities of man.
3. Human instincts and aspirations.
4. Analogy of Nature.
CHAPTER 5
Natural and Rational Arguments (Continued).
5. The General Belief of mankind. It is a mistake to suppose it favoured the philosophers’ doctrine of universal immortality, the reverse is true.
6. The goodness of God supposed to be impeached, if this be an error, by its general prevalence. But other errors have prevailed.
7. The supposed utility of this doctrine. It works mischief instead of good.
Note. From Tinling’s Promise of Life.
CHAPTER 6
Do we really desire to know what the Scriptures teach. They are not like heathen Oracles. False Exegesis. New meanings imposed on the plain terms of Scripture. Biblical Lexicons. Examples Matthew 7: 13, Romans 5:12. Nephesh, psuche zoe, Metaphors. Various passages cited; protest against sophisticated treatment of God’s word.
Note. Whately’s Lecture on Life and death.
CHAPTER 7
The Creation op Man.
Historical verity of the Mosaic record. Man last created; in the image of God; from the dust of the ground; breath of life; living soul, Milton cited. The name Adam, earth-made not spiritual and immortal at first. The Tree of Life. Theophilus, Calmet’s dictionary. Dr. Hodge’s Systematic Theology.
CHAPTER 8
The Genesis op Sin and Death.
The trial of the first pair. The temptation. The serpent, change in his nature. The Death threatened could not have been understood in the sense of a threefold death as now interpreted. Barnes cited. “In the day.” Adam Clark. The curse fell upon the serpent, and on the ground, but not upon Adam and Eve as a Curse. Debarred the Tree of Life; Milton; Smith’s Bible Diet. Irenaeus cited. Paradise restored. Trial of the race in Adam not a cause for regret, thanksgiving. The inferior before the superior before life Eternal. First and Second Adam.
Note. From Baker’s Mystery of Creation and of Man.
CHAPTER 9
Inferential Evidence.
1. Animal Sacrifices.
Animal Sacrifices instituted by God, immediately after the Fall. Significance of the Death of the Animal. Death of Christ actual.
2. Silence of Scripture.
What traditional theology teaches. Not one hint of natural immortality in all the Bible. The Dogma not demonstrable. Pres. Dwight cited. The transference of aidnios from zoe to psuche. What is asserted of the righteous as their peculiar portion, claimed for the wicked also. Simmons’ Manuel, Texts cited. Bartlett’s book cited and criticized. Dr. G. D. Boardman cited. The doctrine said to be “assumed” in the Bible.
CHAPTER 10
The Death Incurred.
The Law has a twofold application. True also of the words Death and Life; but in senses that are real and actual, not metaphysical. Numerous citations from the Old Testament with running comments. Numerous citations from the New Testament with comments, Dr. Bartlett cited. Inconsistency of the advocates of the popular dogma.
Note. The New Congregational Creed.
CHAPTER 11
The Life Given The Unspeakable Gift.
The New Testament a New Revelation, revelation of a new life. Zoe life. Numerous citations from the New Testament, direct and indirect, with comments.
Note. From Drummond’s Natural Law, etc.
CHAPTER 12
Life versus Death.
Two classes, two opposite destinies contrasted, numerous citations, direct and indirect, from the Old and New Testaments, with comments. Parallel between the First and Second Adam in 1 Corinthians 15. The death that Christ suffered. The Bible means what it says.
Note. From Hobb’s Everlasting Life.
CONTENTS 13
Texts And Arguments Commonly Used to Support the Traditional Dogma.
Reason to complain of the methods of our antagonists. Life and Existence.
Unauthorized assumptions.
Very few texts available when fairly treated. Literal sense discarded.
Examination of the principal texts. Daniel 12:1, 2; Matthew 25:46.
CHAPTER 14
Texts and Arguments Commonly Used to Support the Traditional Dogma (Continued).
Mark 3:28, 29. Mark 9:43-50. Luke 16:19-31.
The Prophetic parable of the rich man and Lazarus foretelling the reversed condition of the Jews and Gentiles.
CHAPTER 15
Texts and Arguments Commonly Used to Support the Traditional Dogma (Continued).
Revelation 14: 11. Revelation 19: 3. Revelation 20: 9, 10, 20. The Beast, False Prophet and the Dragon. Barnes and Stuart cited. The general truth taught in the figures ought to be clear and evident.
CHAPTER 16
The Exodus of Sin and Death.
The Divine economy dualistic. Two revelations;
Two worlds; Two Adams;
Two progenitors; Two births;
Two covenants; Two classes; Two kingdoms;
Two advents;
Two Deaths; obscured and ignored by the popular philosophy. Good and Evil not always cotemporary.
Different ideas of Christ. His purpose. His power.
Divine truth not all revealed at one time. The First and Last contrasted. The Apocalypse Celestial Paradise.
Supplement.
The Two Doctrines contrasted.
Index of Scriptures.
Index of Authors.
INTRODUCTION
Dear Mr. Pettingell:
I feel greatly honoured by your request that I should send you a few lines of sympathy in the way of preface to your new volume. The time will come, if the world lasts long enough, when you will be recompensed for your steadfastness in maintaining the truth on Life Eternal through the Divine Incarnation, by the gratitude of American Christians. At the present moment, they have somewhat discredited you for “heresy”; but this is the name given to every divine verity, before it has received the imprimatur of the leaders of orthodoxy.
There is not a doctrinal truth now dear to Protestants which has not been burned alive in this fire in the early days of its testimony. But out of the fire the Lord has delivered all the truths vindicated at the Reformation.
The truth for which, during so many years, we have laboured together, will similarly triumph. This I firmly maintain, because our conclusions are founded upon the application of the orthodox principle of interpretation to Holy Scripture. Protestants learn their creed in every particular except one, by applying to the Scripture the common sense rule of taking the plain and obvious sense of the main current of Biblical expressions as the ruling sense. The one exception is in all that relates to man’s nature and destiny. From first to last, the Protestant Churches, imitating the Romish Church, have persisted in applying to Scripture, on this matter, a non-natural or figurative law of exegesis. Man is thus declared by theology to be an immortal being, and then, all that the Bible says on the mode of his gaining Eternal Life, and on the punishment of those who reject God’s redeeming mercy, is tortured into un-natural senses.
This perverseness cannot hold out long against steady protest and brotherly rebuke. Already a vast multitude of the ablest and most Christian minds are in full revolt against such perversion, and their numbers are increasing daily in all directions. In England, the revolt is strong enough to compel the toleration of the undersigned, in the open profession of the faith of life in Christ in the principal post of London Independency, for the past year, a post of which I was not indeed worthy, but which has given me an opportunity of proving that we are heartily- one with our brethren, in all other matters pertaining to Evangelical Religion. Not a voice has been raised in opposition to this appointment, and it is idle to regard the circumstance in any other light than as evidence of the public sense of the fact, that this doctrine on Immortality has, at least, a prima facie case in interpretation, and ought no longer to be regarded as a “heresy” deserving of disgrace or excommunication.
The same may be said of the still more striking concession of the London Missionary Society in conferring on the same person the honour of moving the adoption of their Report, last May, at Exeter Hall, again without a breath of opposition. I mention these facts to prove to the American Churches what is the state of public opinion here. It is making a decided movement towards open and avowed toleration of what some of us consider the central idea of Revelation the centre whence radiate, all the great gospel doctrines of Justification, Sanctification, Redemption and Resurrection, the Deity and Atonement of Christ, and the work of the Holy Spirit, and lastly, the doctrine of Retribution.
Similarly in India, these ideas are widely extended among the most devoted missionaries. I have myself superintended a mission in Calcutta during the last five j ears, carried forward by my friend the Reverend Wm. A. Hobbs, a man of indefatigable activity, a fine Bengalee scholar, and a Christian, whose self-devotion has won the affection of the whole missionary body in Bengal. Not a word of “forbidding” him has reached our ears. Not a syllable of discouragement, such as we hear of as so frequently proceeding from your religious journals and eminent church authorities in disparagement of your orthodoxy.
I could fill pages of your book with the record of the many centres, where the doctrine of Life in Christ has rooted itself. In France and Switzerland, not a few of the very foremost Professors and Pastors in Paris, Lyons, Marseilles, Montaubon, Bale and Geneva are its devoted supporters. In Germany, Dr. Gess, of Breslau (the former of Dr. Godet’s mind), has taught it openly to his students for nearly twenty years. Dr. Dorner speaks of it with respect in the recent fourth volume of his System of Christian Doctrine, In Italy it is making way daily. Everywhere, indeed, the sectarian Church-rulers excommunicate devoted labourers, like Cocorda of La Tour and Byse of Brussels, for teaching it. But everywhere it speeds. So is it in China and Japan.
In our own Universities, specially at Cambridge, the avowed adherents are among the foremost and most trusted authorities in these places: Professor Stokes, Professor Adams (the discoverer of Neptune)? Professor Svvainson, the Head of Christ’s College, and several others. Close at home, indeed, the Bankers and the Ladies are, in some cases, ruthless upholders of the notion of endless torments of the already miserable London poor. The Bankers threaten to withdraw their subscriptions of hundreds of pounds from the Church Missionary Society the London City Mission and the Evangelization Society if they tolerate agents holding our faith on immortality in Christ.
The London City Mission lately had to part with four of the best members of their Committee because so many hundred pounds were at stake! Another member of the same banking firm in Lombard Street will not tolerate in the Baptist Mission any defection from the faith in endless misery for all the heathen. But spite of every opposition the truth spreads, and missionaries are found to give up their posts rather than continue to teach the millions of India and China the pernicious fables of Xavier and Loyola.
In one word, the truth is proving its character by the spiritual quality of the men who embrace it. Time-servers “decline to say what they think,” or boldly affirm that Christianity has left unsettled all the chief questions respecting the nature of man and the nature of God.” But this last is impossible. If the Bible is written in metaphors throughout, what is the value of such a Revelation? And why do your learned American writers, so earnest in supporting the idea of endless torments, systematically avoid grappling with the positive argument for Life in Christ, as set forth by its principal defenders? Let them, at least, give the indication of sincerity by answering in detail, if they think you err, the contents of your forthcoming publication.
Meantime, I steadfastly maintain, after forty years of study of the matter, that it is the notion of the infliction of a torment in body and soul that shall be absolutely endless, which alone gives a foot of standing ground to Ingersoll in America, or Bradlaugh in England. I believe more firmly than ever that it is a doctrine as contrary to every line of the Bible as it is contrary to every moral instinct of humanity.
God grant that soon a “great company” of your presbyters may “become obedient to the faith.” I am, dear Mr. Pettingell,
Yours sincerely, Edward White.
London, November, 1883.
THE UNSPEAKABLE GIFT.
PART THE FIRST.
The Question of Human Immortality considered in the Light of History, Reason and Philosophy.
“There are some of us, and to this class I myself belong, who have taken a definite position. We have reached the conclusion that Eternal Life is the gift of our Lord Jesus Christ; and this life is not given to those who reject the Gospel, but given in the new birth to those who believe, and who are thereby made partakers of the divine nature. We warn men that while they continue in impenitence they fail to secure it; and if they continue impenitent to the end, they are destined to indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish; that their punishment will not regenerate, but destroy them; that in the fires to which they are destined, they will not be purified, but consumed, and that from the second death there is no resurrection. I cannot tell to what extent these modifications of the earlier doctrine have affected the convictions of Congregational ministers and churches. The change, if there has been change, has been almost a silent one.
I believe that very few ministers have declared that they have abandoned the older doctrine. I believe in those cases in which it has been explicitly and emphatically abandoned, and the theory of Life in Christ earnestly and emphatically maintained, churches and congregations have accepted the transition without much surprise, and without any protest. This, at least, has been true, in my own case; and I wish, with the greatest possible emphasis, to state that, in my own experience, the reception of this doctrine has not only not enfeebled my belief in the great doctrines of the evangelical faith, and especially in the doctrines of Incarnation, the Atonement, and Regeneration, but has given to all those doctrines a firmer hold on my intellect, my conscience and my heart.”
R. W. Dale, D.D., of Birmingham, to the Congregational Union of England and Wales, 1874.
CHAPTER 1
The Nature and Limitations on the Question.
Before entering upon the discussion of the question in hand, it is important for us carefully to consider what the question really is. This has been rendered the more important by the treatment it has received, both from its friends and foes. The former have too often associated it with various other questions quite irrelevant or inconsequential, and have so advocated them, and given them such prominence as greatly to obscure and prejudice the main question. The latter have always been more willing to discuss the minor issues than the main question. Indeed, they have almost uniformly so misstated it and misrepresented it, as to confuse the minds of honest inquirers, and to deter them from any fair consideration of it.
The reader should understand in the outset, and bear in mind:
1.
That it is not a question of human immortality or non-immortality, as a fact, as argued by Christians on the one hand, and opposed by infidels on the other, that we are about to discuss. We fully believe in the possible, yea actual immortality of man, when so ever he shall be fit to enjoy the boon. We believe it was God’s original purpose to give immortality to man, and that he might have been exempt from death had he never sinned, and that it is still His purpose to immortalize him, but not in sin and misery, but only by a restoration to holiness.
We hope for immortality as confidently as our opposers, and we advocate the doctrine more earnestly than they, if possible. But we differ from them in the grounds of our hope. We advocate it as a Christian doctrine: they as a doctrine of philosophy: they claim it from Adam by their natural birth: we from Christ, only by a new spiritual
birth, and a resurrection from the dead: they believe it to be the natural endowment of every man: we believe it to be a supernatural endowment yea, a gift of God’s grace, through redemption by Christ.
We do not argue it as a doctrine of universalism, as they do; but as a special gift of grace to those who are saved, and to them only.
Among the many passages of Scripture in which our thesis is plainly enunciated, we need now to quote only the following simple text, which sets it forth, both positively and negatively, so clearly and in such categories” terms, that it would seem to be impossible for any one who accepts the testimony of Holy Writ to gainsay or resist its force.
“He that believeth not God, hath made him a liar: because he hath not believed in the witness that God hath borne concerning His Son. And the witness is this, that God grave unto us Eternal Life, and this Life is in His Son. He that hath the Son hath the Lite; he that hath not the Son hath NOT the Life.” (1 John 5:10-13, Revised Version.)
It is not concerning the nature and destiny of the SOUL of man, that we are to inquire; but concerning the MAN HIMSELF.
There are various speculative theories of the nature of man. We have considered some of them in our larger volume, “The Life Everlasting” We cannot discuss them in this smaller one, nor is it important, for we do not rest our argument on any one of them.
Of what the soul of man consists, pure science can tell us nothing. Indeed, science cannot tell us whether man has any soul as an entity distinct from the body. Nor does Scripture give us any warrant for dogmatizing as to its independent nature, and asserting positively, as many do, that it can consciously exist, and exercise all the functions of an active, conscious personality, apart from the body. Without dogmatizing on a subject which grows more and more difficult the more it is examined, and in regard to which the wisest are the most diffident, we are free to confess that we have never been able to find any good evidence from Scripture certainly not from science, to believe that man can exist as an intelligent, sensitive, responsible person, in a disorganized condition; or, in other words, that he can be dead and alive at the same time, as is commonly believed to be his abnormal condition between death and the resurrection. But, be that as it may, it is the ultimate state of man that especially concerns us now.
The extensive prevalence of the Platonic philosophy, which attributes to man an indestructible soul independent of the body which is at best but a speculation has put a new meaning into the word soul, which is quite different from the sense in which it is employed in the Scriptures as we will show and has introduced into our theological teaching, and into our literature generally, new forms of expression when treating of the destiny of man, not to be found in the Word of God, such as “the immortal soul,” “ the ever-living soul,” “ the never-dying Soul,” etc.; and our dictionaries have incorporated this deathless nature of the soul into the very definition of the word, as its distinguishing characteristic. This is actually a pre-judgment of the whole question. At least, it misleads and confuses the minds of inquirers who would know what is the true doctrine of the Scriptures concerning the destiny of man. It sets them to disputing about the soul of man, when the real question which the Scriptures set before us is concerning the whole man, body and soul in one; man, not in any transitional state, but as reconstituted in the resurrection.
We need not stop to inquire what is the condition of man immediately after death, concerning which the Scriptures give us very little light. Our chief inquiry is concerning the man that now is, to whom the Word of God is addressed: the man whom God created and placed under law; the man who sinned and forfeited the life all the life that was given him; the man to whom God said, “Thou shalt surely die”; the man who was redeemed by the death of the Son of God; the man to whom the unspeakable gift of Eternal Life is again offered in the Gospel, and who is exhorted to lay hold of it; the man who will be raised and judged according to the deeds done in the body What will become of him? The righteous, with new spiritual bodies like unto Christ’s glorious body will then enter upon a new life, a life of joy and blessedness that shall never end this, no one can doubt and the wicked who, according to the Word of God, shall then “be punished with everlasting destruction” shall they too enter upon a life a life of misery that shall never end? or shall they perish, soul and body together, in the Second Death, from which there is no resurrection?
It is not the Future Punishment of the wicked, nor even the Future Rewards of the righteous, that is the special subject of our inquiry; but The Gift of God, which is Eternal Life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
That the wicked are punished, and punished according to their ill desert, after death for the sins they commit in this life; and that the righteous are rewarded for all their good deeds, is too clearly revealed in the Scriptures to admit of any question by those who accept their testimony. But it is a great mistake, which too many make, and a fruitful source of error, on the subject of our inquiry, to suppose that the death which is the common lot of all men since the fall, is that punishment, or that the Eternal Life, which is a gift of grace, is the reward of the righteous. No man, however free he may be from personal sins, can hope for exemption from this death; nor can any one, however full he may be of good works, establish any claim to this Life Eternal, on the score of merit.
The punishment which is due to the sinner for his own sins, and the death which he dies as a mortal man, are two distinct things, and they should never be confounded with each other, as they commonly are in the popular mind. The same distinction is to be observed between the rewards of the righteous, and the unspeakable gift of God the Eternal Life which is the subject of our inquiry.
The Scriptures assure us that, “As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive.” “It is appointed unto men all men once to die, but after this the judgment.” Had it not been for God’s purpose of grace and mercy, made known in the Gospel, this death would have been the final end of all men. But the Gospel reveals to us a resurrection from the dead, and another life a Second life, which is pure, spiritual and eternal, for all who shall be fitted to enjoy it; and a ‘Second’ death, from which there is no resurrection, for all who have no fitness for this immortal life.
Now this is the Life which is freely offered to all men in the Gospel, without money, and without price the Life which we are exhorted to seek, to lay hold of, to receive as the gift of God through Jesus Christ; and having received it, the way is open for us to lay up our treasures in heaven, and to accumulate merit as abundantly as we please. We are assured that there shall be distinctions, according to merit, in the recompense of the righteous, and that not one good deed, even to the giving of a cup of cold water to a disciple for the sake of Christ, shall fail of its full reward.
The “Second death” is the death we are warned against, and urged to escape, while we may. Though the First death may not be avoided, the Second, which shall issue in utter destruction, may be. What various degrees of punishment shall be meted out to the unsaved by the hand of justice? How many shall fall under this dreadful doom of the Second death? What the number of stripes that shall be inflicted upon “those who have sinned without law, and shall perish without law?” How many and how heavy the stripes which they shall deserve who have sinned against both the Law and the Gospel, and have rejected and despised an offered Saviour, and what shall be their disappointment, their rage, their anguish of spirit, and their torment, and how long all this shall endure, before the fires of Gehenna shall utterly consume them, and the universe shall be rid of their presence we forbear even to guess. Nor need we now inquire, for this is not our theme. It is just the opposite of all this, The Unspeakable Gift of God.
This gloomy side has its fit place for consideration, but it now comes only incidentally into view as the background of the glorious picture we are considering.
Entertaining large views of the saving power of Him who “so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him might not perish, but have Everlasting Life,” we would gladly hope, if we could, for the salvation of all the children of Adam. But bowing reverently, as we do, to the teaching of His Word, we cannot entertain any such hope. Alas! that Word assures us that, at the last day, “many” will be adjudged to be fit only for destruction; that the good wheat only will be gathered into the garner, and that the chaff will be “burned up with unquenchable fire”; “And then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father,” a kingdom which is not only everlasting, but co-extensive with the universe.
The notion of two everlasting kingdoms, running parallel with each other, the one, a kingdom of purity and blessedness; the other, a kingdom of sin and sorrow; the one, to resound with the praises and joyful songs of redeemed men and angels; and the other, with the groans and blasphemies of lost sinners and devils to all eternity, is not a doctrine of the Bible, it is a relic of Persian dualism and pagan superstition. It came into the Christian church in the latter part of the second century, with that other pagan doctrine of which it is the legitimate fruit the natural and necessary immortality of sinners.
It was incorporated into her creed by the philosophic schoolmen of the dark ages, and has been handed down to us through the medium of an apostate Church; but is regarded by many, even to this day, as a part of the faith once delivered to the saints. It is full time that it were relegated to its source, and that those who call themselves Christians returned to the simple faith of the Gospel, as taught by the Master Himself, and His apostles.
Though the rewards and punishments that are set before us in this Gospel as necessary stimulants to action in our earthly career are not to be ignored, it is time that enlightened Christians, in this age of the world, should begin to have some higher conception of the Divine Economy, than that it exists merely for the purpose of administering rewards and penalties. As children under the nurture and tutelage of a kind parent often look only at the rewards that are promised to stimulate them to right action, and to the punishments that are threatened to deter them from wrong-doing, and think that if they gain the one and escape the other, nothing more is intended by their guardians, or to be desired by themselves; so under the discipline of our heavenly Father, we are too apt to regard the rewards He offers, and the penalties He threatens, as our highest motives for action, and that He exercises His rule over us merely for the purpose of administering them. It is true that rewards and penalties are a necessary part of any system of government over imperfect creatures; but they belong to a lower and imperfect stage of discipline. When character is perfected, and right habits are formed, and holy action becomes spontaneous, as will be the case when the object of our earthly training is fully accomplished, these constraining motives will be no longer needed; nor will they be thought of. We shall act automatically, as it were, doing that which is right, and pure, and lovely, and that only, from the instinctive promptings of a holy nature.
It is for this perfected stage of being that our heavenly Father would fit us. He would lift us out of this animal, material, mortal condition, in which we begin our career, into that higher realm, which is purely spiritual, and make us fit if we will consent to it for companionship with the holy angels, and for union with Himself in love, and for the Life that is Everlasting. This is the end we should seek even now, and the end we shall seek, just so far as we go out of ourselves, and rise toward Him, the great object of our confidence and love.
This is the end He will secure for all who will throw open their hearts to the influence of His grace, and permit Him to work His own good pleasure within them. But alas! for those who turn away from Him, and close their ears to His call, and shut their hearts against the sweet influence of His Spirit who desire and seek after those things only that are earthly and perishing. There is no place for them in His Spiritual Everlasting Kingdom, there can be none for them. They must perish in their own corruption.
We have no new translation of the Holy Scriptures to propose, nor do we desire to have a new meaning put upon any of the well-chosen terms of the original.
It is true, we cannot but regard the translation of many passages as imperfectly done, and as failing to give the real force of the original, and we are happy and joyful to see that not a few of them have been improved and others might have been in the “ New Version.” But the Old Version, as it was, is all that we need to establish the doctrine for which we contend, if its explicit and uniform testimony be accepted; or rather, its explicit and uniform testimony is the doctrine, and the only doctrine, on this question for which we contend. But no version, or revision, however close it may be to the original, will serve to bring us any nearer to the truth if scholastic and speculative theologizers are to be allowed to twist and warp its plain utterances to suit their own theories. All that we desire is, that those who have been led away from the truth on this question, and involved in the mazes of error by these insidious methods, should be brought back to the simple teaching of God’s Word, as it lies everywhere on the surface of its pages, and open to any sincere inquirer.
Here we take our stand. We must insist that those who would discuss with us this doctrine of Immortality shall be loyal to the Word of God, which is, and must be, our supreme authority on this question. Whatever light science or philosophy, in their advance, may throw upon this or any other subject, we gladly accept, not fearing that all truth, so far as it is rightly apprehended, will be harmonious and self-consistent, and whatever progress may be made by repeated revisions, in the understanding of mysterious and ambiguous passages, of which there are not a few, we gratefully welcome. But if there be any one doctrine more than another which we are to take directly from the Word of God by reverently and honestly inquiring, “What saith the Scriptures?” it is this.
Neither science, nor philosophy, nor sentiment is able to teach it to us. We hold it to be treason to the Scriptures, and to the God of the Scriptures, for one to reject their plainly-spoken, explicit testimony on this question, and attempt to read his own speculations, or the speculations of others, however learned they may be, into them, or to try to make them agree with his own preconceived notions, by putting a forced or unnatural construction upon their language. And yet, this is the grave charge that must be made if the truth be told against the philosophic Christianity of the schools; and the only excuse that can be made is, that their philosophy requires it, and tradition has authorized it, and “the people love to have it so.”
We have no purpose or desire to attack or oppose the Evangelical system, usually called “Orthodoxy,” but, on the contrary, it is our special desire to maintain it. We love and honour it; and it is because of our fidelity to it that we are anxious to have it freed from this monstrous error of immortality in sin and misery that has fastened upon its very roots, and thrown a blight and false colouring over all its doctrines, and is doing more than all its other enemies to bring it into contempt. If this great traditional error could be eradicated, so that the true Gospel doctrine of Life Eternal only in Christ, and its correlated doctrines might be permitted to stand forth in their primitive simplicity, and in their true light, there would be little room or occasion for the cavils of opposers and infidels.
When we come to recognize our mortal condition as the children of a sinful race, the necessity of a New Birth in order to a life that shall never end becomes apparent; the Divinity of that Saviour, through whom alone this New Life is given, can no longer be questioned; the Salvation He offers, instead of being a problematical rescue from an incredible doom, which, though threatened, could never be inflicted by a God of justice and love, becomes a heavenly boon of priceless value to be earnestly sought for and thankfully accepted by perishing mortals; and Redemption instead of seeming to be an act of justice which every child of Adam has a right to demand at the hands of his Maker, as it must under the shadow of this error, becomes a pure act of grace; and Christ, the Eternal Son of God, is exalted to his true place in the scheme of our Salvation, and entitled to the highest gratitude and love of the world as the only Saviour (or Life Giver, Syriac Version) of men. The great doctrines of the Second Advent the Resurrection of the dead, the General Judgment and The Life Everlasting which stand out so conspicuously in the Gospels and in the Epistles, and upon which the early disciples fixed all their hopes for the future, but which, alas! under the blighting influence of this error, have lost their true place in the creed of the Church, and in the preaching of its ministers, and have come to be shadowy myths, will again, in the light of this truth, be invested with all their primitive power, as verities close at hand.
We cannot stop to discuss these correlated doctrines, and to reset them in their appropriate places in this evangelical system of theology, nor need we, for if we can but brush away the clouds which this false dogma of paganism has thrown around them, and bring out again from its eclipse the one doctrine of Life and Immortality as it is brought to light in the Gospel, this whole system will need no defence. To this end will our efforts be directed in this volume.
CHAPTER 2
Deathless Nature op Man’s Origin and History of the Dogma.
To speculate on the origin of the doctrine of the deathless nature of man, would seem, to those who admit the truth of the Mosaic narrative in the third chapter of Genesis, quite unnecessary; for Moses there tells us that the notion, “Ye shall not surely die; ye shall be as gods, who live forever, knowing good and evil,” was first whispered into the ears of Eve in Paradise, as it has been into the minds of her children in all ages. But as there are many who will not accept this as a true record, especially so far as their favourite doctrine is concerned, we reserve the discussion of this record till we come to our Biblical argument, and begin with the remark, to which all will assent: That it is a very ancient belief. If, however, this record of Moses be not accepted as a true account of its origin, we may well despair of tracing it to its source.
It is a very plausible doctrine, as is evident from the readiness with which it has been received in all parts of the world, and from the ease with which it has insinuated itself into the literature and theology of all ages and all peoples.
It is certainly a very popular doctrine, as all who have attempted to call it in question can testify. Indeed, it could not be otherwise than popular, wherever it has been received. There is something so flattering to the pride of man, in the idea of possessing a godlike nature, that is absolutely indestructible, something so responsive to the instincts and cravings of his soul, sentiments implanted within him by his Creator as a motive to perseverance in the way of holiness, and which sin itself, though fatal to his hopes, cannot eradicate, and which still linger there, after he has forfeited the boon, to urge him to seek for its recovery, to which the mercy of God encourages him; there is something so dismal in the thought of death and extinction that it is not to be wondered at that man, sinful and mortal though he may be, should still cling to this hope as he clings to his life, and should fain try to believe, however dark his prospect, that he shall never die. It is a very delusive doctrine, as will be evident when we come to consider its influence on the theodicy of the Christian Church.
This hope, under various forms, and mixed with many fanciful notions, entered into the religions of the most ancient nations. We find traces of it among the Chaldeans, the Persians, and the Egyptians. Socrates, four hundred years before Christ, argued it from the nature of man, and the instincts of the human soul; and Plato, his pupil, one of the greatest philosophers the world ever saw, and whose speculations have had more influence over the religious opinions of mankind, than any other philosopher, and, we may say, than all other philosophers combined, formulated it into definite propositions, and incorporated them into his system. He held that man has actually two souls, an animal and a spiritual soul. Though the animal soul is perishable, the spiritual soul is imperishable. But to give a logical consistency to this doctrine, he taught that it is not only immortal, a parte post but eternal, a parte ante: that it never had a creator; and therefore having had no beginning it can never have an end.
The idea of the natural immortality of man found no place among the Hebrews, under Moses and the earlier prophets. They were kept separate and secluded from the surrounding pagan nations, to prevent them from imbibing their false and corrupting notions. It was not until after their long captivity, nor indeed until after Plato’s philosophy had come to prevail throughout the Grecian world, and the Hebrew people were brought into association with its disciples, that their Rabbinical teachers and Pharisaical doctors began to entertain these philosophical speculations. But there is not one single hint of any such doctrine in all the Old Testament Scriptures, there are indeed, intimations, more or less distinct, of a resurrection from the dead, and of the destruction of the wicked, in what is more plainly revealed in the New, as a second deaths and, indeed, assurances to the righteous, that they would be redeemed from the power of the grave, and that “ length of days forever and ever “ would be given them; but not one hint can be found in all these Divine Oracles that immortality would be the portion of all men. We boldly challenge our opponents to produce one such passage. It is only in the Talmud and commentaries of the Rabbins by which the people were taught how to explain the Scriptures, or rather, to explain them away, as people now are, by the same means, and how to “make the Word of God of none effect,” as Christ said, that we find any such notions among them.
So when Christ came, we find the Pharisees, who, as a sect, had become largely Platonized, rejecting scornfully the idea of their need of a Saviour to give them Eternal Life, while the Sadducees, at the other extreme, for one extreme always induces its opposite, denied the existence of any life whatever beyond the present.
But our Lord, standing between them both, and taking part with neither, proclaimed everywhere, and with wonderful emphasis, and constant reiteration, that there could be no life beyond death but by a resurrection from the dead, and no Eternal Life but through Himself as the Giver of it. “I am the Resurrection and the Life.” “He that believeth on the Son hath Everlasting Life, and he that believes not the Son shall not see Life.” This is the special theme of the Gospel of John, as it is also of his epistles, Life and Immortality only through Christ, by a new birth and a resurrection from the dead. “This is the record, that God hath given unto us Eternal Life, and this life is in His Son; he that hath the Son hath the Life, and he that hath not the Son of God hath not the Life.” It stands out conspicuously in the writings of all His other immediate disciples. This is “the inheritance, incorruptible and undefiled, that fades not away,” of which Peter speaks, and the “unspeakable gift,” for which Paul thanked God, and which he urges his brethren so earnestly to “lay hold of.” This is the “faith once delivered to the saints,” and the source of their strength and joy amid all their trials and persecutions, and their “confidence” even in dying, which they are exhorted to “ hold fast to the end,” and which they all did hold fast, till the simplicity of their faith was corrupted by the incoming of that same philosophical delusion that had corrupted the faith of the Hebrews before the coming of Christ, yea, that corrupted the faith of the first pair in Eden. “I fear,” says Paul, in writing to the Corinthians, “lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.” “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of this world and not after Christ.”
The early fathers of the Church, without exception, held and taught the same doctrine respecting the perishable nature of man, and his need of a Saviour in order to reach Eternal Life, and used the very same language which Christ and His Apostles used.
Barnabas, the companion of Paul; Clement I., also one of Paul’s fellow-labourers, and, as is supposed, bishop of Rome; Hermas, whose name is mentioned in the epistle to the Romans; Ignatius, who was consecrated bishop of Antioch, probably by Peter, in AD 67, and who, forty years afterward, suffered martyrdom in the Amphitheatre; Polycarp, a disciple of John, and bishop of Smyrna, who in extreme old age, in the year 160, was burned at the stake; Theophilus, another bishop of Smyrna, in the latter part of the second century; Ireneaus, a pupil of Polycarp, who also died a martyr in the early part of the third century; and still later, Arnobius and Lactantius, and many others, whose names might be mentioned, all held and publicly taught this same Christian doctrine of Immortality, only through redemption by Christ, the Son of God, and a resurrection from the dead at His second coming, and the literal destruction of the wicked, in the second death, as is abundantly evident from such fragments of their writings as have been preserved, and from the testimony of their contemporaries.
The document entitled Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, recently brought to light by Bishop Bryennios, which was evidently written during the lifetime of Polycarp, emphatically and unmistakably sets forth the same doctrine, and no other, THE WAY OF LIFE (mia tes zoes), and the way of Death (kai mia tou thanatou), as did all these other apostolic fathers before the faith of the Church had been corrupted by the Platonic philosophy.
Justin also, an eminent Grecian scholar near the close of the second century, certainly teaches the same doctrine in some of his writings, but having been a believer and teacher of Plato’s philosophy before his conversion, and coming into the Christian Church at a time when its primitive faith had already begun to feel the corrupting influence of this philosophy, which was so popular in the outside world, and bringing with him some of his old views and former habits of thinking and expressing himself, his writings do not appear to be always and uniformly consistent with either system of doctrine. Hence he is quoted and claimed on both sides of this question of the natural immortality of man. After him, in the progress of Christianity toward that supremacy which it soon achieved, other adherents of the same school, who unmistakably held to the doctrines of their Grecian master, were swept into the Church, and installed as her teachers in theology. Among these were Athenagoras another Grecian scholar in the closing years of the second century, and Tatian and Cyprian in the early part of the third, both African bishops, bitter and bigoted in their spirit, Hippolytus of the port of Rome, and Origen the most accomplished scholar of the age, but a man of ascetic disposition, and of a speculative mind; after him came Athanasius, Jerome and Ambrose, in the fourth century, and in the fifth, more eminent than them all, the great Augustme, another African bishop, to whom w may accredit the honour, such as it is, of having formulated this dogma, of the inherent immortality of the soul, into the Christian system, and established it as one of the corner-stones of the so-called “orthodox” theology, a system still perpetuated and known as the Augustinian system.
See note at the end of this chapter.
These theological teachers, in seeking to reconcile the dogmas of their Grecian masters with the simple doctrines of Christ, were quite too willing to subordinate divine truth to human speculations. It is true, as Christian believers, they gave up or kept in abeyance that part of their heathen master’s teaching that attributed
to man an eternal existence, a parte ante; but they continued to hold, with him, to man’s eternal existence a parte post. In this, however, they and their modern followers are less consistent than their leader, for the one cannot stand without the other. Both postulates belong together; the latter has no logical force without the former to justify and sustain it.
With their new teaching, new forms of expression, unknown to the Scriptures, came into use, and new meanings were put upon those forms that are common to the Scriptures. Instead of discoursing upon the salvation or loss of man as an integer, as did Christ and His immediate followers, they now begin to discourse concerning the soul of man, in contradistinction from his body, and to give quite another meaning to the word (psuche) “soul.” It is now called “the immortal soul,” “that principle in man that never dies, that is indestructible,” and the like expressions for which there is no warrant, whatever, in the Word of God, but which belong only to that philosophy concerning the nature of man, that they would read into it.
To bring the Scriptures into agreement with this heathen philosophy, a new meaning must be given to such words as “life,” “death,” “salvation,” “destruction,” etc., whenever the destiny of man is spoken of, which is to be considered the religious or Scriptural use of these words.
This insidious practice of discarding the literal meaning of these plain Scriptural terms, and taking them in a figurative, unnatural sense, whenever the destiny of man is referred to, has been handed down, with the philosophy that requires it, to the present time. It has entered so thoroughly into all our religious teaching, and has been so wrought into all our religious literature, that it seems, to those who have been so instructed, to be the only proper thing to do. It is this more than anything else that has thrown this whole subject of the destiny of the saved and of the lost into such inexplicable confusion, that honest, un-lettered inquirers know not what to believe. No wonder that so many commentaries and expositions are needed to tell them in what sense to understand these simple Bible terms, that would otherwise be plain enough, and how to explain them into agreement with the popular philosophy of the day.
These philosophical Christian teachers taught, as their successors still teach, that Christ could not be the actual source of Eternal Life to His people, as He Himself declared, for immortality is the natural endowment of all men from Adam. The Eternal Life (the zoe aidnios) which He promised to give them must be a pertain blissful condition of life which the wicked cannot enjoy, and the death and destruction (thanatos hai apoleia) which are threatened to the wicked, cannot mean actual death and destruction, for the soul of man is deathless and indestructible, It must mean a kind of metaphorical death, a miserable condition of life that never ends. And even the fires of Gehenna, the inextinguishable fire (asbestos pur) the eternal fire of God, into which all His irreclaimable enemies shall at last be cast, to be consumed like the chaff of the threshing floor, is not a consuming fire, but it is a peculiar kind of fire (ignis sapiens) that only torments those who are cast into it, yea, that continually renews what it destroys that it may torment them forever. Such is the Biblical exegesis to which this heathen philosophy has given rise, and with which all who have been “orthodox” educated are familiar!
Origen, and others of the same school, devised another way of evading the direct testimony of Scripture relating to the destiny of man, which, though equally false and delusive, was at least more creditable to their conception of the justice and mercy of God. Unable to accept of the awful conclusion to which their associates had come, with respect to the eternal misery of the unsaved, they conceived that the doom of death and everlasting destruction, which the Scriptures declare to be the end of all such, is to be taken neither in the literal sense, as the actual death and destruction of their persons, nor in the figurative sense of eternal misery, but in an ideal sense, denoting the death and destruction of their sins, and that having been in this way purified by the fires of Gehenna, they will at length be restored to the favour of God and to the enjoyment of Eternal Life with the righteous in heaven. Thus, by the subtle sophistry of these ingenious Christian philosophers, these simple, cardinal words of Scripture, that foretell the doom of the wicked, came to have these three senses as diverse as possible from each other, viz.: the literal, which they discarded, because it contradicted their dogma; the metaphorical, implying not the actual death and destruction of sinners, as individuals, but only the death and destruction of their well-being, while they would themselves live to sin and suffer forever; and the ideal or sophisticated, implying the death and destruction of their Bins only, which, instead of harming them, would fit them for the never-ending enjoyment of heaven.
So that according to one view, to destroy man is to make him miserable forever; and according to the other view it is to make him holy and happy forever, and this in the teeth of our Lord’s precise definition of what it is that will be destroyed, neither his happiness nor his sinfulness, but the man himself. According to the one theory, the familiar passage in Matthew 10:28 should be rendered, “Fear not them which make the body miserable, but are not able to make the soul miserable; but rather fear Him who is able to make them both miserable in hell forever.” According to the other it should be rendered, “Fear not them which make the body holy, but are not able to make the soul holy; but rather fear Him who is able to make them both holy in hell.”
The adherents of this third school of theologizers have never been the majority, though under such various designations as Origenists, Restorationists, Universalists, Advocates of the larger hope, etc., there have always been speculators of this sort, wherever religious opinions have been freely exercised; and perhaps they are more numerous at the present time than ever before.
But from the time of Augustine onward, through the long, dreary centuries of the dark ages, this other method of theologizing called the Augustinian system of theology, from its leading representative has had free course and been glorified, as the true doctrine of the Holy Catholic Church, and is, by inheritance, the orthodox doctrine of the Protestant world also.
To give it the highest official sanction of the Church, and to fortify it against all opposition or doubt, the Lateran council, under Leo X., issued the following decree:
“Whereas, some have dared to assert concerning the reasonable soul, that it is mortal; we, with the approbation of the Sacred Council, do condemn and reprobate all who assert that the intellectual soul is mortal, seeing that the soul is not only truly, and of itself and essentially, the form of the human body, as it is expressed in the canon of Pope Clement V., but likewise immortal; and we strictly prohibit all from dogmatizing otherwise; and we decree that all who adhere to the like erroneous assertion shall he shunned and punished as heretics.”
The letter of this edict is no longer in force, to compel the faith of Protestant Christians, and yet the spirit that enacted it is not yet dead, and there are too many, alas, who would be glad to see its penalty put in execution. But we are thankful to know that the age of bigotry, intolerance and heathen superstition, is fast passing away, and that under the enlightening influence of a free Bible, and freedom of thought, even in religious matters, the dogmas of an Anti-Christian philosophy, which so early were taken into the bosom of the Church of Christ, and have been supported by ecclesiastical bulls, and handed down by tradition, are undergoing a searching scrutiny.
And this, the most popular, and yet the most delusive and Anti-Christian of them all, must soon yield the place which it has so long usurped in the creed of the Church, to the truth as taught by Christ and His earlier disciples. Intelligent Christian inquirers are springing up on all sides, in all our evangelical Churches, with whom neither the edict of the Pope, nor the traditions of an apostate Church, nor the speculations of Grecian philosophers, nor the bold assertion of the original author himself, will suffice to commend this dogma of the indefeasible immortality of fallen man, to their confidence, in face of the clear, positive, and uniform declaration of God’s Word to sinning man, “Thou shalt surely die.”
The following Table, taken from The Life Everlasting, exhibits, in brief, the three schools of thought, on this question, among the Christian Fathers. I, That of Immortality only in Christ, as taught by Christ Himself and all the Apostolic Fathers. II. The Platonic School, holding to the natural immortality of all souls, which took its rise near the close of the second century, which was divided, for a time, into two parties: 1. Those holding to the doctrine of the endless torment of the wicked. 2. Those believing in the final restoration of the wicked and the salvation of all men of which two theories, the former, usually called the Augustinian. finally prevailed, and was declared to be the only “orthodox doctrine” of the church.
CHAPTER 3
Disastrous Influence op This False Dogma.
The fathers of the Reformation, under Lather, did a noble work for the caus’3 of Truth and Christianity, in protesting against the errors of the Church in which they had been reared, in setting the Word of God above all its traditions, and the decretals of its Anti-Christian Head, and in their heroic efforts to recall men to the simpler and purer faith of its early days. They searched, out, and exposed many of the grosser errors and follies that scholastic sophistry, cunning priestcraft, and power-loving ecclesiasticism had engrafted upon it, during its long career of hypocrisy, bigotry and oppression. As God-fearing, and truth-loving men they did all that could reasonably be expected of men in their position.
When we consider their training, their surroundings, the impediments that were thrown in their way, and their scant opportunities for investigation, we are astonished that they achieved so much, rather than that they left anything undone. Amid clouds and darkness, and with all the prejudices and false notions into which they had been educated, it is not to be supposed that they would be able, at one bound, to cast off all their shackles; to come into the perfect light and liberty of the Gospel; to see the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and to formulate it into a creed of such true proportions, as to require no further revision or amendment, at the hands of Christian scholars, through all coming time.
Some of them did have a suspicion, that this great philosophic dogma, of the natural immortality of man, was not in accordance with God’s truth, and even Luther protested against the edict of the Pope that had been issued to enforce it. But it lay too deep down under the accumulated rubbish of more than a thousand years; it had so entwined itself about their whole system of religion, and was so firmly embedded, and fixed in its very foundation, that it was quite impossible to expose and eradicate it at once. They had too much work on hand demanding their immediate attention, and were too heavily pressed on all sides, to admit of their accomplishing all we might desire, or even all they themselves desired. And so it was, that this great fundamental error, indeed the fons et origo of most of the other errors of this corrupt Church, was taken over into the creed of the Churches of the Reformation, only to be exposed and eradicated as it surely will be, by their successors in a freer and more enlightened age.
“I permit the Pope to establish articles of faith for his faithful followers; such as, the bread and wine are transmuted in the sacrament; the Divine essence is neither generative nor generated; the soul is the substantial form of the human body: and himself is ruler of the world and King of heaven and God of earth; and the soul is immortal, and all the numberless prodigies of the Romish dunghills of decretals.” Luther.
There have been many Christian scholars since their day, who have questioned the Scriptural authority for this dogma, and many more, who would not, and could not, accept of the conclusions as to the endless misery of the unsaved, to which it leads; and this number is rapidly increasing. And yet, it still lingers in the creeds and catechisms of most of our Churches. It is taught in our commentaries, and in our evangelical pulpits, and in our Sunday Schools, and in all our popular systems of theology; it pervades all our sacred and secular literature and, most of all, that which is anti-religious, distorting, as it always has, and must, to a greater or less degree, all the doctrines of the Christian faith, bringing reproach upon the justice of God, discrediting the work of Christ in our redemption, obscuring the glory of the Gospel, and greatly hindering its progress, and, in short, operating as a fruitful source of scepticism and infidelity, wherever it is insisted on as a fundamental principle of the Christian religion.
For it follows as a necessary corollary of this doctrine, that this once holy and happy universe, which God pronounced “very good” in the beginning, will never be restored to its original perfection; that sin, bringing death and misery in its train, having once gained a lodgement here whether with or without Divine permission, we need not now inquire will never be exterminated, or expelled.
It may, like a raging fire, be localized and circumscribed within certain limits, but it will never, like that fire exhaust itself and die out; nor will it ever be extinguished by God Himself, but will rage on forever, not to devour and consume, but only to torment the miserable victims upon whom it is ceaselessly preying; and, so long as Jehovah lives and reigns, holiness and sin, happiness and misery, praises and curses, life and death will run parallel with each other, throughout all the cycles of a never-ending future. Heaven will resound with the songs of the redeemed, and hell, with the curses and groans of the damned, through all the eternal ages; and the time will never, never come, when Infinite love. Divine wisdom and Almighty power will have so successfully triumphed over the works of the devil, as to have utterly destroyed them, nor over death and hell, as to have destroyed them; nor when the justice of God will have so vindicated itself, by the sufferings of the unsaved whether they be many or few as that they can be permitted to expire; nor when the foundations of His government will be secure, and the loyalty of His holy, happy children assured, without this awful exhibition of His infinite wrath, rolling up like the smoke of a furnace, forever before their eyes.
But when men stop to consider what is involved in the idea, or rather in the fact of suffering that is absolutely endless; what it is for conscious creatures like themselves, to writhe in the agonies of a second death, without dying forever and ever, and without the least possible hope of relief; when they consider what countless myriads of the human race even with the most favourable construction of the words of Christ, concerning the number of the lost must already have sunk into this abyss of woe, and what multitudes are daily following them there; when they come to predicate this doom, not of sinners in the abstract, but of their own acquaintances and friends it may be of their own children and bosom companions, who go out of life giving no evidence of piety, and perhaps, even rejecting the salvation offered in the Gospel, they are appalled at the conclusion to which their creed and their logic lead them. Their faith cannot endure the strain put upon it. Something must give way.
“Should this eternal torment of the unsaved cease, and this fire be extinguished, it would in a great measure, obscure the light of heaven, and put an end to a great part of the happiness and glory of the blessed.” Hopkins’ Works, Volume 2, pages 457, 458.
Holding to the doctrine of the endless conscious existence of all men, beyond this life, as a doctrine of the Bible for so they have been taught to believe they begin, in their hearts, to charge God foolishly with all the injustice and cruelty their false creed attributes to Him, or to doubt the testimony of His Word, as to the actual danger of coming short of salvation, and the necessity of striving to lay hold of the Eternal Life that is set before them in the Gospel, or to deny the God of the Bible, or to take refuge in some other form of belief or unbelief, or else clinging to their faith in God and to the Scriptures as His Word, they earnestly set themselves to find, and perhaps, think they do find, in these Oracles in spite of their most positive declarations to the contrary evidence enough to satisfy them, of the ultimate salvation of all men.
Even those who cannot relieve their burdened minds, by doing such evident violence to the letter of God’s Word, still hope, because they will and must, that possibly a post mortem probation, or some other way not yet revealed, may be found, of escape from the incredible doom of endless woe, which seems to be threatened against all who die in their sins. They do not dare to deny explicitly a doctrine that has been held by so many of the wise and good, who have gone before them, though they are unable to reconcile it with their own sense of justice. They may not, perhaps, be willing to admit, even to themselves, that they do not believe it, lest they should seem to be sliding away from the true foundation; but they cannot but hope that it may not be true. They accept it, if at all, under a kind of mental protest. It is that dark, mysterious doctrine, upon which they dare not trust themselves to think, lest they should have hard thoughts of God, whom they wish to love and trust, whom they do indeed love and trust as their Heavenly Father, amid all the clouds and darkness of their false theodicy; but it is only as they include themselves, and all their dear friends, and all infants, and imbeciles, and all in heathen lands, who have never heard of a Saviour, and all in Christian lands, who have “ never had a fair chance “of salvation, among the number of the saved; and then, as for the rest if there be any such they comfort their hearts, by saying, and wisely saying, with faithful Abraham, “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?”
In the rude and unfeeling ages of the past, when the severest penalties were inflicted for trivial offences, and when the chief object of punishment was torment, and the executioners of the law were called “tormentors”; when human governments vied with each other in the severity of the tortures they inflicted upon the unhappy victims of their displeasure, and even the death penalty was made as cruel and protracted as possible, and medical aid was invoked, to prolong the lives of those who suffered it, that still more enduring agonies might be inflicted upon them, while dying; in those times not so very long past, but now happily passed, never to return when Church officers exercised the function of inquisitors, under the pretence of doing the will of God, this doctrine of endless torment for the enemies of God, a doctrine so consonant with the spirit and practice of the age, might more easily find, and hold its place un-challenged in the creed of the Church.
But in these “ last days,” under the softening influences of the Gospel, when so much is done to assuage human sorrow and pain, and even animal suffering, and to relieve the distress of even the most ill-deserving; when mercy is mingled with justice, in the punishment of the most hardened of criminals, and capital punishment even, is made as humane and summary as possible, men cannot but ask, whether the majesty of the Divine government, to which all human governments must look, both for their authority to punish, and for an example of the manner and spirit in which it is to be administered, can be vindicated only by the infliction of tortures too horrible to think of, and protracted without end? Is there no such thing as capital punishment the punishment of deaths actual death under the government of the Almighty Ruler? Is it to be supposed that He, who instituted this penalty of death, death without torture, and commanded it to be executed upon the guilty subjects of His theocratic government on earth, has no such penalty, in reserve, for rebels against the government of heaven?
Has He ho alternative, but to imprison the helpless victims of His displeasure, and to pour out upon them the vials of His wrath without limit, and without end? Has He no way of putting an end to their miserable existence? or does He choose to prolong their forfeited lives, that they may never cease to suffer? It surely cannot be for the benefit of these victims, who have no future to hope for. Is it then, for the benefit of the saved? or is it to gratify the vindictive wrath of their Creator? If not, what can be the object of the eternal suffering of these miserable, helpless creatures, who are supposed to be confined forever beyond the reach of mercy or hope?
And when we are told, as we surely are, in the theological systems of our fathers, and of those who follow them, at the present day, that this is the doom, not only of rejectors of the Gospel, and irreclaimable offenders against
.light and knowledge, but of innumerable multitudes from heathen lands, who were born, as all of us were, under sin and condemnation, and who have never heard of a Saviour of creatures, who owe both their existence, and the conditions of their existence, to the Sovereign Will of Him who foresaw, and predetermined all things from the beginning Christian believers, if they have Christian hearts, cannot but feel, that there must be a flaw somewhere in the chain of reasoning, that leads to such monstrous conclusions, though they may not be able to detect it.
What though the great and good divines of a former generation could school their severe and logical minds to accept all the terrible conclusions involved in the dogma of the deathless nature of man, which they had received by tradition from their fathers; what though they could, in their zeal for the glory of God’s justice, believe and teach to their docile hearers, that the perpetual spectacle of the agonies of the lost in hell, would serve to augment the joys of the redeemed in heaven, and that, “should eternal punishment cease and the fire be extinguished, it would put an end to a great part of the happiness and glory of the blessed.” It is taxing too heavily the faith of the men of the present day, to insist on their believing doctrines, however hoary with age, or fortified by human authority, that are abhorrent, at once, to their reason and their moral sense. They will no longer be held to those views of God and His government, that prevailed, when all rulers were tyrants, and justice was but another name for vengeance, and punishment was synonymous with torture. They cannot be induced to love or worship a deity, who is represented to them as a monster of cruelty more savage and vengeful than the bloodthirsty gods of the heathen world, nor to accept of a theodicy, that is at war with the spirit and precepts of the Gospel. They will not be terrified by threatening they do not, and cannot believe will ever be executed, nor persuaded to flee from a -danger they do not fear, nor betake themselves to a refuge of which they have ceased to feel the need.
They cannot be aroused to seek for an immortality which, they have been made to believe, is already assured, nor to make any efforts to lay hold of that Eternal Life, which they entered upon when they were born.
If the alternative to the great salvation that is set before men in the Gospel be, through misrepresentation, made incredible, the truth, which it ought to enforce, will soon lose its power to move them. If the “death,” which God threatens, be riot death, at all, but something else, so incredible that no thinking man can believe, nor ought to believe will be visited upon the impenitent, men will sin with greater boldness and in fancied security. It was -by changing the truth of God into a lie, that the great Arch-deceiver accomplished the ruin of our first parents, and today, the glorious Gospel, which is “ the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, is made of none effect,” through the same delusion. Men everywhere, in increasing numbers, are turning away their ears from the truth, mixed, as it is, with human conceits, and turned into a fable, under the influence of this great falsehood. They are forsaking the altars, at which their fathers worshiped, and betaking themselves to other forms of belief, or unbelief, that have, at least, the merit of not being incredible, however far they may be from “the faith once delivered to the saints.”
This is just the result we have to deplore, at the present time the cause of which ought not to be a mystery. Everywhere, throughout Christendom, the people are casting off the restraints of religion, and forsaking the Sanctuary. Scepticism among all classes, especially among the young, is becoming very general.
Even among those who professedly hold to what are called Evangelical doctrines, there is a scepticism, more or less latent, as to the final and irreversible doom of those who die in their sins, a kind of speculative, esoteric, half-doubting hope, of their ultimate salvation, by some plan of Divine mercy, not yet revealed, that greatly weakens the power of the truth. Earnest Christians are looking with anxiety and concern upon the indifferent- ism and irreligion of the present time, and are inquiring after the cause and the remedy. They ask: Why is it, as knowledge and the spirit of inquiry increase, and philanthropic efforts for the welfare of society are multiplied, religious error and infidelity increase?
Why do not the masses frequent the house of God, and listen to the ordinary preaching of the Word, as they once did? What will bring them back to the sanctuary and to the faith of their fathers? What modification in the services of God’s house, and in the manner of presenting the truth, are needed to accomplish this end? They do well to inquire. These are questions of vital importance. But does it not occur to any of them, that their creed may require some modification? that the evils they so much deplore may be due, quite as much to the nature of the dogmas that are preached, as to the manner in which they are presented? Quite as much to the false light, in which the great Object of their worship is held up before them, as to the precise forms in which they are invited to worship Him?
Not that “the glorious Gospel of the blessed God” needs any modification; but is it not time to inquire whether all the human philosophy that is preached with it, is also from God, and a part of that Gospel? Whether all the errors, perversions, false interpretations, foolish conceits, and traditions, by which it was burdened in its transit through the dark ages, were fully exposed, and rejected in the Reformation, so that none of them remain, to weaken its power or dim its lustre, or check its progress in these last days? In short, whether there be not need of another reformation, to carry forward to a higher stage, the work which the Reformers of the sixteenth century began, and to do it more thoroughly, than they did not merely to lop off some more of the branches of this error, but to extirpate completely the error itself, which has so long hidden the glory of the Gospel, and fettered its progress in the world.
This apparent falling away, is not to be taken as an evidence that the Gospel has spent its force, and that Christianity is a decaying system, and must soon pass away and give place to some other form of religion, better adapted to meet the wants of a higher civilization; that a supernatural religion has had its day, and mast yield its place to one that is scientific and natural if to any; that the doctrines taught in the Bible are losing their hold on the hearts and consciences of men; that though answering very well for mankind in their state of childhood and ignorance, they are altogether too crude and imperfect to be received as the truth, in this age of scientific light and knowledge. No not this; but that the people are becoming more critical in their inquiry; What is Bible truth? and less willing to be controlled by human authorities, and the traditions of men that have been read into the Bible. They want a God to worship, whom they can love and trust, as well as fear, a Saviour o save them from a peril that is felt to be imminent, a religion whose sanctions are justified by the principles it inculcates.
However practicable it might once have been, it is no longer possible, to hold men to doctrines that contradict their intelligence, nor to views of God and His government that are repugnant to the sense of justice He has implanted within them. Christianity is the only religion that has ever had any tendency to lift men up from Kin and its degradation, and to fit them for the immortality that is set before them, through the Incarnation of a Divine Saviour. The Gospel of Christ, as it came from the lips of its Author, has lost none of its virtue or power.
It is as really adapted now to the wants of perishing men, as when first preached by Christ and His disciples. It is now, as then, the only hope of a lost world. It is still the power of God unto salvation, to every one that believeth, and there is salvation in no other name but that of Christ, the Giver of Eternal Life. But so long as men are assured of their indefeasible claim to this Eternal Life, without Him, they will have but little sense of their need of this Life-Giver, and but little fear that God, in His great mercy, will fail to find some way to save them from the consequences of their sins, in the life beyond, if not in this.
But what is “the great salvation,” that is offered us in the Gospel? What is it that constitutes it good news as the word imports to dying men? It is this That God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have Everlasting Life.” It is not that we are to be saved from suffering or dying. This is the common lot of all men, believers and unbelievers alike. We must all eat our bread in sorrow, all the days of our life, till we go down into Hades. Christ Himself as the Son of Adam went there but as the Son of God, He rose victorious over its power, by the Divine life that was in Him, and so shall- all His people, by the same Divine life -that new life which He shall give them.
But so long as the minds of men are occupied with the delusive hope of an immortality, already assured, the light of this glorious Gospel cannot shine into them in all its fullness and power. Christ Himself, though robbed of His chief glory as the only Giver of this Everlasting Life, may still receive the praises and admiration of men, as the kind, suffering, dying “Lamb of God.” But it is only as men are made to see, and feel that they must actually perish, without Him; that they have no substantial, enduring life in themselves, and can have no hope of its perpetuity hereafter, that they will earnestly seek Him as their Life-Giver and Saviour.
The real Gospel message is the proclamation of this Life, Life out of death Eternal Life to mortal not to immortal men through Jesus Christ its only Source. The grand distinction between the saint and the sinner, is not that the one is so much better than the other, that the saint is to be rewarded with eternal bliss, and the sinner is to be punished with eternal misery. The world cannot see any ground for such a distinction in them; nor can they be made to believe that there is any such distinction to be made, in the life to come.
But they can be made to see and feel, whenever their religious guides shall so teach them, that all men, since the fall, are naturally and inevitably mortal, whatever may be their moral character. It is only by a new birth, and a resurrection from the dead, through Christ, that any child of Adam can possess this imperishable life. It is imperishable because it is the Divine life imparted to the soul of man, by a new birth. This is the only life that is imperishable. Failing of this, no man has “the power of an endless life” within him.
The Church of Christ by encouraging natural men to expect an immortal life, that is assured only to the children of God, have obscured the main distinction between the regenerate and the unregenerate, have turned the sacrificial death of Christ into an unmeaning tragedy, and robbed the Gospel of the chief element of its excellence and power. This, we believe to be the prime cause of her want of success in urging it upon the world.
The doctrine of immortality, not by nature, but by a supernatural birth from above, is an offence to the natural man, who prides himself upon the nobility of his nature. But it is the truth of God, and credible as well as true, and affords no sinner any just occasion for reproaching his Maker. It is the doctrine of the Gospel, and the only Gospel that was known to the primitive disciples, or early Christians, till their faith was corrupted by the cunning of the great Deceiver, through Grecian philosophy that he might “strengthen the hands of the wicked, that he should not turn from his wicked way by promising him life.” (Ezekiel 13: 22.)
When the Church of Christ returns to the faith, from which she has been seduced, and holds forth again the simple truth, as it is in Jesus, there will be no difficulty in making men see and feel their perishing condition, and believing it, as they now do not, they will cry out, as under the preaching of Paul and Silas: “What must we do to be saved?” The Sanctuaries will again be crowded to hear “the words of this life.” The early missionary spirit will again revive, and Christians, at home and abroad, will labour with a zeal and faithfulness to save their perishing fellowmen, which can only be inspired and kept alive by a hearty belief, that they are actually going down to death, and unless they be rescued and saved before they die, they must perish utterly and forever.
Note. “The doctrine of Life in Christ is the key to the interpretation of Scripture. Read in this light, the Bible is a new book. The perplexities, the doubts, the surmising of God that would force their way, the dark, gloomy future, are all dispersed. This doctrine has made the Bible ten thousand times more precious to me than it was before; has made Christ more honoured, and the Great Father more loved.
“I no longer wonder that there should be fierce and inveterate opposition to the propagation of this grand doctrine. It was the very first truth which Satan sought to obscure and obliterate by the introduction into the Christian Church of a specious and false philosophy borrowed from Greece and Egypt, and first taught by himself to Eve in Eden. He will not so easily part with a philosophy which has enabled him to do his work so well. Views that cover God with the aspect of injustice, or alienate men’s minds from Him, or lead ten thousands to infidelity, or enable men to get rid altogether of the idea that sin is a fatal and destructive thing, will not be easily given up.
The doctrine that the soul is the true man, and that the soul is gifted with an inalienable immortality, brought in a mutilated shape into theology from the philosophy of Plato, has led to all this. It has led to Augustine’s exhibition of God as a being of revolting cruelty, and to the future of much of His world as displaying only the most intense and harrowing misery; it has lead to Origen’s excision of vengeance from among the Divine attributes, thereby opening the way to unbridled sin; it has led to the Roman purgatory, with all its attendant errors, as a refuge from what was felt to be too great a punishment to be inflicted by God upon ordinary offenders; it has raised against Scripture and the God of the Bible the derisive taunt and outcry of infidelity; it has caused the hearts of believers to mourn over a conduct on the part of God which they could not justify.
Altogether, no dogma whatever can be named which has been productive of one-half the evil consequences that the dogma of man’s inalienable immortality has produced. This is what we have gained by introducing into our theology under another name and under a specious disguise the old Manichaen heresy of the eternity of evil. I have no hesitation in saying that the eternity of evil as taught by the school of Augustine is a far greater slander upon the character of God than this same error as it was propounded by the Persian Manes. Manes supposed evil to be an eternal and essential part of the constitution of the Universe, the school of Augustine represents God as the perpetuator of evil by bestowing immortality upon the evil-doer. We cannot wonder that all the craft of the Arch-deceiver should be put forth to maintain such a doctrine as this. Nor are men at all ready to part with long- established opinions. The triumph of the doctrine of Life in Christ will produce a revolution in theology.
The standard works alike of the Reformed and the Roman churches are in a great measure based upon the idea of the inalienable immortality of man. The interpretation of Scripture takes it as its starting point. When this comes to be acknowledged as a mere human conceit, many admired commentaries, treatises, sermons, confessions of faith, will be Been to have been based, in great measure, upon a foundation of sand.
“But the truth will shine out the clearer for all this. To the truth we are ready to sacrifice a whole hecatomb of human writings; and the truth is spreading far and wide. In Great Britain it is spreading slowly but surely against prejudice and authority. In the United States it is spreading much more rapidly. From the Atlantic to the Pacific sea-board of the Great Republic, men of acute mind, who will not submit to the bidding of others no better able to judge than themselves, are examining the great question. I have little doubt of the result. I look forward, at no distant day to see the Christian mind shake off the false theology, founded on a mutilated Philosophy, and wonder that it could ever have submitted to it for a year or a day. “Preface to Duration and Nature of Future Punishment, Fifth Edition. H. Constable.
CHAPTER 4
The Teachings of Nature and Reason.
Our argument on the question of human immortality rests mainly, if not wholly, on the Word of God. This teaches us all we need to know, and, indeed, all we can know, with any certainty, of the destiny of man. It was given us for this express purpose. But as this great error, which we are controverting, makes its appeal to Nature and Reason, and appears to have its main force in what they are supposed to teach, we will consider, as briefly as we can, the arguments drawn from these sources, before proceeding to the examination of the Scriptures.
The Naturalist, looking at such facts as Nature presents, declares that he finds no evidence in them, that any man will live again after death. And from his standpoint, he is able to bring quite an array of reasons for his conclusion.
The sentimental Philosopher, on the other hand, reasoning from sentiment, and the natural instincts of man, concludes that man will never die at all; that what seems to be death, is only a change of state, one step, in his onward and upward development, toward perfection of being.
We learn from the Scriptures that there is something of truth in each of these two extremes. But without these Divine Oracles, we have no means of knowing just what this truth is, nor where it lies, nor how these two conflicting views are to be reconciled.
Scripture agrees with Science, in teaching, that man’s natural life, like that of all other living creatures, ends with death; it furthermore teaches, that there can be no hope of a second life, for any man, without a Divine, supernatural interposition, to raise him up again; and then going beyond the reach of all scientific research it shows us God’s method of restoring the dead to life, and of bestowing upon mortals the unspeakable gift of Eternal Life.
It also agrees with Philosophy in teaching, that God did originally, and does even now, design man for a never- ending life, and for this reason, He implanted the instinct of immortality within him; but it is for an immortality in holiness, and in harmony with Himself the Creator, and not in sin and rebellion against Him. It furthermore declares, that, unless man can be recovered from the doom of death, to which sin, when it is finished, inevitably leads, and reunited to God in holiness and love, he can have no fitness for this endless life, nor any hope of attaining to it.
We have no fault to find with Scientists or Philosophers as such. For without a Divine Revelation, they have no means of arriving at the ultimate truth on this question, which is only “brought to light in the Gospel.” But we do find fault with those so-called Christian Scientists and Philosophers, who, having the Gospel, so completely ignore its teachings, as to rest their conclusions, mainly if not entirely, on the findings of Science and Philosophy; and because, on the one hand, their analysis of matter gives no evidence of a future life, conclude there is none, in spite of the declaration of God’s Word; or, on the other, because they find in man the sentiments and instincts of a future life, conclude, not only that it is absolutely endless, but also, that it is the assured portion of every man, whatever his moral character may be, notwithstanding the declaration of God’s Word, that it is the portion only of the saved.
It seems strange, passing strange, that, when God Himself has spoken so clearly, and emphatically on this very subject, concerning which there is so much need of instruction, men professedly Christian, with His Word in their hands, should “turn away from Him that speaks from heaven” to the dubious oracles of earth, for wisdom, and be so ready to subordinate His authoritative teaching, to human speculation.
We cheerfully, and gladly accept of all the lessons of Nature and Reason, for just what they can teach, but for no more. We cannot allow them to control in the domain of spiritual things, into which they are unable to enter. In their own province, so far as they are correctly interpreted, they are in beautiful accord with the Oracles of God, but in all that is spiritual and supernatural, we must take His Word as our supreme and ultimate authority; and we must also insist, that it be so taken by all who, as professedly Christian men, undertake to argue with us, this question of human Immortality.
It is then rather for the sake of giving completeness to our view, and because it will be expected of us, and also, that we may show how imperfect and unreliable are all human sources of knowledge on this question, than because it seems really important, that we devote a few pages to what are supposed to be the teachings of Nature and Reason, before we proceed with the Scriptural argument.
1. The nature of the soul.
It is said, that, if the soul be “a simple, pure, un-compounded, unorganized entity,” then it must be indestructible and necessarily immortal. But who knows that such is the nature of the soul? It is a sheer assumption, without one particle of evidence to sustain it. The argument that is founded on it amounts simply to this: If the soul be indestructible, it is indestructible. If it be immortal, it is immortal. But the assumption leads to a broader conclusion. The logical mind of Plato saw it, and therefore he concluded, that the soul, if such be its nature, could have had no beginning, and likewise will have no end; that man, so far as his soul is concerned, is an uncreated being; that when a child is born, an immortal soul enters his body, and when he dies, it goes out again, either to enter some other body, or to exist in a ghostly state forever; and that the number of such souls is eternally the same, neither being increased by new births, nor diminished by deaths. But Christian men, who cannot but admit that God created man, and that he has a definite beginning, by rejecting the former part of the conclusion, have vitiated the latter part; because both parts must go together. For it is evident that what had a beginning, may have an end; and what has been created, may be uncreated. If the soul of man is not of such a nature as to exclude the idea of its creation, it certainly is not of such a nature, as to save it from possible destruction.
“It must indeed be confessed that the argument of the immaterialist, as sometimes conducted, if pushed to its consequences, would go near to imply the immortality of birds, beasts and fishes, of insects and of zoophytes! . . Why should that which is immaterial, be indestructible? None can tell us; and on the contrary, we are free to suppose that there may be immaterial orders, enjoying their hour of existence and then returning to nothing.” Physical Theory of Another Life, chapter 20. Isaac Taylor,
But granting the assumption, that the soul is “a simple, pure, un-compounded, unorganized substance or entity,” and that it has a beginning; the question arises: When is that beginning? Are souls made beforehand, and kept in readiness to meet human demands? or, are they made to order, and put into the child’s body at birth, or at some period before or after birth? We press this question upon those who hold that the soul is an entity separate and separable from the body and in dependent of it. It is not an idle question; but is one that is important for them to consider. If they are unable to answer it, let them tell, at least, if they can, whether it be a full grown, mature, responsible soul, at the outset, or does it grow in strength and maturity, with the body? The former supposition would be fatuous, and lead to the absurd conclusion, that new-born infants are equally responsible, for their moral exercises and acts, with adults. If they take the latter supposition, then we would ask them to tell us, why the soul may not fall, as well as rise and grow with the body; how can they show, that the soul does not follow the fortunes of the body, but is, as they would have us believe, independent of it?
Let them show, how it is possible for such “a simple, pure, un-compounded, unorganized entity” to carry on all the varied and complex operations of thought, feeling and action within the body and independent of it; or at least, let them show that it is possible.
If they shall admit, on the other hand, that the soul is an organism then, it may be disorganized, and like all other organisms, its functional or organic action ceases, when the organism is broken up. But if they still insist that the soul is “a simple, unorganized entity,” they must admit, that a bodily organism is necessary to the exercise of its functions. If the soul had no conscious life or activity, till it is united with the body, what evidence is there to show, that it can maintain its individual life, and fulfil its functions, after the bodily organization is destroyed?
There is every evidence possible in the nature of the case, to show, that the body is as necessary to the soul, as the soul is to the body; and that they are mutually dependent on each other. An injury to the brain, through which the soul is supposed to act, affects the soul likewise; it may cause insanity, it may cause insensibility, until the injury is repaired; it may cause death. Is it reasonable to suppose, that while an injury to the brain that is not fatal, injuriously affects the soul to the same extent, an injury that is still greater that is fatal does not injuriously affect its consciousness and activity at all, but only gives it greater freedom of action and feeling?
The fact is, the whole argument for the immortality of man founded on the nature of his soul, rests upon a pure assumption, and will not bear investigation. The only difficulty in meeting it, is the same that applies to any other idle fancy; there is nothing solid to argue against. It can be only a waste of words between us, and those who hold it, to argue it further, till they can show that it has something beside a mere guess to sustain it.
Note. The reader is referred to Lockers Essay on the Human Understanding: in which arguing against the assumption of the necessary immateriality of the soul, he says “that in respect to our notions, it is not much more remote from our comprehension to conceive that God can, if He pleases, superadd to our idea of matter a faculty of thinking, than that He should superadd to it another substance, with the faculty of thinking.” “To say that God cannot give to matter a faculty of thinking, is to say God’s omnipotence is limited to a narrow compass, because man’s understanding is so; and brings down God’s infinite power to the size of our capacities.” “lf one allows brutes to have sensation, it will follow either that God can and both live to some parcels of matter a power of perception and thinking; or that all animals have immaterial, and consequently, according to your lordship (the Bishop of Worcester), immortal souls as well as men; and to say that fleas and mites, etc., have immortal souls as well as men, will possibly be looked on as going a great way to serve an hypothesis.” Book 4, chapter 3.
2. The capacities and capabilities of Man.
The argument from the nature of the soul, which we have just considered, so far as there is any argumentative force in it, would seem to be as applicable to brutes as to men. This our opponents are constrained to admit; but they tell us, there is this distinction to be observed; that, while the brute seems to reach the limit of his capacity, man is cut short in the midst of his career; that he is capable of infinite improvement and progress, and, that it is reasonable to suppose, that an opportunity will be given him for further development and progress, in another life. Granting all this, we are not to assume, as too many do, that such a future life, would, of necessity, be an endless life. Eternal existence is a mystery, which no finite mind can fathom. What changes may come; what worlds and systems of worlds, teeming with life, may yet be created, and pass away, to give place to others; what aeons, and cycles of aeons may follow each other, in their perpetual round, throughout the infinite future, who can know, but the infinite Creator Himself?
Reason cannot assure us, that there is no possible limit in the endless future to human development and progress; much less, can it assure us, that this development and progress would be forever maintained, in the case of every one, who might be started on such a career. We are not to assume, that everything that is created will surely reach the utmost limit of its capacity. Indeed, we know it is not so. The brutes that are supposed to be limited in their capacities, are often cut short in the midst of their career, before they have reached that limit. Trees are often blighted and destroyed, before they are half grown. Flowers are nipped in the bud. The promise of fruitage is not always realized. And who shall assure us, that man shall escape all the dangers that threaten his opening life, and reach the farthest possible goal or rather go on forever without reaching any goal?
But it is not true that everyone continues in a course of development and progress, to the end even of his present life. There are multitudes who, apparently, reach the summit of their powers, both physical and intellectual, even before they come to the end of their course, and then go down, as they came up, into feebleness and decay and death. There are many who have no higher aim in life, than the beasts that perish, whose only inquiry is, “ What shall we eat, and what shall we drink, and where withal shall we be clothed?” And with these wants gratified, they become as stupid and indifferent to all higher wants, as the brutes themselves.
Yea, there are many, whose development is actually downward, toward that which is low and grovelling; whose thoughts, whose aims, whose desires and pleasures are all carnal and beastly; and who go down from one degree of sottish sinful life to another, till they sink far below the level, even of decent brutes, and die of very rottenness. Their lights go out in darkness. What reason have we to suppose, that they are lighted up again to shine forever? What are they fit for, but to be burned? Indeed, observation, to say nothing of Scripture, teaches us that the number who lay any solid foundation for permanent progress hereafter, is comparatively few.
It is a law of God’s providence, which even Nature, as well as Revelation teaches, that “to every one that hath, shall be given and he shall have abundance; but, from him that hath not, that is, improves not what is given him, shall be taken away even that he hath.”
Faculties that are mis-improved, or not improved at all, cannot be preserved; they fall into imbecility and decay. Not merely God’s Word, but Reason and Nature urge us, with ten thousand voices to the wise improvement of what we have, if we would gain more, or even keep what we have. This is as true of man’s intellectual and moral, as of his physical nature. The mind that is uncultivated becomes stupid and drivelling; also, the heart dies in its selfish confinement, if not drawn out toward some object that is worthy of its love. We are not constituted for the exercise of evil passions, but only for the exercise of those that are pure and lovely. We are out of harmony with the world about us, and with our own selves, when we fall under the power of evil passions and desires, or when those that are normally good are abused by excessive indulgence. We are like a machine that is out of order; the tendency is to entire dissolution and ruin. Evil passions within the soul, like disease in the body, tend to corrode, corrupt and destroy.
We are taught by observation, as well as by Revelation, that “Evil shall slay the wicked,” but “the righteous shall hold on his way, and he that hath clean hands shall be stronger and stronger.” It is only as one rises toward that which is good and true and perfect, that he acts in harmony with his own nature, or can have any assurance that his progress will be stable and permanent.
3. Human Instincts and Aspirations.
We are told that men love life and cling to it, and that they naturally shrink back from death. All this is very true. But it is not true of man only. All animals have an instinct of life. This is needful to its preservation. This instinct gives no more assurance of its perpetuity in the one case than in the other. But it is urged, that it is something more than a mere instinct in man; it is a sentiment that reaches forward into the future, and is never able to find its full satisfaction in any present attainment, nor to rest content in any present possession.
It is true, man was not made to be satisfied with the good that comes from the possession of material things, nor with the gratification of his physical wants. He was intended for higher things, and made capable of them. But what if he will not seek them? What if he knows not where to find this higher good; or if he knows, what if he has no desire to seek it? What if he closes his ears to the voice of true wisdom, and persists in seeking his highest gratification in those things which can only increase his thirst, but never satisfy it? Is God beholden to give him ultimate and perpetual happiness in whatever way he shall choose to seek it, or whether he shall use such light as he may have in seeking it.
“It is sometimes said that the intense longings we have for immortality, prove that man is immortal. That there are such longings I do not dispute; nor do I dispute that they come from God’s Spirit. But I have yet to learn that to long for a thing proves the possession of it. The very fact of longing for a thing implies that we have it not. Still this longing docs prove that we are capable of immortality and may obtain it if we set to work in the right manner. It seems to me that God very graciously puts into our breasts this unceasing longing for immortality to make us reflecting men; to induce us to inquire about it, from the only Book that can teach us right concerning it; to induce us to seek it, and when we get it to hold it fast.” Immortality in Christ, Reverend H. S. Wakleigh.
Indeed, it might be presumed, that the Creator would make known to man the way of attaining to the true end of his being, and supply him with the means necessary thereto. We might further suppose that, having wandered from this way, or having lost it through folly or sin. He would, in His great mercy, show him the way of return, and “devise means that His banished be not expelled from Him.” This is just what He has done in the Gospel.
But the Gospel is not a scheme of compulsion. It is good news to the lost and perishing. It is a message of invitation, of exhortation, of entreaty, yea of command; but it is addressed to voluntary agents. What if man will not listen to this message of mercy? What if he has no relish for the kind of good it offers him? What if he prefers those gratifications that are sensual and transitory? How shall his higher nature be satisfied or saved from perishing?
Those to whom the Gospel has never been given might, perhaps, be excused for fancying in their blindness, that they would reach the goal of their hopes in whatever direction they might seek it, or whether they should seek it or not; but how can those who have this Gospel so misread it, as to suppose that all the good, it promises to the obedient, the diligent, the faithful, will be given unconditionally to those who are not obedient, or diligent or faithful? and that the highest of all boons, the gift of an endless life, will be bestowed upon all men indiscriminately, whether they are fitted to enjoy it or not? And yet Christian men, and even ministers, so called, of the Gospel of Christ, do so reason, in their efforts to prove the immortality of man on the ground of his natural instincts. Reverend Joseph Cook says in his positive way, “Man is an organized lie,” if this greatest of all gifts is not bestowed upon him. If he means by this, that God’s truth could not be justified, if He had not designed man for immortality, and made it possible for man to attain to it, it is just what we all believe and teach, and what God’s Word declares. It is too evident to require any such oracular assertion. But if he means, what his whole argument implies, and what he evidently intends to be understood as teaching: That God is equally beholden to the good and bad alike, to give them what they most desire, it is the rankest sort of Universalism.
But more than this what if man shall defy the wrath of the Almighty by rebelling against Him? What if he shall despise His laws, and trample His ordinances under foot, and scorn His overtures of mercy? Is there no such thing as destruction under the government of heaven? Has God made the life of man so sacred, that He cannot take it away Himself? Is there no death penalty attached to His laws? Is it reserved for human governments alone to take the life of incorrigible offenders; and must the Almighty Ruler content Himself with imprisoning and tormenting His enemies forever and ever, because He gave them, in the outset, a life which he could not take away? Neither Reason nor Nature teaches any such doctrine; and what is more, Revelation flatly contradicts it.
4. The Analogy of Nature.
The natural world is thought to give many unmistakable hints of a future life for man. The revival of vegetation in the Spring, after the torpor of winter; the shooting up of the fresh germ from the seed, that has been buried in the ground; the transformation of the crawling grub into the winged butterfly, as it bursts from its winding sheet in the chrysalis; the awakening from sleep after the rest of the night; all these, and other processes of nature are taken as symbols of the resurrection from the dead to an immortal life. Let us take them for all they teach; and when enlightened by Revelation, we shall find in them many beautiful and important lessons. But there is nothing supernatural in any of these changes. They are all natural processes of life in its different stages. There is no actual death in any of them. The tree or the plant that actually dies, does not revive in the Spring.
Seed that is actually dead will not sprout up and grow. The grub, when it passes into the chrysalis state does not die. It only becomes dormant. If it were to die, the pupa would not live again. Sleep, though it be called the Sister of Death, is only such in appearance. If it were real death there would be no awaking, but only corruption and dissolution. Hence the inquiry of Job, “If a man die shall he live again?” is not answered by any of these processes. “Man dies and wastes away, yea, man gives up the ghost and where is he?” Nature does not answer this question by any of her analogies. It is answered only by Divine Revelation. The Resurrection of the dead is not a natural process. It is altogether abnormal and miraculous.
Those who undertake to argue the natural immortality of man from these natural processes of life in its different stages, confuse their minds by misinterpreting them, and instituting false analogies.
“So striking is the analogy between these metamorphoses and reanimation of man, that many able writers on Natural theology have considered them as direct proof of his future resurrection. But unfortunately there is one defect in the analogy, that seems to have been overlooked. When man is laid in the grave, we know that no vestige of life remains. We may inflict whatever injury we please upon the dead body, but it will exhibit no signs of sensibility. But not so with the chrysalis. In its most torpid state, you can always find marks of vitality, or rather, if you cannot discover signs of life, it will never come forth as a perfect insect The conclusion, therefore, is, that the curious facts respecting insect metamorphosis, although a beautiful emblem of man’s resurrection, are but a poor argument in direct proof of the doctrine.” The Resurrection of Spring by Professor Edward Hitchcock.
Paul’s reference to the sowing of seed and the springing up of new plants, when arguing the resurrection of the dead, in 1 Corinthians 15th, is not to substantiate the fact of a resurrection; for he expressly declares it to be a supernatural event. It is to illustrate the greatness of the change and the power by which it is effected. The plant that furnishes the seed, is not raised, as in the case of the man that is buried. Mankind, as well as animals and plants are propagated in this way; but the identical animals and plants are not reproduced; nor if they were dead could they furnish even the seed for the propagation of other animals and plants. The question is not; Shall the race of mankind, or shall the same genus or species of plants be continued in their successors; but shall the individuals themselves live again after they are dead? and shall they live forever?
But our inquiry, it should be remembered, is not simply concerning another life, but concerning the endless- ness of that life. Here the analogy fails altogether; for the life that is reproduced in these processes, is no more permanent than the original life. We are not to presume that all future life is necessarily interminable. The question then recurs, “Is man destined to an endless existence, or an endless series of existences beyond this life? and is this true of every man?”
On the contrary, so far as these analogies show anything on this subject, they show the very doctrine for which we are contending, the doctrine of a conditional immortality. It is not every tree that revives in the Spring, but only such as have a living root. It is not every seed that germinates; but only such as have a vital principle in them. So also we contend, it is not every man that rises to an immortal life, but only those who have the true life in them.
Let us consider well the illustration so often employed, of the change of the grub into the butterfly. It is not every pupa or grub that has gone into the chrysalis that rises into the winged butterfly, when the time for this change comes; but only such as are fitted for it. Naturalists tell us, that grubs, caterpillars and larvae, and Lepidoptera generally, are quite liable to fail of development into the second stage, through injuries received in this first stage of life. Every one of these crawling grubs is said to carry within its first body an embryo butterfly, or psyche as it is called in Greek (the very term by which the human soul is designated), upon which little ichneumon flies often prey, without doing any apparent injury to the grub in its first stage. It fulfils its natural larva life, like all other grubs of its kind, wraps itself in its winding sheet, and goes into the chrysalis state, in the hope as it were, of rising, in due time as a butterfly. But this hope is never realized. It goes to corruption, and utterly perishes; for the butterfly or psyche within, was destroyed while in its embryo, in the first stage. This winged or lepidopterous state is reserved for those, and those only that carry with them to the end, this embryo psyche uninjured and fit for its resurrection life.
The parallel seems perfect. If it does not foretoken and teach the doctrine of conditional immortality, or the immortality only of the righteous that is, of those who are fitted for it, as we maintain, then it is impossible for Nature to teach any Scriptural doctrine by analogy.
CHAPTER 5
The Natural and Rational Argument. (Continued.)
“It is very becoming that men’s zeal for the truth should go as far as their proofs, but not go for the proofs themselves. He that received opinions with anything but fair arguments, may, I own, be justly suspected not to mean well, nor be led by the love of truth; but the same may be said of him, too, who so defends them. An error is not the better for being common, nor truth the worse for having lain neglected; and if it were put to the vote anywhere in the world, I doubt, as things are managed, whether truth would have the majority, at least whilst the authority of men, and not the examination of things must be its measure.” Essay concerning the Human Understanding. John Locke.
V. The doctrine of the Natural Immortality of Man is supposed to find support in the general belief of Mankind. The advocates of this doctrine are accustomed to rely much on this argument, in discussing this question. They have so commonly, and so confidently assumed it to be a fact, that mankind have generally believed in the personal immortality of the individual, that most persons have supposed it must be so. We would cheerfully concede it to them, and whatever advantage they might draw from it if any in this argument, if it were true.
Indeed, in some of our earlier writings, trusting too much to the assertions of others, we did concede this; but a more careful study of the various religious notions of the world at large, has convinced us that it is a mistake. This has not been the general belief of the heathen world. But on the contrary, so far as they have had any thought or belief on this subject, it has been to a large extent just the opposite of this. If there be any advantage in this argument, in citing the vague notions of mankind unenlightened by revelation, it would certainly inure to our side of the question.
It is true, that dim and fluctuating ideas of some sort of a future state of rewards and punishments are quite common to all men, who think at all on this subject. They are suggested by the unequal distribution of good and evil in this life; by the moral sense with which their Creator has endowed them, and perhaps also, by the tradition of a divine revelation to the fathers of our race after the fall, and which, though vaguely given at first, and sadly obscured and perverted by superstition, has never been entirely lost to the world.
But the idea of a future state, for the purpose of rewards and punishments is quite different from that of an endless existence hereafter. The idea of a second life does not exclude that of a second death, and final extinction of being, even for those who are rewarded hereafter, much less for those who are punished. Those who have argued this question, have not been careful to distinguish between the sentiment of a future, which is indefinite and one which is absolutely infinite. It is very common to confuse these two ideas, though they are, in fact, radically distinct. The Word of God evidently points to a future, even for the wicked; but it is a future that is terminated by a death, from which there is no recall.
And yet men leap, at once, to the conclusion that, if there be any future whatever for the wicked, it must be an eternal future. So they interpret the Scriptures as teaching their endless conscious existence in suffering in a future state. In the same way they interpret, or rather misinterpret, the notions of the heathen in regard to the future.
These two ideas, or assumptions underlie the whole argument of Mr. Alger’s plethoric and Anti-Christian volume, on the Doctrine of a Future Life; that to believe in any future life is to believe in one that is endless, and that if it is the lot of any portion of the race, it is of course the lot of all. Hence he almost, if not entirely ignores the doctrine of a limited life, or a conditional immortality which has always been held, not only by those who interpret the Scriptures literally, but also by multitudes on multitudes throughout the pagan world.
The ancient Hebrews had no idea of the natural immortality of any one; nor any hope of living again, excepting through the Almighty power of God in raising the dead; and as for the wicked, their lot was death and utter destruction.
The ancient Egyptians, who were more nearly in accord with the Hebrews in their religious notions than other races from whom they were more widely separated, seem to have believed in the resurrection of the bodies of the dead, and also in the final destruction of the wicked their actual extinction of being after having been sufficiently punished.
So far as there is any consistency in the old Grecian mythology, it gives us no warrant for thinking that the ancient Greeks believed, either in the endless enjoyment of their fabulous Elysium, or in the endless torment of Tartaros; nor indeed, have we any evidence that the masses had any sincere belief in any existence whatever beyond this life. One of their own poets, in lamenting the death of a friend says:
“The meanest herb we trample in the field, Or in the garden nurture; when its leaf
In Autumn dies, forebodes another Spring, And from brief slumber wakes to life again.
Man wakes no more! Man, peerless, valiant, wise, Once chilled by death, sleeps hopeless in the dust, A long, unbroken, never-ending sleep. ‘
(Moschus Epit. Bion.)
Socrates is represented by Plato as complaining, that “men in general are highly incredulous as to the soul’s future existence,” and of the impossibility of convincing them to the contrary. Indeed, he was put to death for his peculiar religious and philosophical heresies.
In the poems of our Teutonic ancestors, the pleasures of the blessed in the halls of Odin, are represented as continuing long, but as finally coming to an end:
“When Lok shall burst his seven-fold chain, And Night resume her ancient reign.”
The highest goal to which the pious Hindu aspires, is absorption into the universal spirit, or in other words, the complete loss of all individual existence; and the chief ultimate good for which the many millions of Buddhists seek, is Nirvana or utter extinction of conscious, personal being.
In fact the majority of our race in pagan lands have always been too degraded and brutish to seek or desire anything beyond the satisfaction of their present animal wants. It is only upon the more immediate future, that
the few, the very few who have speculated on a life beyond, have fixed their thoughts. Nor have we any good reason to think, that their poets and philosophers who have given free reins to their imagination, for the amusement of the people, or the statesmen, who have taxed their ingenuity to devise means to support their authority, by working upon the fears of their subjects, have sincerely believed what they taught to others. Varro says: “There are many truths which it is not expedient that the vulgar should know, and many falsehoods which
it is expedient that the people should receive as truths.”
Gibbon, in his Decline and Fall says: “With the people they (these teachings in regard to the future) were equally true, with the philosopher, equally false, and with the statesmen, equally necessary.”
Archbishop Whately, in his Essay on the Future State shows conclusively that a belief in any life hereafter, so far from being general among the ancient heathen nations, was not the serious belief of even the poets and philosophers, who put forth their speculations and fancies in regard to it. It was thought necessary, for prudential reasons, to impose them so far as possible, upon the masses, but among themselves, they laughed at the credulity of those who believed in the fables they taught them. He further says:
“In reality the doctrine never was either generally admitted among the ancient philosophers, nor satisfactorily proved by any of them, even in the opinion of those who argued in favour of it. Let it be remembered, then, when the arguments of the heathen sages are triumphantly brought forward in proof of the soul’s immortality, that when they countenanced the doctrine of future retribution, they taught with a view to political expediency, what they did not themselves believe; and that when they spoke their real sentiments on the subject, the eternity of existence, which they expected, as it implied the destruction of all distinct personality, amounted practically to nothing.”
It is doubtful whether even Plato, who went more deeply into this question than any of them, and whose philosophy has been so thoroughly incorporated into the Christian system, understood the aeons or so-called “eternities” of which he spoke, to extend beyond what is termed “the Platonic year” a period of six thousand suns.
In fact, it is principally, if not only, under the Christian system modified, as it has been by the philosophy of Plato, that this doctrine of the actual, personal immortality of all men an immortality of blessedness for the righteous and an immortality of sin and suffering for the wicked has found general acceptance.
VI. It is thought by many that this cannot he an err or else the goodness of God would not have suffered it to take root and prevail as it has especially in Christian lands. How is it possible, it is asked, that God should have permitted learned and good men to be so misled, in regard to so important a doctrine as this? This inquiry would seem to apply with more force to the question in hand, if no other error had ever taken root, and prevailed in the Church, and in the world.
See note at the end of this chapter.
But the religious history of the world is a history of error and delusion from the very beginning. Even in Paradise, the very first fact that is recorded of our first parents is that of their deception and that, too, in regard to this very question of immortality. From that time to this, the vast majority of the human family have been given over as Paul tells us in Romans 1 to the most erroneous, distorted and abominable ideas of God, and of their relations to Him. And even His own chosen people, selected and separated from the world at large, that He might train them to better views of the truth, are seen continually lapsing into the false notions of the heathen nations that surrounded them. The career of the Christian Church, from the days of the Apostles to the Reformation, has been one of apostasy, heresies and corruption. The repeated warnings of our Lord to His disciples, to “beware of the tradition of the elders,” to “beware of the leaven of the Pharisees” who, by the way, were Platonists on this very question and the earnest exhortation of the Apostles in their Epistles to the early Christians, show us the tendency there is, even among true disciples, toward error and the danger of falling into it.
Peter says, in his Second Epistle: “There were false prophets among the people (in the days of Moses), even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bringing upon themselves swift destruction; and many shall follow their pernicious ways, by reason of whom, the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.” Alas, how true his words have proved! Paul, foreseeing this very error, writes to the Corinthians, “I fear lest by any means, as the Serpent beguiled Eve, through his subtly, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.” And again, in writing to Timothy, he says: “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts, shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears, and shall turn away their ears from the truth, and be turned unto fables.”
Since the Reformation of the sixteenth century, in view of the prevalence of such a vast and increasing number of sects, each contending for its own peculiar notions and even more earnestly than they contend for the doctrines they hold in common, we cannot suppose that the Church of Christ has yet got beyond the possibility of error. And still further, when we come to inquire into the history of these various creeds, and to learn how they have been made and see how they are transmitted from generation to generation, and how few there are who care to search for doctrinal truth at the Fountain Head, and fewer still the number of those who dare to compromise their standing in the Church in which they have been educated, by differing from their associates on any popular doctrine, and how intolerant and unfair, even those who are otherwise very good men, are toward others that are equally good, who may honestly differ from them on any point of doctrine, our respect for mere human authority upon speculative questions, is very much weakened.”
In regard to any fact that can be observed, the testimony of intelligent witnesses is to be respected, and the greater the number of such credible witnesses, the stronger the evidence in its favour. But even in regard to facts, how often has the careful observation of some individual shown, that the multitude who have gone before him were mistaken? But in regard to matters of speculation, the guess or opinion of one man, however positive he maybe, is no better than that of another; nor is its authoritative value increased by the number of followers he may draw after him. Popularity gives no more force to any speculative opinion, than there is force in the reason on which it is founded. The strength of a chain that hangs insecurely, cannot be increased by adding to the number of its links; nor does a traditional opinion gather any real increase of authority, from the number of generations through which it has come down to us. No time-piece can be depended on as giving the true time, however perfect its workmanship, unless we know it to have been set by a true standard. If the town clock be wrong, it is none the less wrong, though all the time-pieces in the town have been set by it; and yet, their united testimony might seem to countervail that of any single time-piece that should differ from them, though it were the only one actually correct.
See note on the New Congregational creed at the end of Chapter 10.
An incident, exactly in point, occurs to the writer while penning these paragraphs. Happening to compare his watch with the clock of his host, he noticed a wide discrepancy between the two; but when his host assured him that the clock was an excellent time-keeper, and must be right, he began to fear that his own watch might be at fault. To prove the correctness of the clock, the host took out his own watch, and found that it agreed exactly with his clock. Here two witnesses against one was still stronger evidence against the writer’s watch, and it might have been accepted as proof conclusive that it was wrong, had he not taken the pains to inquire still further, when he found, that the clock had run down and stopped, during the night, and the cook had set it by guess, and then, the host had in confidence turned his own watch to agree with it. Now, had all the guests in the house set their time-pieces by this standard, the evidence against the writer’s watch would have been apparently overwhelming, but in fact, it would have been of no more real value than the opinion of the cook.
This is just the case with many of the most popular errors and delusions that have been current in the world. They are specious and plausible enough to gain the credence of those who do not inquire; but when one inquires into their origin and history, he finds that they have no foundation in truth.
This is the case with this wide-spread and popular error of universal immortality. It is so agreeable to the wishes of man, and so flattering to his pride, that it is well calculated to be popular. The natural and Scriptural arguments in its favour, may be so marshalled, as to give an air of plausibility to it, but when one inquires into its origin and history, he finds the arguments for it altogether specious and unreliable, and that it has no better authority to rest upon, than the assurances of the Tempter, “Ye shall not surely die,” to which the conceits and speculations of poets and philosophers and schoolmen, who have adopted the suggestion, add no weight whatever; nor has it any real force, in the face of the most positive declaration of God’s Word to the contrary.
“Unless we are prepared to accept as true the dogma of transubstantiation, to which it must be admitted, the recorded words of Christ do give some colour, as well as the doctrine of the Papal primacy, of which the same thing may be said unless, I say we are ready to receive these doctrines as true, because the church at large did for centuries hold them with all but universal consent, we must allow that our Lord knowing all things which should happen, may have purposely used language, upon this point (eternal misery) which He foresaw, might very possibly, for a season, be misunderstood, with a view to the far-off day when a clearer light would dawn, and the true meaning of His word shine forth. May it not be that the very ambiguity of the words, their capability of various interpretations, was intended to serve a beneficent purpose? There was a long reach of time in the history of the Church, during which the belief generally held with reference to eternal fire was that it would literally scorch and torture the flesh. We need not be too hasty in concluding that even this gross misinterpretation of Christ’s words was a calamity. Who shall say that the rough peoples, the savage races to which the gospel was then being carried, could in any other way have been made to feel the terrible reality of retribution in the world to come; could any otherwise have been persuaded to look forward to that retribution as a thing to fear?” Conditional Immortality. Sermon 4, on Matthew 25: 46. William R. Huntington, D.D.
VII. The supposed utility of this doctrine is thought to recommend it to our favour.
The doctrine of Immortality only in Christ is objected to by many good people, not because it would displease them to find it true, but from fear of the consequences of its promulgation. They think the doctrine of the eternal misery of the unsaved, in the belief of which they have been educated, is necessary to restrain men from sin, and to bring them to repentance. We greatly respect their pious anxiety for the maintenance of God’s government, and fully sympathize with them in their desire to bring sinners to accept of the salvation offered in the Gospel. We also agree with them in holding to the truism, that God’s Law, like every other law, must have a penalty, and one, too, that answers to the offence, and that the Gospel will never be anything but foolishness to those who neither feel nor fear the evils from which it would deliver them. It is not that we desire to weaken the motives of the Law or of the Gospel, that we are opposing this dogma of immortality in sin and suffering, but rather to restore to them the power they once had, and are evidently losing under this false teaching. It is the advocates of this false doctrine not ourselves who are weakening the influence of both the Law and Gospel, and bringing them into contempt by proclaiming a doctrine which they sincerely hope may not be true after all; and by endeavouring to make sinners receive it, and act in view of it, when they scarcely believe it themselves. Their mistake is, in supposing that there can be no doctrine of future punishment but that which they have received by tradition from the Papal Church; that to deny this, is to deny all future punishment. They seem to suppose that God has no other way of magnifying his holy Law and making it honourable, but to threaten all transgressors with eternal torment.
But is there nothing dreadful in the thought of being excluded from the kingdom of heaven and all its joys forever? of being counted unfit to live anywhere? of having one’s “ name blotted out of the Book of Life”? of being absolutely and forever destroyed from among God’s creatures, and forgotten by them? Is there nothing terrible in the prospect of a second deaths from which there is no resurrection? Is there no such thing possible under the government of God as capital punishment? Is this sort of punishment practicable only under human government? And as brutal rulers sometimes impose additional tortures upon their victims, and protract their agonies in dying as long as possible must this be the method employed by our Almighty Ruler eternally protracting them in the case of all the unsaved, that He may give dignity and honour to His Law and government?
So tyrants have reasoned and practiced, citing the Divine Example as their authority for all the fiendish tortures they have chosen to inflict on the victims of their wrath, fancying, perhaps, that they were giving force and strength to their government. But this inhuman practice, with the reasoning that sustained it, so far as civil polity is concerned, has had its day. A more enlightened and human system of penal jurisprudence is taking the place of the old barbarian codes that were once in vogue, and is beginning to prevail, everywhere, at least throughout the civilized world; and this, too, with manifest advantage to justice and good government.
* Burnet quotes “Bloody Mary,” the persecuting queen of England, who burned alive so many of her best subjects during her short reign, as saying, “ As the souls of heretics are hereafter to be eternally burning in hell, there can be nothing more proper than for me to imitate the Divine vengeance by burning them on earth.”
But in theology the old theory lingers, the theodicy of the dark ages still keeps its place in the creeds of the Christian Church. The Deity must be represented, not as simply just, but as infinitely vengeful and cruel. He must not withdraw the life He gave from those whom He cannot save. He must not even let them perish in their own corruption. This would be dangerous leniency. He must keep them in being forever, and inflict upon them perpetual wrath to all eternity. At any rate, He must be represented as threatening to do this, and sinners must be made if possible to believe it. And then, in order to free Him, somewhat from so foul an aspersion, so that men can love and trust Him, it is vaguely hinted, that perhaps, after all. He will not execute these threatening, but that His infinite love will find some way, not yet revealed, of rescuing His children from so dreadful a doom. Is this the way to magnify the Law of God and make it honourable? Must He be represented as more tyrannical and cruel than the worst of pagan gods, that men may fear to sin against Him, and then as insincere and too good to fulfil his threatening, that men may love and trust Him? Or must we apologize for Him, as many do, under the plea that He cannot help Himself; for He has made a horde of creatures whom He can neither govern, nor destroy, for He made them unconditionally indestructible in the outset; and the best He can possibly do is to imprison them and keep them in eternal misery!!!
We do not so understand the truth. We sympathize most fully with our opponents in the end they would secure; but we believe there is no more effectual way of defeating it, than the method they pursue. If there is any one doctrine of the Word of God more distinctly revealed than another, and one that ought to be preached without a peradventure, it is the doctrine of a future retribution of the absolutely remediless, hopeless condition of those who persistently reject an offered Saviour of the eternal and irreversible distinction that will be made between the saved and the lost. But the sanctions of God’s law are sufficiently impressive without any human additions. If there be no power in the threat of death and everlasting destruction, or in the offer of eternal life, through a crucified Saviour, to move the heart of the sinner, the preacher cannot hope to make them effective by any false colouring of his own. He loses vastly more than he gains by attempting to exalt the judicial character of God at the expense of His goodness, on the one hand, or of His truth, on the other. The sinner must believe that God is just, as well as terrible in His judgment, and that He will be as true to all His threatening, as to His promises. But in order to this, the threatening must appear to be just. Fear without conviction of sin, will never lead to repentance. Men may be shocked and horrified by terrible descriptions of the ceaseless, hopeless agonies of the lost, till every true sentiment of their moral natures revolts against the monstrous injustice and cruelty of Him who they are told will inflict them. They may be driven to madness, as they often are, by such preaching; but all this has no tendency to produce conviction of sin, or penitence, or love. Those who have relied the most on this kind of preaching and exhortations have not been the most successful in bringing men to embrace the Gospel, nor in strengthening the Church of Christ.
It will be time enough to insist on this style of harangue, when it shall be shown to have had any other effect than that of hardening men’s hearts, and alienating them from the religion that sanctions it.
Certainty of conviction and punishment is a much more important element in the prevention of crime, than any threatened severity with the probability of escape. There may be a kind of restraint, for a time, exercised over low and grovelling natures through the use of terror; but it soon exhausts itself. Its ultimate effect is to degrade, demoralize, and harden the heart. Yea with some, it operates as a kind of incentive to lawlessness, under a spirit of bravado. It is found to be a better policy even under human governments, to endeavour to control men by appealing to their moral sentiments, to make them feel that the penalties of law are just and necessary, and that they are not inflicted in hatred, but in pity and sorrow; but, that nevertheless, they will be surely inflicted. This is especially true as regards the Divine Law that requires the heart of the sinner, as well as his external obedience. A religion without confidence and love, is little better than no religion. It is a sense of God’s goodness that leads men to repentance, if they ever do repent. They may be made Christians in name the world is full of such a servile conformity to the outward forms of religion may be secured by operating on their fears, or by presenting selfish considerations, they may be somewhat restrained from open acts of sin; but they cannot be made real Christians; they cannot be made truly obedient; they cannot be made pure and holy in this way.
What now, if men shall outgrow their early fears? What if they shall begin to suspect that they have been deceived? that their real danger has been grossly misrepresented, in order “to catch them by guile”? A reaction is sure to follow. Both the Law and the Gospel will fall into contempt, and they will be further from hope than before.
This is just what we are seeing at the present day; and the evil is rapidly increasing. Complaint is made that the pulpit is losing its power over the masses; that vital religion is dying out in our Churches; that the Sanctuary is comparatively deserted; that our educated men are becoming infidels; that there is a great lack of the true missionary spirit in our theological schools; that our young men and women are not offering themselves as earnestly as in former times, to carry the Gospel message to the destitute. All this is lamentably true. The cause is not far to seek. This false doctrine of the necessary immortality of all men, even in sin as well as in holiness, is, in fact, driving the whole community into a scepticism in regard to the future condition of the wicked, which threatens to extinguish all religious zeal and earnest effort for the salvation of sinners every- where. Why should we be greatly concerned for the ignorant heathen, if they will probably have a better opportunity to embrace salvation after death? If those myriads of millions of human beings are destined to an endless existence, as they are said to be, it cannot be doubted, that a just and merciful God will provide some effectual way of rescuing them, if not here, certainly hereafter, from eternal woe. It seems incredible that Pie should foredoom from their birth so large a portion of the human race to endless misery, for the sin of their progenitors, or even for their own short-comings, without giving them, at least, “a fair chance” to escape, either before or after death. It seems incredible that He should perpetuate the wretched, worthless existence of any creature, however bad he may be, in sin and misery without hope and without end in the life beyond. It is incredible. No wonder that thoughtful men under the stress of this dogma, and the logical conclusion to which it brings them, should seek relief in the hypothesis of universal salvation, or at least, of a post-mortem probation. But if they would consent to drop their philosophy, and accept of the simple doctrine of the Scriptures of immortality only in Christ they would have no occasion for such unscriptural hypotheses.
It is not incredible that God should create a race of mortal men; nor that He should give them only a conditional immortality, founded on their fitness to enjoy it; nor that He should permit them to become mortal through sin, and then offer them Everlasting Life, as a gift of grace through a Saviour, conditioned on their repentance for sin, and acceptance of Him as their Saviour. It is not incredible that He should judge and punish all men both from Christian and heathen lands, beyond this life, according to their several deserts, some with few stripes and others with many stripes; nor that there should be a Second Deaths for the unsaved and an Eternal Life for his loyal, loving subjects only.
This is just what God’s Word teaches, as we read it. And we would fain hope that this may be made evident to those who will consent to keep us company, as we now turn from these broken cisterns that men have hewed out for themselves, to the Everlasting Fountain of truth and reverently inquire, “What saith the Scripture?”
Note. The Advocates of the dogma of the natural immortality of man have so commonly asserted that this is, and ever has been the general belief of the world, and have so confidently founded what they regard as one of their strongest arguments in support of it on this general belief, that we feel called to notice it more particularly, not that it would lend any real strength to their cause, were it true, but to show that, so far from being the fact, just the contrary is true; and if any argument at all is to be founded on the opinion of mankind, it certainly inures to our advantage. This is shown by Dr. Whately, whom we have already cited, and by Prof. Hudson, in his learned work, The Doctrine of a Future Life and by others. We quote the following from a recent English volume entitled The Promise of Life by J. F. B. TINLING, A.B.
“The fallacy of this popular argument lies partly in the statement of fact, and partly in the inference deduced from it. First, as to the fact. We readily grant that there is nothing upon which men have more speculated than the possibility of a life after death nothing about the fundamental or elementary thought of which there has been so general an agreement in all times and circumstances. But this admission is very different from the assertion referred to. That beings endowed with intellect, thwarted and interrupted by death, and yet surrounded by natural phenomena suggestive of a life out of death, should speculate upon the possibility of a future state would be inevitable, even if no future state were intended for them. To wish to live is natural, and the wish is father to the thought. But we also recognize the influence of traditional truth in these speculations. The defaced remnants of a primitive religion have doubtless done as much as the hopes and fears of man to shape his expectations of a future. Yet all these influences together have never produced that common belief in the immortality of the soul which is so confidently asserted. In the days of Socrates in the home and springtime of philosophy most men according to the great moralist’s testimony, believed that at death the soul would utterly perish with the body; and his statement was confirmed by the fact that in the great plague of Athens, the multitude, instead of being moved by religious faith to prepare for a future state, plunged into excesses of sensuality as having no expectation of anything that could be spared to them by death. If this was the case with Greece in the height of her glory, it would be strange indeed if the rest of the world, for the most part comparatively thoughtless and barbarous, were found to have generally possessed a consciousness of immortality.
“In order to estimate rightly the prevailing thought of mankind upon this subject before the introduction, or apart from the influence, of Christianity, we must consider the religions of the world in three great and natural divisions. The first of these consists in the faiths which have been moulded by primitive tradition; the second, in the offspring of speculation, and the third in the effect of revelation. It is impossible to keep these divisions quite separate they overlap and modify one another; but this fact need not prevent us from appreciating their distinctive characteristics, or observing what tradition, philosophy and Judaism had to say respectively to the doctrine of the immortality of the soul.
“Turning our attention first to the great examples of tradition to Chaldea, Egypt and India we are struck with a common feature which is often hastily identified with a belief in immortality. This is metempsychosis, or the transmigration of souls, which Herodotus describes particularly as held by the ancient Egyptians, and which is a common tenet of Brahminism and Buddhism, and, therefore, of one-half of the modern population of the globe. Professor Roth, of Tubingen, even understands the Rig Veda, the most sacred of the Shastras of India, to teach the annihilation of the wicked. At any rate, there is nothing in this Eastern doctrine implying the individual immortality of the soul. The mental or spiritual part of man was held to be an emanation from the Deity, which during a long course of years in the Egyptian mythology, 3000 will animate many or even all kinds of living creatures, and at last will return to, and lose its individuality in God, like a drop of water returning to the ocean.
It has been truly said, ‘The Orientals are pervaded with a profound horror of individual existence, and with a profound desire for absorption into the infinite Being.’ Here is certainly no belief in immortality in the sense in which Christians understand the word. In the systems of India all hope or thought respecting individual existence is bounded by the expectation of universal convulsions of nature, which take place at immense intervals, and in which every created being is doomed to perish.
“Nor if we examine the mythologies of rude and childlike tribes, shall we find traces of a belief in the immortality of the soul, while evidence of a contrary belief is by no means uncommon. That strange confusion of the ideas of survival and immortality which we have noticed as underlying the arguments of Christian philosophers and which shuts up many minds to the alternative of no existence or endless existence after death, appears but little in the conceptions of uncivilized people. Along the coast of Guinea the negroes throw their dead into the sea, in order that the soul may be extinguished soon after the death of the body. The inhabitants of the Sandwich and Fiji islands believed firmly in survival but expected wicked spirits to be devoured by devils or by human spirits stronger than themselves.
Druidism in Europe presents an exceptional belief in unconditional immortality, but here it is mixed up with the transmigration of souls, and with the doctrine of a final universal salvation. Zoroastrianism contrasted similarly in Asia with surrounding systems. It included the idea of resurrection as well as that of immortality. Its declaration respecting the punishment of the wicked is as follows: ‘The author of evil shall not exult over them forever; their prison-house will soon be thrown open; the pangs of three terrible days and nights, equal to the agonies of 9000 years, will purify all, even the worst of demons. The anguished cry of the damned, as they writhe in the lurid cauldron of torture will find pity in the soul of Ormuzd.’ Thus here also immortality is associated with, and seems to have demanded a belief in universal salvation. Indeed, it is doubtful whether any false religion, except savage Mohamedanism, which is neither traditional nor speculative, but an eclectic imposture, framed under the influence of corrupted Judaism and Christianity, exhibits the idea of the individual immortality of wicked men.
“Let us now glance at the conclusions of speculative philosophy. The great thinkers of Greece from Pythagoras to Zeno and their illustrious Roman disciples were less original in their speculations on the nature and destiny of man than they were in the ethical or moral laws which they laid down, and the considerations by which they endeavoured to commend them.
“They were men of vast intellect, culture, and courage, and most of them confirmed themselves in their superiority by extensive travel and observation of the superstitions or philosophies of other lands, especially those of Chaldea and Egypt.
They had the sense, too, to adopt what they could not improve, and thus Pythagoras received from Egypt, or India, or both, the Oriental theory of the divine origin, transmigration and final absorption of souls. But neither he nor any who followed him and most of these were content to endorse his conclusions on the subject seem to have conceived the idea of an individual immortality. How little like Christian belief were these theories of the greatest minds of antiquity will appear from a glance at the teaching of Plato the disciple and equal of Socrates.
To him the world was an animal with a rational soul. The souls of men were formed from the remainder of the rational soul of the world which had previously given existence to the invisible gods and demons. Even these fancies, distantly related as they were to a definite and reasonable hope of immortality, seem rarely, if ever, to have amounted to conviction in those that held them. Cicero said that while he was reading Plato he was convinced of immortality, but that as soon as he laid down the book his doubts returned; and Archbishop Whately no mean judge of the reasoning powers and conclusions of others has left his judgment of these speculations of philosophy in the following words: ‘As to what Plato and afterward Cicero and others, said in behalf of immortality, no reader of their own class seems to have had even any suspicion of their being in earnest.’ Thus we may safely conclude that the supposed universal consciousness of individual immortality finds neither proof nor illustration among the master-thinkers of the past.
“Our inquiry now turns to the possessors of Divine Revelation the revelation of the Old Testament, What did the Jews believe respecting the immortality of the soul? On this point we have from the New Testament the very important information that ‘the Sadducees said there was no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit.’ Thus human consciousness failed, even in connection with Moses and the prophets, to demonstrate natural immortality to the intellectual, aristocratic, and priestly class which divided with the Pharisees the religious authority of the Jews. But the Pharisees themselves were far from being a compact body of believers in individual immortality. It is true Josephus describes them as such, but his authority has long been more than doubtful. We may be content to set against it a few decisive quotations. The Reverend S. Cox, a competent authority, says: ‘The Jewish fathers of our Lord’s time differed on the ultimate issue of the state and punishment in Gehenna.
Some held that it would issue in the ultimate salvation of all who were exposed to it, while others held that it would issue in their destruction, the very souls of sinners being burned up and scattered by the wind.’ Nemesius, a writer of the fifth century, implies that the preponderating belief of the Jews was the destructibility of the soul. The great Rabbi, Maimonides clearly taught this doctrine in the twelfth century, saying: ‘The punishment that awaits the wicked man is that he will have no part in eternal life, but will die and be utterly destroyed. He will not live forever, but for his sins will be cut off and perish like a brute;’ and Dr. Bentley the great scholar and critic, refers to the same belief of annihilation as ‘what some of the learnedest doctors of the Jews have esteemed the most dreadful of all punishments, and have assigned for the portion of the blackest criminals of the damned, so interpreting Tophet, Abaddon, the valley of slaughter and the like for final extinction and deprivation of being.’
“We are forced by these testimonies to the conclusion that among the Jews, as among the idolatrous nations and the philosophers of the world, we must seek in vain for either an intuitive or a prevalent belief in individual immortality.”
PART THE SECOND.
The Question of Human Immortality Considered in the Light of Revelation.
“He that believes not God hath made him a Liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of His Son, And this is the record; That God hath given to us Eternal Life; and this Life is in His Son. He that hath the Son hath the Life and he that hath not the Son of God hath not the Life.”
1 John 5: 10-12.
“I, at first with two fair gifts, “Created him endowed with happiness “And immortality: that fondly lost, “This other served but to eternize woe, “Till I provided death.”
Milton’s Paradise Lost 11, 57, etc.
CHAPTER 6
We have seen how vague and unsatisfactory are the teachings of Nature and Reason on this great question of human immortality. It is conceded by all who acknowledge the Divine Authority of the Scriptures, that we must rely mainly, if not entirely, on them to answer this and other cognate inquiries. Indeed this is the special object for which they have been given to us.
But before proceeding to inquire of these Divine Oracles, “What saith the Scriptures?” let us pause for a moment and ask ourselves if we are sincerely, and honestly desirous of knowing what they do say, and willing to accept of their teaching on this question, as authoritative and final? or have we a theory of our own in regard to the nature and destiny of man, which we would be glad to have confirmed, and which we shall try to sustain if possible? Are we willing to take the plain, literal words of Scripture on this question, as expressing the truth, or must they be warped and twisted to make them agree with some preconceived theory of our own? Or must some new meaning be put into them, to make them teach what we think they ought to teach?
Unless we are willing, however wise we may think ourselves, to take the attitude of docile listeners at the feet of the Master, and to believe what He says, and believe it because He says it, and as He says it, the study of His Word, upon this, or any other disputed point, will be of little use to us. One may, by the exercise of ingenuity, “accommodate” the Scriptures to a seeming support of almost any doctrine he may bring to them. By selecting certain pliable passages, and putting a new meaning into their crucial words, and by explaining away other passages as metaphors, and treating others, as of doubtful authority, he may prove from the Bible, to his own satisfaction, and perhaps to the satisfaction of others who trust him, doctrines to which it actually gives no countenance.
Scholastic ingenuity has shown itself equal to the task of defending, from the Scriptures, all the anti-Christian and abominable errors and practices of the Papal Church. Indeed, all the varying and conflicting sects of the present time, claim the authority of the Scriptures, in support of their peculiar tenets, and can bring forward a formidable array of texts in evidence of their truth if one will only accept of the construction they put upon them.
It is not because our Divine Teacher puts forth the truth in a vague and ambiguous way, after the manner of the heathen oracles, that men have held such contradictory notions of it, and have so disagreed as to the essential doctrines of His Word; but simply because they have brought their own various notions and prejudices and prepossessions and philosophies to that Word, and read them into it. And if the language itself of their proof texts does not exactly express their ideas, it is quite easy to give a new turn to any pivotal word, or to say that it should be taken in a tropical sense. This is what is called Biblical Exegesis or Hermeneutics in our theological schools. Then these learned theologians, of the various schools, must write their commentaries and expositions, to tell the unsophisticated just what these texts ought to mean, and what they do not mean, and when they are to be taken in one sense, and when in another, just the opposite.
But what if the Greek and Hebrew words of the Original Scriptures will not bear these new senses they would put upon them? What if these meanings are not to be found in their Standard Classical Lexicons? These too must be overhauled, and special “Biblical Lexicons” prepared for the use of Bible scholars, with these new meanings put upon these words, and the places in the Bible particularly referred to, where these words should be taken in this new sense; and this is called the “Scriptural sense” of these words!!
This is no exaggerated hypothesis. The writer has such an improved (?) Lexicon attached to his Greek Testament, which he bought when a student of Theology. * It was evidently prepared in the interest of the Platonic theory of the natural immortality of man, and in support of such interpretations of Scripture as this theory requires. It may be instructive to give from its pages a few specimens of this sort of learned idea. We open the Testament at Matthew 7:13, and read as follows:
“Enter ye in at the strait gate; for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leads to destruction (apoleian) and many there be which go in thereat; because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way which leads unto life (zoen) and few there be that find it.”
*”The Polymicrian Gkeek Lexicon to the New Testament in which the various senses of the words are distinctly explained in English, and authorized by references to passages of Scripture. By W. Greenfield, Editor of Bagster’s Comprehensive Bible, The Polymicrian Greek Testament, etc.” London.
We know what “destruction” means in the ordinary sense of the word, and what apoleia means in Greek; they both mean the same thing. But we want to know the “Scriptural sense” of the word. So we turn to our Biblical Greek Lexicon; and after the various ordinary definitions are given, we are referred to this passage, and informed that it here means “perdition” or “misery,” etc. We look out the word perdition, in Webster’s Dictionary, and find that its religious sense is “the utter loss of the soul, or of final happiness, in a future state.”
We know also, what the word “life” means in English, and what the word zoe means in Greek; they both mean the same thing. But that we may find out just what the “Scriptural sense” of the word is, we again consult our Biblical Lexicon, where its ordinary sense is very correctly given; but we are referred to this passage, and told that it here means “eternal happiness.”
Now having got the true “Scriptural” meaning of these two crucial words, from this learned lexicographer, we know how to understand the passage. It should be read thus:
“Enter ye in at the strait gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to misery, and many there be which go in thereat; because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way which leads unto eternal happiness, and few there be that find it.”
Again, we read in Romans 5: 12, as follows:
“Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and death (thanatos) by sin; and so death (thanatos)
passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”
We know well enough what the ordinary sense of the word “death” is, and that it means the same as thanatos in Greek, but that we may know what the “Scriptural sense” of the word is, we again consult our Biblical Lexicon. We find the word correctly defined, so far as its ordinary sense is concerned, but we are referred to this passage, and told that it here means, “an unchanging eternal state of wretchedness and misery.” Hence, we are to understand this passage as though it read as follows:
“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and an unchanging, eternal slate of wretchedness and misery by sin, and so an unchanging, eternal state of wretchedness and misery passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”
Where, we ask, did our Biblical lexicographer get the peculiar “Scriptural Sense,” which he puts upon the pivotal words, in these and other similar texts, bearing on this question? How does he know that the “destruction” of the wicked does not mean destruction, but only misery, and that the “life,” which is promised to the righteous, is not actual life, but simply “eternal happiness;” or that the “ death,” that is the fruit of sin, is not actual death, but on the contrary, is “ an unchanging eternal state of wretchedness and misery.” The classical writings of the Greeks, in the time of our Lord, and when the Scriptures were written, do not justify any such sense as the lexicographer puts into these Greek words. What authority has he then, for putting this sense into them in his Biblical Greek Lexicon? None whatever, unless it be the authority of his cotemporaries and predecessors, of the same school of philosophy, whose lead he has followed. They all have evidently, first read these meanings into these words, to make them accord with their own philosophy, and then have transferred them to their lexicons to justify their reading.*
* Professor Cremer, in his Lexicon of the New Testament, while asserting that in Scripture these terms (apollumi, etc.), stand for the eternal misery of mankind, frankly allows that “such a signification is peculiar to the New Testament, and without analogy in classical Greek.” Life in Christ, page 361.
The Greek word psuche with its Hebrew analogue nephesh usually translated “soul,” “life,” etc., is treated in the same way. Under psuche in my Biblical Greek Lexicon, various texts of Scripture are referred to, where the word is said to mean, “that in us which thinks, feels, wills, and renders us immortal This may represent well enough the meaning which is given to the word “soul,” in English, by those who hold to the philosophy of Plato. Webster, in the earlier editions of his great dictionary though this has been eliminated from the later editions defines “ soul “ as “ the spiritual, rational and immortal principle in man,” as though he would effectually stop all inquiry as to its immortality, by making it enter into the definition of the word itself; and then, as if to close the door of the Christian Church against all who do not accept of his philosophy, he gratuitously adds: “ The immortality of the soul is “a fundamental article of the Christian system”!! But neither this word psuche nor its analogue nephesh, has any such high signification in the Scriptures.
They simply designate that principle of life, which is common to man and to beast; and are so used very commonly throughout the Bible. They are frequently used to indicate personality, as so many souls or persons, but never, in that high Platonic sense, in which the word “soul” is now understood. We can say with confidence, that not one single passage can be found in all the Bible, in which any natural immortality of the nephesh or the psuche is asserted, or even hinted at, or implied; nor can this idea be put into them, without doing violence to the text. And our Biblical lexicographers have no authority whatever for endeavouring to fasten this anti-Christian doctrine upon these Scriptural words.
Numerous other passages are referred to in the same way by this Lexicographer. Guided by him, we are to read as follows:
John 11: 25. “I am the Resurrection and the (zoe) life.”
John 6: 53, 54. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, ye have no (zoe) happiness in you. Whoso eats my flesh and drinks my blood, hath eternal (zoe) happiness, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
But this method of giving another sense to these Scripture utterances is not peculiar to this author. Robinson, in his Lexicon of the New Testament pursues the same method. Under zoe, after first giving its true classical and ordinary meaning as “life, existence as opposed to death and non-existence,” he brings to it another meaning to make it accord with the theory of the natural and necessary immortality of all men, which he calls the “Christian sense.” This is “a happy life, welfare, happiness.” And he puts this meaning into such passages as he pleases and refers the reader to them, that he may know just how they are to be sophisticated. Let us turn to a few of these texts and see how they are to be read according to his Lexicon.
1 Timothy 4: 8. “Godliness is profitable unto all things having the promise of the (zoe) happiness that now is, and of that which is to come.”
Romans 5: 17, 18. “For if by one man’s offence (thanatos) death reigned by one; much more, they which receive abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness, shall reign in (zoe) happiness by one Jesus Christ. Therefore as by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto justification of (zoe) happiness.
Here it will be seen, as elsewhere so often in the Scriptures, zoe, life, is contrasted with thanatos, death, and to render it “happiness” destroys the contrast, unless thanatos be translated “ misery.” And this is what we are taught to do. And this is just what makes the writings of Paul such a puzzle to all who follow the lead of these teachers, and so difficult of explanation by all these commentators.
1 John 5: 11, 12. “This is the record that God hath given to us eternal (zoe) happiness, and this happiness is in
His Son. He that hath the Son hath the happiness, and he that hath not the Son, hath not the happiness.”
But are we not elsewhere assured that the Son hath Immortality, Self -existence. Eternal Life in Himself; and is not this the zoe, Life, which He imparts to all believers? This is indeed something more than happiness. It is LIFE, a life that includes every blessing that makes life desirable and blessed. Why not change the meaning of this word in numerous other places and read, “We know that we have passed from (thanatos) death unto happiness” , “The Tree of happiness” , “The water of happiness” , “The Book of happiness” etc.? Surely we shall do better to deal honestly with the language of inspiration, and acknowledge Jesus Christ to be the Source, not merely of happiness, as He is, but also of Eternal Life, as He Himself declares, and receive it as the Gift of God’s grace from Him.
We would not question the honesty of these lexicographers, and Biblical commentators and expositors and theological professors. Many of them we have learned to love and respect from personal acquaintance, as very worthy Christian men. No doubt they are sincerely endeavouring to give to others what they believe to be the real meaning of God’s Word, as they have received it from their teachers, and predecessors, and they, by tradition from theirs. It is more the fault of the system, than of individuals. This practice has come in gradually, with the philosophy that requires it, and has been handed down with it from generation to generation, as the only way of bringing the Word of God into agreement with that philosophy, which if taken literally, it actually contradicts. It has been so thoroughly incorporated into our theological systems, and so firmly established, by the practice of ages, that these learned men think it is just the thing for them to do, to put an ethical or figurative sense upon all those words, which declare death to be the penalty of sin, and life-eternal life the portion only of those who are saved. And the confiding, humble disciple, anxious to know just what the Scriptures teach, instead of reading them, as he would any other book, must needs supply himself with these helps, that he may know when he is to understand these words in their plain obvious sense, and when in an ethical, or tropical or a peculiar sense. In this way he qualifies himself to teach his congregation or his class in the Sabbath school, or his children, or others whom he is called to instruct in the things of religion.
No other reason can be given there is no other reason why the plain, simple word maveth, thayiatos deaths whether in the Hebrew, Greek or English should not be taken to mean actual, literal death when man is spoken of in the Scriptures, as it is when any other living creature or thing is spoken of but just this the Platonic philosophy, which has been taken into our Christian system, as one of its fundamental principles, and which must be read into the Scriptures, forbids it.
The same may be said of the word chai (Hebrew), zoe (Greek), Life, But with respect to this latter word “life,” the unlearned reader labors under this further disadvantage, that there are two words both in the original Greek and Hebrew Scriptures that are rendered by our one English word “life,” and they are quite distinct from each other The word nephesh (Hebrew) or psuche (Greek) which is sometimes rendered “life,” and sometimes “soul” always refers to that transitory principle of life, which man has in common with all other earthly creatures, and the Hebrew adjective olam or the Greek adjective aionios signifying eternal, everlasting, etc., are never, never joined with it. But whenever that higher life, which Christ Himself possesses and which He gives to His people, that life, which is received in the new birth, that spiritual life which is pure and eternal, is spoken of, the word zoe is always used, and the adjective aionios eternal is constantly coupled with it; Also in the Old Testament, so far as this new life is revealed, the word chai is employed, and to this the adjective olam everlasting is joined. No Bible scholar, who is acquainted with these languages has any excuse for failing to note these distinctions.
That these, and other words are never employed in a figurative sense in the Scriptures, no one pretends to assert. The Bible abounds in figures of speech. These constitute one of its principal charms in a literary point of view. But these figures are self-interpreting. At any rate, they are not such as to mislead and to contradict its sober, didactic teaching. When the Prophet speaks of the trees clapping their hands, or when Christ calls Herod a fox, no one need misunderstand what is meant. But the teaching of God’s Word is not all of this sort. There is a great deal of plain, practical, common sense instruction in it, adapted to the comprehension of the simplest minds. Surely, in His annunciation of His Holy law and its sanctions of life and deaths we may expect our Sovereign to use such plain literal language as will not be misunderstood that cannot be, unless it is violently perverted. No human ruler would be justified in giving to his subjects a law couched in ambiguous terms. Nor has our Divine Lawgiver done this. It is only the perversity of man that would make the threatening and promises of His Holy Word seem to teach something different from what the words themselves assert.
The Hebrew people before the coming of Christ had been led into this same vicious practice of explaining away the Scriptures, their Rabbis and doctors of the law had prepared for them the Talmud and Targums containing, together with the Divine Word, the explications and comments and traditions of their wise men; and the people had been taught to look to these, rather than to the Word itself, for their instruction in the things of religion. Our Lord rebuked them in His day, telling them that they had made the Word of God of none effect by their traditions. “In vain,” says He “do they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men;” and He would say the same of the practice as it now prevails.
* “It seems a strange way of understanding a law which requires the plainest words, that by ‘Death,’ should be meant eternal life in misery.” John Locke.
Here is the only real difficulty we encounter in discussing this question with those who differ from us. It is quite evident that if the declarations of the Word of God are to be taken, in their literal and ordinary sense, the doctrine for which we contend is established beyond all dispute. It abounds in passages which declare in the most positive manner that “the soul that sins it shall die.” “Sin when it is finished brings forth death,” “The wicked is reserved for the day of destruction.” “Whose end is destruction;” “Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction;” “They shall be destroyed forever;” “They shall utterly perish in their own corruption;” And others, which promise to the righteous “length of days forever and ever,” that to those, “who by patient continuance in well doing, seek for glory and honour,” God will give “immortality” , “My sheep hear my voice and I know them, and they follow me; and I give unto them Eternal Life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any one pluck them out of my hand”; “Verily, verily I say unto you, if any man keep my saying he shall never see death “ etc., etc. And still other passages, that contrast the final end of these two classes, as follows: “The wages of sin is deaths but the gift of God is Eternal Life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have Eternal Life.” “This is the record that God hath given us Eternal Life, and this Life is in His Son; Se that hath the Son hath the Life, and he that hath not the Son hath not the Life” etc., etc.
What if we take these passages with a multitude of others equally explicit, and set them in long array before the eyes of the reader? They will have no convincing force whatever, on the minds of those who have been taught to believe that the wicked cannot actually die, cannot utterly perish; cannot be completely destroyed forever, and that “length of days forever and ever,” “immortality” or eternal existence is not the peculiar lot of the saved, but is the natural and inalienable inheritance of all men, whether saved or not. They are so thoroughly inured to the practice of putting a metaphorical or ethical or poetical sense on these expressions which they have learned to call the Scriptural sense, whenever they conflict with the popular sentiment of the world, in regard to the indestructible nature of man, that this seems to them, to be the real teaching of Scripture, and they look with suspicion upon any one who ventures to think that they should be understood as meaning actually and literally what they say.*
We solemnly protest, in the name of Truth and of Him whose Word is Truth, against such unwarranted treatment of the Scriptures, as subversive of all true doctrine. “If the foundations be destroyed what can the righteous do?” If men are to be allowed, without rebuke, to bring their own notions or opinions or poetical fancies or philosophies or dogmas, however popular they may be to the Word of God and to read them into it, and to “accommodate” its language to them, by putting extraordinary meanings into its simple terms, we have no standard of Divine truth, no defence against error of any sort, no credible authority for any doctrine whatever. We are liable to be “tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, and by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive.” We might as well, yea better, throw aside the so- called “Word of God,” and every man adopt that scheme of doctrine which pleases him best. It is but solemn mockery to prate about the “Sacred Scriptures,” and to talk of their “inspiration,” and to call them “The Oracles of God,” if they are not to be allowed to speak for themselves, and are not to be accepted as meaning what they say. It is bad enough to bribe a human witness to testify falsely; but how shall we characterize the crime of extorting a false testimony from the Divine Word and claiming it in behalf of errors it denounces?
* “Why did not a host of texts open their eyes and show them their mistake? In reply we ask, why does a straight stick put into the water look crooked? And why will no arguments make it look straight? Simply because it is seen through a distorting medium. So men search the Scriptures forever, with a pre-established belief in their own indestructibility and they will be only more and more confirmed in their belief of eternal evil. The longer they look at the stick, the more certain they will become that it is crooked. This accounts for the otherwise perplexing fact, that some of the most determined advocates of this doctrine are men who have studied the Bible all their lives, and in many points have the deepest understanding of it. It also accounts for the rapidity and thoroughness with which many persons change their views as soon as their eyes are opened to see the fundamental fallacy that underlies them. The moment the stick is taken out of the water, it appears perfectly straight.” Glory of Christ. SAMUEL MINTON.
“It is always safe to trust the poets [!] not much moral truth has got into the world except through them “ [!] On the Threshold, Lecture to Young Men. T. T. Mungek. This is what one of the popular religious teachers of the present day says. But we would fain believe that some moral truth has got into the world through the Sacred Scriptures, and that it is quite as safe to learn of Him who is called Hie Light of Men, and to believe what He says in respect to the future life yea, infinitely more safe when we see how flatly they contradict Him.
“Behold I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that use their tongues, and say ‘He saith’. Behold I am against them that prophesy false dreams, and do cause my people to err by their lies and by their lightness. They speak a vision out of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the Lord.
“The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream, and he that hath my Word, let him speak my Word faithfully.”
Let him speak my word faithfully. This is what we propose to do. And unless some better reason shall be given for discrediting the testimony of Scripture on this question of Immortality, than the assurance of the great Deceiver “Ye shall not die,” or the philosophy of Plato which endorses it, or the teaching of an apostate Church, which has made it one of the fundamental principles of her faith, or the popular tradition of the present day, which makes it heresy to call it in question, we shall venture to understand the words of Jehovah as spoken by Himself, and by His prophets and apostles and by Jesus Christ our Saviour, as meaning just what they say. “The wages of Sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal LIFE through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
That this is the explicit and uniform teaching of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation, if its language is to be taken as meaning what it expresses, we hope to make evident to every inquirer who will take the trouble to examine the array of passages we shall cite But if its language is not to be so taken, then it is useless to attempt to prove anything by the testimony of Scripture.
Note. The late Archbishop Whately, renowned alike for his piety, learning and logical powers, has stated the Scriptural arguments on both sides of this question with such clearness and candour in his Lectures on the Future State, that we cannot forbear to quote, somewhat at length, a portion of his Eighth Lecture. The fact that he reviews the question not as a partisan nor even as an advocate of any view, but rather as a cautious discriminating judge must surely entitle his opinion to the respectful consideration of every sincere inquirer.
“The Scriptures do not, I think, afford us any ground for expecting that those who shall be condemned at the last day as having wilfully rejected or rebelled against their Lord, will be finally delivered: that their doom, and that of the evil angels, will ever be reversed.
“What that doom will be, whether the terms in which it is commonly spoken of in Scripture, ‘death,’ ‘destruction,’ ‘perishing,’ etc., are to be understood figuratively, as denoting immortal life in a state of misery, or more literally, as denoting a final extinction of existence, this is quite a different question. It is certain that the words, ‘life,’ ‘eternal life,’ ‘immortality,’ etc.,* are always applied to the condition of those, and of those only, who shall at the last day be approved as ‘good and faithful servants,’ who are to ‘enter into the joy of their Lord.’ See John 20:31; 5:29; 11:25; 1 Peter 3:7; 1 Corinthians 11:15, 16.
“ ‘Life.’ as applied to their condition, is usually understood to mean ‘happy life.’ And that theirs will be a happy life, we are indeed plainly taught; but I do not think we are anywhere taught that the word ‘life’ does of itself necessarily imply happiness. If so, indeed, it would be a mere tautology to speak of a ‘happy life’; and a contradiction to speak of a ‘miserable life;’ which we know is not the case, according to the usage of any language. In all ages and countries, ‘life,’ and the words answering to it in other languages, have always been applied, in ordinary discourse, to a wretched life, no less properly than to a happy one. Life, therefore, in the received sense of the word, would apply equally to the condition of the blest and of the condemned, supposing these last to be destined to continue for ever, living in a state of misery. And yet, to their condition the words ‘life’ and ‘immortality,’ never are applied in Scripture. If, therefore, we suppose the hearers of Jesus and His Apostles to have understood, as nearly as possible in the ordinary sense, the words employed, they must naturally have conceived them to mean (if they were taught nothing to the contrary) that the condemned were really and literally to be ‘destroyed,’ and cease to exist; not that they were to exist for ever in a state of wretchedness. For they are never spoken of as being kept alive, but as forfeiting life; as, for instance, ‘Ye will not come unto Me that ye might have life:’ ‘He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.’ And again, ‘perdition,’ ‘death,’ ‘destruction,’ are employed in numerous passages to express the doom of the condemned. All which expressions would, as I have said, be naturally taken in their usual and obvious sense, if nothing were taught to the contrary.
“That these expressions however are to be understood not in their ordinary sense, but figuratively, to signify an immortality of suffering, is inferred by a large proportion of Christians, from some other passages; as, where our Lord speaks of ‘everlasting punishment,’ ‘everlasting fire,’ and of being ‘cast into hell, where their worm dies not, and the fire is not quenched.’
“This last expression of His is taken from the book of the prophet Isaiah (66:24), who speaks of ‘the carcasses of the men that have transgressed, whose worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh’; describing evidently the kind of doom inflicted by the eastern nations on the vilest offenders, who were not only slain, but their bodies deprived of the rites of burial, and either burned to ashes (which among them was considered a great indignity), or left to moulder above ground, and be devoured by worms.
“From such passages as these it has been inferred that the sufferings, and consequently the life, of the condemned, is never to have an end. And the expressions will certainly bear that sense; which would, perhaps, be their most obvious and natural meaning, if these expressions were the only ones on the subject that are to be found in Scripture. But they will also bear another sense; which if not more probable in itself, is certainly more reconcilable with the ordinary meaning of the words ‘destruction,’ etc., which so often occur. The expressions of ‘eternal punishment,’ ‘unquenchable fire,’ etc., may mean merely that there is to be no deliverance. no revival no restoration of the condemned. * Death,’ simply, does not shut out the hope of being brought to life again; ‘eternal death’ does. ‘Fire’ may be quenched before it has entirely consumed what it is burning; ‘unquenchable fire’ would seem most naturally to mean that which destroys it utterly.
“It may be said, indeed, that supposing man’s soul to be an Immaterial being, it cannot be consumed and destroyed by literal material fire or worms. That is true; but no more can it suffer from these. We all know that no fire, literally so called, can give us any pain unless it reach our bodies. The ‘fire,’ therefore, and the ‘worm,’ that are spoken of, must, at any rate, it would seem, be something figuratively so called; something that is to the soul, what worms and fire are to a body.
And as the effect of worms or fire is not to preserve the body they prey upon, but consume, destroy, and put an end to it, it would follow, if the correspondence hold good, that the fire, figuratively so called, which is prepared for the condemned, is something that is really to destroy and put an end to them; and is called ‘everlasting’ or ‘unquenchable’ fire, to denote that they are not to be saved from it, but that their suffering is to be final. So in the parable of the tares, our Lord describes Himself as saying, ‘Gather ye first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them; but gather the wheat into my garner; as if to denote that the one is to be (as we know is the practice of the husbandman) carefully preserved, and the other completely put an end to.
“We must not indeed venture to conclude at once, from our conviction of the divine goodness and power, that evil will ever cease to exist; since we know not how to explain the existence of any evil at all. We can only say there is some unknown cause for it; and that it is a foolish presumption to think of assigning a limit to the effects of an unknown cause, except where revelation guides us. But when we are told that Christ is to ‘reign till He shall put all things under His feet,’ and that ‘the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death ‘y this does afford some ground for expecting the ultimate extinction of evil and of suffering, by the total destruction of such as are incapable of good and of happiness. If eternal death means final death, death without any revival, we can understand what is meant by Death being the last enemy destroyed, viz.: that none henceforth are to be subjected to it. But if ‘death’ be understood to mean everlasting life in misery, then, it would appear that death is never to be destroyed at all; since, although no one would be henceforth sentenced to it, it would still be going on as a continual infliction, for ever.
“On the whole, therefore, I think we are not warranted in concluding (as some have done) so positively concerning this question as to make it a point of Christian faith to interpret figuratively and not literally the
‘death’ and ‘destruction’ spoken of in Scripture as the doom of the condemned; and to insist on the belief that they are to be kept alive for ever.” “Scripture Revelations of a Future State.”
CHAPTER 7
The Creation of Man.
In the first three chapters of the Bible, we have, what purports to be, a true account of the creation of man, his temptation and fall, and the consequent forfeiture, by sin, for himself and his posterity, of life, the perpetuity of which, was conditioned on perfect obedience to his Maker.
The historical verity of this account is largely questioned, at the present day. “In some scientific circles, in which Christian faith has no place, this narrative is now regarded as one of many similar fables of the early world, the truth being that there was no first man, and no fall of man, but a gradual rise from the animal level up to humanity, through the ages of an immeasurably distant past. In other scientific and theological circles, where Christian faith still maintains its hold on Revelation in general, the narrative is regarded as an allegory wholly destitute of historical reality, but setting forth in pictorial form the early struggles of man with the lower forces of nature, and the ascension of the spirit through discipline and temptations to the heights of faith in God. Among Christian believers of this class, it is now boldly affirmed that it is impossible to attach any historical value to the idea of the ruin of the world by the common ancestor of the race.” *
* Genesis the Third, History not Fable. Reverend E. White, London.
While it is not to be supposed that a majority of Christian scholars would willingly allow themselves to be included in this latter class, it is quite evident that the narrative is very generally accepted if accepted at all, with an incredulous smile, which indicates the very feeble hold it has upon their confidence.
It is not our purpose here to notice the various objections that are urged against it, nor the various hypotheses that have been offered in its place, nor even to enter into any argument in its favour. We cannot make room for such matters in this brief volume. It must suffice for our purpose to say, that it is a portion, and an important and integral portion of the Scriptures, which we receive as the Word of God. It is given to us in the form of a true narrative of facts, without one hint that it is to be taken in any other sense. It is referred to in other parts of the Bible, and by our Lord Himself, as a true narrative. St. Paul assumes its truth as the basis of his argument, in his Epistles to the Romans and the Corinthians, on the very question we have in hand. And we shall venture to do the same. It will be time enough for us to reject it for some other theory of the genesis of man, and the entrance of sin, with all its sad fruits of sorrow and death into our world, when our wise men shall be able to present us with one upon which they themselves can agree, or which has any better claim to our faith. It is to those who acknowledge, with us, the Divine authority of the Scriptures, and of this narrative as a part of them, that our Scriptural Argument concerning the transitory nature of sinful man and his immortality only through redemption by Christ is especially addressed, with the hope that it will seem to them, as it does to us, impregnable. As for others, there is a previous question for them to settle before we can hope to influence their mind even though they should consent to listen to us.
It will be understood that it is the creation, not of this earth, nor of the lower races of animals but of man that concerns us in this inquiry. Whatever may have been the process, and however long may have been the time taken to bring this world, with all its furniture of life and beauty to completion, it was not till everything had been made ready for his occupancy and use that God created man, the highest, and noblest, as well as the last of all earthly creatures.
He created him “in His own image and after His own likeness,” not as equal to Himself in any of the attributes of His infinite nature, certainly not in his chief and most peculiar attribute of independent existence.* For this would have been impossible, even for God Himself. Man, in being made in the image of God and after His own likeness, was made neither omnipotent nor omniscient, nor omnipresent, nor self-existent and eternal in his being. But he was endowed with a free will, and the power of intelligent action, and authority to exercise dominion within the earthly sphere where he was placed, and with the faculty of knowing, loving and consciously obeying His Maker. In all this, as well as in the beauty and perfection of his body, he was superior to all other creatures of earth. Some have supposed that his physical form was modelled after that which was peculiar to the Eternal Son of God, before His manifestations to the world. But still he was amenable to the law of his Creator, and as dependent on His will for the continuance of his life and all that he possessed, as he was for his original endowments.
“‘If it be urged that because there had been imprinted upon Adam at his creation the image of his Maker, therefore he could not die, it is enough to answer that the dewdrop shows the image of the sun only so long as it quivers unconsumed; presently the burning heat scorches the drop into vapour, and the image flies. Indeed, it seems to be the very nature of images that they should be perishable unless care is taken to keep them in existence. The image on the sensitive plate of the photographer will prove as transient as it is beautiful, if it be not presently plunged in the ‘fixing-bath,’ which gives it permanence. Man made to reflect the image of Him that created him, ceased perfectly to do so the moment the cloud of selfishness came between him and the Sun.” Conditional Immortality Sermon 6, by William R. Huntington, d.d.
By what process the inferior animals were brought into existence, we know nothing beyond the fact that God created them. Nor are we here called to notice the various scientific speculations on this subject. But we have a more particular account of the creation of man, as we might expect. But still, the record is very brief; and many questions are left for conjecture on our part, which, within certain limits, may be indulged, provided the record itself be not impeached.
The sacred historian informs us that:
“The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life (neshamah chaiyim the breath of lives), and man became a living soul (nephesh chaiyah).
In this summary passage there are several points to be noticed:
1. The materials from which man was made were not extra mundane, or superior, in any respect, to those that entered into the composition of other earthly creatures and things. They were the same “the dust of the earth.”
2. Man was fully made and completed, and, as it appears, in the maturity of his bodily form, before he began to live. “God formed man out of the dust of the ground.”
3. Nothing is now wanting to make him a living man or “a living soul,” but the “breath of life,” and when God breathed this into him, he became a living soul. The words here translated, “breath of life,” are neshamah chaiyim. Neshamah means breath, or the vital air we breathe in common with all animals. It seems to be nearly, if not quite, synonymous with the word ruach which is more frequently employed to express the same idea. Chaiyim is the plural of the word chai or chaiyah, meaning “life.” The expression “God breathed” this vital air “into his nostrils,” is of course anthropomorphic, that is, a representation of God acting like a man. We are not to suppose that God actually breathes as do men and animals of flesh and blood. He is a Spirit, He existed before the air was created, and is dependent on nothing for the support of His life. But He is represented anthropomorphically to us in the Scriptures, to bring His acts within our comprehension. There appears to be nothing peculiar to man in the fact of the communication of this breath of life to him. For the brutes themselves are represented as having the breath of life in their nostrils also; as in Genesis 7: 22, where the same words, with still greater emphasis, by the addition of ruach, are employed as follows: “All in whose nostrils was the breath of life (neshamah ruach chaiyim, the breath of the spirit of lives) died.”
4. The phrase nephesh chaiyah, translated in this passage, “living soul,” certainly designates nothing peculiar to man, for it is equally applicable to the brute. This identical expression is employed ten times in the book of Genesis, and twice in Leviticus, and in every instance but this, it is used with reference to brute animals; but this fact is not apparent to the unlearned reader, because our translators have only in this instance rendered it “living soul.” In all the other instances when the lower animals are characterized by this phrase, they have rendered it “living creature,” or “living thing” or “life”! On this passage Reverend J. Pye Smith says:
“Some of our readers may be surprised at our having translated nephesh chaiyah by “living animal.” There are good interpreters and preachers, who, confiding in the common translation “living soul,” have maintained that hero is intimated the distinctive pre-eminence of man above the inferior animals, as possessed of an immaterial and immortal spirit. . . . We should be acting unfaithfully if we were to affirm its being contained or implied in this passage.”
Dean Alford in his comment on it says:
“The description is not one bringing out any distinctive attribute of man, but simply one describing the animation of the form shaped out of the dust of the earth, whereby he became what, in Chapter I., the various tribes of created things are described as being, a living being. The difference, whatever it may be between him and other living creatures, is not declared in this term.”
In Dr. Lange’s commentary under 1 Corinthians 15: 45, it is said:
“The expression ‘living soul,’ as used in Genesis, is often taken to indicate an order of being superior to the brute, and is the text of many an argument to prove the immortality of the soul. The incorrectness of this assumption will be readily seen by referring to Genesis 1:20, 21, 24, and elsewhere, in which passages the words translated ‘living soul’ are applied also to the entire lower creation. They are used indifferently of man and beast to express animal life in general. And it is in this very light the Apostle uses them, as the course of his argument shows. Adam is spoken of as a living soul, not to prove his immortality, but rather his mortality.”
6. Observe, God does not bring a living soul and put it into this lifeless body, nor does He even make a living soul within his body as something distinct from it; but by the impartation of this breath of life, Adam BECOMES a living soul. This describes the whole man as one integer.*
On this point Milton in his Treatise on Christian Doctrine Volume 1, page 250, well remarks:
“It may be inferred, unless we had rather take the heathen writers for our teachers respecting the nature of the soul, that man is a living being intrinsically and properly one and individual not compounded or separable, not according to the common opinion made up and formed of two distinct and separate natures as of soul and body; but that the whole man is soul, and the soul man; that is to say, a body or substance, individual, animated, sensitive and rational; and that the breath of life was neither a part of the Divine essence, nor the soul itself, but as it were, the inspiration of some Divine virtue fitted for the exercise of life and reason, and infused into the organic body; for man himself, the whole man, when finally created, is called in express terms, ‘a living soul.’ Hence the word used in Genesis to signify soul is interpreted by the Apostle, 1 Corinthians 15: 45, animal.”
*The reader is referred to the author’s Essay on the Unity of Man, in his larger volume The Life Everlasting, for a full discussion of this question.
The metaphysical sense in which this word soul is now used to describe a spiritual essence distinct from the body, is utterly unknown to the Scriptures, as we have before remarked. It is derived from our “heathen teachers,” as Milton well says, and not from the inspired writers of the Scriptures. This Hebrew word nephesh (with its Greek equivalent psuche and its Latin representative anima from which our word animal comes), denotes animal life or animal breath in contradistinction to that higher life, of which we shall have occasion to speak hereafter, which is given in the new birth; and then, by metonymy, the animal itself, whether man or beast, that lives by breathing; it includes the whole person, as does the personal pronoun for which it is often used. When qualified by the adjective living that person is “a living soul” or person, and when qualified by the adjective dead as it is at least half a dozen times in the Scriptures, that person is “a dead soul.”
Here it should be observed that the word soul in English, under the influence of this heathen teaching, has come to be understood as nearly, if not quite, synonymous with spirit. The two words are so defined in our dictionaries. But in the Scriptures they are quite distinct. The Hebrew words neshamah and ruach and the Greek word pneuma meaning that vital air or breath which gives life, are never used interchangeably with the words nephesh and psuche.* They are as distinct as the cause is from the effect. It is the inbreathing of this vital breath that causes the lifeless body to become a living soul. And then the heart begins to beat, the blood to circulate, and all the processes of sensitive, intelligent, voluntary life spring into action.
6. Now let this process be reversed. Let this life-giving breath be withdrawn; the heart ceases to beat; the circulation of the blood is stopped, and all the processes of sensitive, intelligent, voluntary action are at an end; and the organism itself begins at once to fall into ruin, and the body to return to the dust from which it came. This is death. This is just what the Scriptures say.
“Thou sends forth thy spirit (ruach=breath) they are created; Thou takes away their breath (the same word, ruach) they die and return to the dust.” Psalm 104.
* The writer has discussed this subject of soul and spirit and the difference between them, fully in his volume The Life Everlasting, to which he refers the reader.
“His breath (ruach) goes forth; he retums to the earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.” Psalm 146.
“For that which befalls the sons of men, befalls beasts; even one thing befalls them; as the one dies, so dies the other; yea they all have one breath (ruach); so that [in this respect] man hath no pre-eminence above a beast.” Ecclesiastes 3:19.
Though “man hath no pre-eminence above the beasts,” in the materials of which he is composed, nor in “the breath that is in his nostrils,” nor in the food upon which he subsists, nor in the manner of his propagation and birth after the creation of the first pair nor in his exemption from the death, which is the common lot of all earthly creatures; yet though a fallen, mortal creature, having failed to prove himself worthy of the prize of immortality that was put within his reach, choosing rather the good that perishes man is still vastly superior to the brute in the capacity to know what he has lost by sin, and in the unique privilege of receiving it back again by the mercy of God, as a gift of grace through a second Adam and a second birth as made known in the Gospel. But we anticipate.
The essential earthly nature of man is made evident by the name which was given to him by his Maker. The name “Adam” is not a personal proper name, though we apply it as such to the first man, because he has no other name. But it designates and characterizes the whole race. The word Adam means “the earth-made” or, a creature made of red (?) earth. Josephus says: “This man was called Adam, which, in the Hebrew tongue, signifies one that is red, because he was formed of red earth compounded together.* This word appears in the very first chapter of Genesis, where God’s purpose to make man is first mentioned. It reads in our Bible “And God said let us make man,” but in the original it is, “And God said let us make Adam,” and so throughout the Old Testament, unless the first man is especially referred to, the word “Adam” is translated man though another word, which yet more emphatically expresses man’s transitory nature after the fall is frequently employed, which is also rendered “man”; that is enosh which means mortal, perishable. One of the most common expressions throughout both the Old and the New Testaments to designate man is Flesh; “All flesh had corrupted its way” “The end of all flesh is come”; “All flesh shall perish together and man shall turn to dust again.” “That which is born of the flesh is flesh;” and in hundreds of other instances.
Etymologists are not agreed as to the root of this word. Some derive it from a word which means red, or of a ruddy complexion; others from the word adamah, which means earth; Josephus seems to combine both meanings; others, with less reason, think it is derived from a word which signifies “to build,” “to beget,” “to cultivate,” etc. But as it is almost identical with the word adamah, “earth,” “earthy,” “of the ground,” this is generally understood to be its root- meaning, and so we understand it.
Now is it not reasonable to suppose that if man had been endowed in his original creation, with an immortal spirit, this would have been indicated by some higher title than earth-made? Would not the title Elohim gods, super human beings, with which the Tempter flattered our first parents, have been more exact? But, according to the philosophy of the day, this is materialism. It is, however, Bible teaching, by whatever name it may be called.
It should be noticed that the woman whose formation out of the side of the man we have not yet considered, and which it is not necessary to dwell upon, receives this title Adam, equally with the man. We are told “God created them male and female, and blessed them and called their name ‘Adam,’ in the day when He created them.” Genesis 5:2. It was the man, not God, who called the woman’s name Eve, “because she was the mother of all living.” God called them both Adam, not because she shared his name as the wife of Adam, as wives now share their husband’s name, but because she shared his earthly nature.
Let those who smile incredulously at the Scriptural account of the creation of the woman, suggest, if they can, a more plausible or significant or reasonable method of creation. They perhaps forget that, if created at all, the first pair must have been created in a manner that must appear to us abnormal and extraordinary. They could not have been born as their children are. They must have been miraculously formed. No method could have been adopted that would not be open to the criticisms of those who are disposed to cavil. After the creation of the first man, from the dust of the ground, God’s method of forming the woman, who is destined to be his partner for life and a help meet for him, appears to us, the more we consider it, a conception truly Divine and most beautifully significant of the relation which He designed to subsist between the husband and wife.
From the record, the first pair appear to have entered upon life miraculously formed, in the full perfection of their physical nature not as infants, for in that case they would have been helpless and quite unable to take care of themselves. But in their mental and moral natures, they were inexperienced, unsophisticated, and without any positive character. The lofty descriptions which some poetic theologians and theological poets have drawn of their primitive state, before the fall, are mere fancy pictures without any warrant whatever either from reason or Scripture. That they were pure, and innocent and guileless, there can be no doubt; for God made them to at the outset. But character is a growth. It is the result of free moral action, of action under temptation, where there is a conflict of motives, and the will is free to choose between them. It is developed only under temptation, and cannot be given by creation.
They begin their life in a world where change is the law of physical and material things. The life which animates all earthly organisms is transitory; they begin in weakness, rise more or less rapidly to maturity and then go down again through feebleness to death, and are resolved into the elements of which they were composed. They appear for a little time and then vanish away, to give place for others that are alike transitory in their nature. There is nothing in the physical organism of this first pair though exquisitely formed to insure them against the common lot of all earthly organisms. Indeed, things that are the most beautiful are often the most frail and perishable.
But there is within them a capacity for a higher, bet- ter and more enduring life than this world promises, to which they may hope to rise, if they shall prove themselves worthy of it. They are placed midway, as it were, between two worlds. With their feet standing on this earth, they may look upward to the heavenly world above them, and hold communion with their Maker, and aspire to fellowship with the holy and happy spirits that surround His throne in love. So the Psalmist sings:
“Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels and hast crowned him with glory and honour. Thou made him to have dominion over the works of Thy hands. Thou hast put all (earthly) things under his feet; all sheep and oxen and the beasts of the field.” Psalm 8:5.
“Whether they shall rise to this higher place, and be taken into companionship with the angels, and be made heirs with them of Eternal Life; or whether they shall sink to the plane below, and take their lot with the beasts that perish, depends on their own free choice. Till this great question is determined, they can be called neither mortal nor immortal. They are candidates for immortality, yet liable to death.
Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, who wrote in the latter part of the second century, before the Grecian philosophy, which was beginning to find its way into the Christian Church, had been generally accepted, well says:
“But some will say. Was man made mortal by nature? By no means. Immortal? Nor do we say this. If immortal his Maker would seem to have made him a god; if mortal, God would seem to be the author of sin. Therefore He made him neither mortal nor immortal, but capable of both; so that if he advanced to the things which lead to Immortality, he might receive Immortality, and become godlike; but if, on the other hand, he should turn to the works of the flesh, he would become unto himself the author of his own death.”
That they are even in their creation liable to death, and actually exempt from it only so long as they are free from sin, is made evident by the provision that is made for the preservation of their lives. A Tree of Life is provided, of which they may freely eat so long as they continue loyal and obedient, but no longer. Immediately after their fall- as we shall soon see this privilege is withdrawn, and they are debarred all access to it, and why? We are not left to conjecture the reason; for we are expressly told: “Lest he put forth his AND LIVE forever”! As we shall have occasion to remark further on this remarkable passage in the next chapter we pass it for the present, simply observing that it establishes beyond all reasonable dispute the point for which we are contending that our first parents were not constituted immortal in their creation, and that all the life they had in their innocence was conditioned on their continued obedience, and even in that case, was dependent on their free access to the Tree of Life for its maintenance. To call such a life an immortal life is neither according to reason nor Scripture but contrary to both. And yet on this question there appears to be more confusion of thought, and illogical reasoning and unscriptural dogmatism in our religious literature than on any other. We take as a specimen, the following jumble of truth and fiction from Calmet’s Dictionary.
“Immortality, in an absolute sense belongs to God only. [True.] He cannot die; angels are immortal, but God who made them can terminate their being. [True again.] Man is immortal in part; that is, in his spirit, but his body dies. [Who taught the author this doctrine? surely he did not get it from the Bible. God said “Thou shalt surely die “not thy body, but thou thyself. It is what that other personage said, that our author is here endorsing.] Inferior creatures are not immortal; they die wholly. Thus the principle of immortality is differently communicated, according to the will of the Communicator, who can render any creature immortal by prolonging his life; can confer immortality on the body of man together with his soul, and who maintains angels in immortality by maintaining them in holiness. Holiness is the root of immortality [True as the Bible.] But God only is absolutely holy, as God only is absolutely immortal. All imperfection is a drawback [Sic] on the principle of immortality; only God is absolutely perfect, therefore only God is absolutely immortal.”
The author seems to be bewildered by his psychological notions. He has glimpses of the truth, but he does not venture to carry out the doctrine he asserts. If holiness is the “root” of immortality, what becomes of immortality when the root is wanting? If God, as he says, “maintains angels in immortality by maintaining them in holiness,” does He not maintain saints in immorality in the same way? No doubt He does, for this is just what He says. What then becomes of the evil angels and reprobate sinners? How are they maintained n immortality? What he means by “all imperfection is drawback on the principle of immortality,” we cannot guess, unless it be, that the imperfect and the wicked are not quite so immortal as the perfect! I But is immortality a thing of degrees? Can one creature be more immortal than another and yet both be immortal? Or does he mean that it is more difficult for God to make wicked and imperfect creatures immortal, but still He will do it? Why not say as God’s Word says, that holiness is essential to the immortality of all of God’s creatures whether angels or men, and failing of this, they cannot have immortality they must die not partly, but wholly and forever.
Dr. Hodge, in his Systematic Theology, Volume 2, Chapter 6, says:
“The reward promised to Adam, on condition of obedience, was Life. This included the happy, holy immortal existence of the soul and body. The death threatened was the opposite of the life promised. But the life promised, as we have seen, includes all that is involved in the happy, holy, immortal existence of the soul and body; and therefore death must include not only all the miseries of this life and the dissolution of the body, but also all that is meant by spiritual and eternal death, God is the life of the soul. His favour, and fellowship with Him are essential to its holiness and happiness [and why not to its life?] If His favour be forfeited, the inevitable consequences are the death of the soul, i. e., its loss of spiritual life and unending sinfulness and misery!”
But surely unending sin and misery are not the “opposite” of a happy, holy, immortal existence. Nothing but actual death is the “opposite” of life. How evidently the author slips away from his premises to save his dogma of the deathless nature of the soul?
But this part of the subject belongs to another place; and we proceed to consider in the next chapter, The Genesis of Sin and Death.
CHAPTER 8
The Genesis of Sin and Death.
We have seen how the first pair of our race had their genesis on this earth, and from, the earth, like all animal creatures, though the last made and highest of them all, they were like them essentially earthly, as the name Adam earth-made, which their Creator Himself gave them, plainly shows. They were of the same physical organization, made of the same materials, and designed to breathe the same air, to subsist on the same food, to come into life by successive generations in the same way; but not necessarily to go out of it in the same way by death; for they had the offer of a higher life, which is pure and deathless. But that they were liable to death, is manifest from the extraordinary provision in the Tree of Life, to secure them against it. They are candidates for that higher life, but not yet matriculated into it.
Their character is yet inchoate and undecided. They must first go through a probation to prove that they are worthy, or fit for the immortality which is the lot only of those higher intelligences that are confirmed in holiness and loyalty to their Maker. If they shall recognize the claims of their Maker to their love and confidence, and give to their higher faculties the supremacy that rightfully belongs to them, they will prove themselves worthy of the boon that is offered to them, and capable of enjoying it. But if, on the other hand, they shall turn away from Him who is the Supreme Source of all life and blessedness, and seek their chief good in the things of time and sense, and in the gratification of their animal and earthly natures, then they must lose their right to the Tree of Life, and share the perishable lot of all earthly creatures and things.
How shall they be proved? It is evident that the test of their loyalty must be one that is adapted to their condition. A moment’s reflection will show us, that very few, if any one of the prohibitions of the Decalogue as afterwards given, would be applicable to their case. Those who smile at the simplicity of the test provided, seem not to consider this. To us, its chief excellence appears in its simplicity. It must be an objective test, and one that appeals to their sensitive nature. It must be one that possesses some attraction, and which will require the exercise of their faith in God, and their sense of obligation to Him, and yet one that is not over-powering in its nature.
Here, in the midst of the garden, close by the Tree of Life, stands a tree the fruit of which they are forbidden to eat. Of the fruit of all the other trees they may freely partake; but they are held back from the exercise of perfect liberty at this one point, or, as it were, by one cord. Shall this cord be severed that they may be perfectly independent of their Maker? The fruit of this tree is “pleasant to the eyes,” and appears to be “good for food,” and in addition to all this, it possesses that mysterious attraction which all forbidden objects have something “to be desired to make one wise” to give some knowledge or new experience which is withheld. But on the other hand, there are the claims of God, and the fearful penalty of disobedience.
Balancing between these conflicting motives, the gratification of their sensitive natures, with a desire for perfect freedom from superior control, and a thirst for that mysterious knowledge which they can only have by disobedience, on the one hand; and on the other, a sense of loyalty to God and the fear of the consequences of
His displeasure, the Tempter now addresses himself to them, and plies his arts of persuasion, with how much success we know too well. That this Tempter was Satan is evident from the teaching of the Scriptures elsewhere. The “old Serpent,” is one of the principal titles given to him. We are told that he was a Deceiver, a Liar, a Murderer (anthropoktonos mankiller) from the beginning (see John 8:44, Revelation 20:2, etc.) What a change the curse of God may have wrought upon this animal, or whether there was anything supernatural at that time as there certainly would be now in the employment of this agency to address the woman, we know not, and will forbear to guess.*
* There is no appearance of limbs externally in the body of the serpent; but naturalists say, that under the skin of some serpents, at least, there are what seem to be inchoate limbs or wings, that have been arrested in their development. This fact, if it be so, taken in connection with the curse, “Upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life,” is certainly suggestive of what the animal once was might have been but for this curse.”
But in any case, we need not suppose that either she or her husband in their inexperience, felt any surprise at being addressed in this manner. Like children, whose credulity is boundless, and to whom nothing seems miraculous, till observation and experience have taught them what are the laws and processes of nature, they listened without fear or surprise to his suggestions and flatteries. That they should have trusted their Maker, believed His Word, and held fast their allegiance, in spite of all the seductions of the Tempter, and their own natural desires for self-gratification covered it up, and concealed it by an enigmatical expression, only to be revealed after the offence had been committed, ought not cannot be credited by any one who duly honours the truth and justice of God, to say nothing of His goodness and mercy. And furthermore, what shall we say of the doctrine, that they incurred, at the same time, this same unutterable doom of endless misery, not only for themselves, but for all their infant posterity, to the end of the world!! And yet, this is the sophisticated theology which Augustine, and his associates and successors, have formulated for us, and handed down to us from generation to generation, as the true orthodox system of the Christian Church. In proof of this assertion we may refer to any of our traditional creeds or catechisms or systems of theology. It will suffice to quote the following from Cruden’s Concordance under the word “death.”
“Death signifies (1) The separation of the soul from the body. This is Temporal death. (2) A separation of soul and body from God’s favour, in this life, which is the state of all un-regenerated and un-renewed persons who are without the light of knowledge and the quickening power of grace. This is Spiritual death. (3) The perpetual separation of the whole man from God’s heavenly presence and glory, to be tormented forever with the devil and his angels. This is the second death or Eternal death. To all these kinds of death Adam made himself and his posterity liable by transgressing the commandment of God by eating the forbidden fruit.
“We are bold to say that there is not one word or hint, or shadow of a hint, in all the Bible to justify such a monstrous scheme of doctrine. It is sheer scholasticism, and that too, of the worst sort. It was evidently fabricated to bring the Word of God, which positively declares that death is the penalty of sin, into a seeming accordance with a philosophy that declares that man will not, cannot actually die.
That our first parents could not possibly have understood any such threefold doom as involved in this one word, is quite evident. That no such doom was intended by God will be equally evident when we come to listen to the sentence of condemnation which He pronounces upon them.
“And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle and above every beast of the field, upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed. It shall bruise thy head and thou shalt bruise his heel.
“And unto the woman he said: I will greatly multiply thy sorrow, and thy conception; in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
“And unto Adam he said. Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded thee saying, Thou shalt not eat of it, cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of i all the days of thy life. Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee, and thou shalt eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return unto the ground, for out of it wast thou taken; for dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return. *
Of the many interesting points suggested by this passage, we can notice, and this but briefly, only these three:
1. We have God’s own interpretation of what He meant by the words: “In the day that thou eats thereof thou shalt surely die.” They lost at once and forever the claim to immortality in themselves, and all hope of exemption from the common lot of earthly creatures. They fell immediately under the sentence of death. The struggle between themselves and the great monster from this moment began, which would inevitably be one of sorrow and pain, and however long it should continue, would surely end in their falling under His power, and returning to the dust from which they came.
Adam Clark says, in his Commentary, it means: “From that moment, thou shalt become mortal, and shalt continue in a dying state till thou die. This we find literally accomplished; every moment of his life, he may be considered as dying till his soul and body are separated [Death means more than a separation of soul and body; it means a cessation of life]. Other meanings have been given to this passage but they are in general either fanciful or incorrect.”
So Dean Alford also says in loco: “A man may, as we say, die by inches, and may be said if passing from a state where death was not the necessary end of his days to die, when the seeds of death begin to work in him. It is not sufficiently borne in mind, that man’s exclusion from the Tree of Life, which could have conferred immortality on him, was the carrying out of this sentence.’ “Isaac Watts in his Ruin and Recovery of Mankind (Question XI.) says: “Who can say whether the word death might not be fairly construed to extend to the utter destruction of the life of the soul as well as of the body? For man, by sin had forfeited all that God had given him, that is, the life and existence of his soul as well as his body; and why might not the threatening declare the right that even a God of goodness had to resume all back again, and utterly destroy and annihilate His creatures forever? There is not one place of Scripture that occurs to me, where the word ‘death’ as it was first threatened in the law of innocence, necessarily signifies a certain miserable immortality of the soul, either to Adam the actual sinner or to his posterity.” That literal death is what was meant, and all that was meant by the words “surely die” is further evident when we are told, as in Genesis 5:5, that he did ‘die’ as God had said. The same word (muth) is used in both places. It is quite unreasonable to suppose that it has two different meanings in these two cases.
2. But there are those who object to this interpretation, because the full execution of the sentence of death is postponed. It is said, “In the day that thou eats thereof thou shalt surely die.” The cumbrous theory of three sorts of deaths, two of which are not death at all, but so called to give plausibility to the theory, rests mainly on an arbitrary construction of this adverbial clause. But any one may see by referring to his Concordance, that the phrases, “today,” “this day,” “in the day of,” etc., are not only used with great frequency in the Scriptures, but that they do not usually refer to a specific astronomical day of twenty-four hours. They are used to certify or emphasize a declaration, to give it an objective certainty. In this very account of the creation, the word “day” is evidently used in a very broad sense, to designate a period of time, more or less extended. It is not generally supposed that the first six days of creation were literal days of twenty-four hours each. It certainly has a broader sense in the following passage. Genesis 2:4: “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.”
But we have no occasion to insist on giving any other than the strictest literal interpretation to this phrase; for we cannot doubt that their forfeited lives would have been at once taken, and the inchoate race of man on earth brought to an end, in its first representatives, had it not been for God’s purpose to redeem man from death by a Divine Saviour, and to offer him another life by a resurrection from the dead, an Eternal Life beyond all possible contingency of forfeiture by a Second Adam from heaven. Hence the execution of the sentence was suspended not annulled and they were permitted to live for a time, as we all now are, after having forfeited our lives by sin, and fallen under the same sentence that they might come under this system of recovering grace.
And may we not hope, that this long reprieve was not in vain even in their case; and that though God’s truth must be justified in their death, as in ours, they died, at last, in the hope of a better resurrection; and that when they shall rise again “from the dust of the ground,” at the coming of their Redeemer, with all their children, it will be with bodies not earth-made, but spiritual, and incorruptible, like unto His own glorious body, to enter with the innumerable company of the redeemed upon that new life, a higher and better life that shall never end in the Paradise of God?
3. It is commonly said, that God pronounced a curse upon our first parents and their posterity. But we do not find it in the record. On the contrary, we find intimations of mercy even in the announcement of their doom. He cursed the ground for their sake, so as to render it more difficult of cultivation and require toil and sweat to secure its fruits. He foretold also the peculiar hardships and pains of the woman. He did curse most emphatically the agent in the accomplishing their ruin, and in him the Great Deceiver himself; but in that curse He gave intimations of mercy, toward the dupes of his malice. They may not have understood all that was meant by that mysterious promise, that the seed of the woman should crush the serpent’s head, but it is evident from the sequel that it was pregnant with hope even to them. To us, who read it in the light of the Gospel, it gives an assurance of the issue of the conflict which he had provoked, in the complete destruction of this great enemy of God and men, by one of her own children in the flesh, but invested with Almighty power.
One point more remains to be noticed in this connection which throws a flood of light on this question of immortality in sin, from our point of view, and which would seem to confirm, beyond the possibility of dispute, the truth for which we are contending, but which is, and ever must be, full of darkness and mystery to those who take the opposite view. They are at once driven from this earthly Paradise, and debarred all access to the Tree of Life, by means of which their lives were to have been perpetuated, had they not sinned, or which, as some think, had been given them as a pledge of its perpetuation, it matters not which, this one point is evident: All possibility or hope of immortality in sin was now taken away from them. “And cherubim and a flaming sword, which turned every way to keep the Tree of Life,” were placed at the eastern entrance to the garden. And for this express purpose, as the Scripture informs us, “lest he (the man and woman, Adam) put forth his hand and take also of the Tree of Life, and eat and live forever.”
This is not to be regarded as a superadded curse, but as a signal act of Divine mercy. For what could have been more awful or more cruel in their Maker, than to have perpetuated their forfeited lives forever and ever, in sin and misery! And yet this is the very doctrine our sophisticated theology teaches. Milton, who holds with us in his Paradise Lost, represents God as saying:
“I at first with two fair gifts Created him endowed with happiness And immortality; that fondly lost, This other served but to eternize woe, Till I provided death.”
So also Prof. Stanley Leathes, in Smith’s Bible Dictionary, says; as every thoughtful scholar who is not utterly blinded by his philosophy must say:
“Though the curse of Adam’s rebellion, of necessity, fell upon him, yet the very prohibition to eat of the Tree of Life, after his transgression, was probably a manifestation of Divine mercy, because the greatest malediction of all, would have been to have the gift of indestructible life superadded to a state of wretchedness and sin.”
Irenaeus, who wrote in the Second century also says:
“The Lord drove man out of Paradise and removed him from the Tree of Life, because He pitied him, and did not desire that he should continue a sinner forever, nor that the sin that surrounded him should be immortal an evil interminable.”
But let it be observed, this Tree of Life is not destroyed, it is permitted to stand, though guarded from all sinful approach, till the right to eat of it in the heavenly Paradise of which this earthly one is but a type, shall be regained for man by the Second Adam.*
* The Hindu Mythology teaches that there is a certain fluid prepared by the gods, called the Amrutta or drink of immortality, which confers eternal life upon all who taste it. But to the pious man, along with immortality, it brings happiness, without measure and without end; while in the wicked it works everlasting agony. So has heathen tradition misinterpreted and perverted the real design of this Tree of Life The goodness of God forbids His conferring immortality on the wicked who must of necessity be miserable. It is only those who are fitted to enjoy eternal Life who are permitted to eat of this fruit.
John in the closing chapters of his Revelation, after his vision of the battle fought, and the victory won, and Sa- tan and all his hosts, not only overthrown, but cast into the lake of fire, with Death and Hades to be utterly and forever consumed, gives a glowing picture of this celestial Paradise, and then says: “ And he showed me a pure river of water of life clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it and on either side of the river was there the Tree of Life, which bore twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month, and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him; and they shall see His face; and His name shall be in their foreheads, and there shall be no night there; and- they need no candle, neither the light of the sun; for the Lord God gives them light; and they shall reign forever and ever.”
That God should have caused the eternal destiny of the whole human race to depend on this one act of the first pair seems, to many, arbitrary and unjust. But this complaint arises from a misconception of the case. If the two alternatives had been eternal happiness or eternal misery, as our traditional theology teaches, then indeed one might well complain of such a trial for the race, or even for any one individual of the race. But there was no such trial. The alternatives were not eternal weal or eternal woe even for themselves, much less for their posterity; nor is there any warrant from Scripture for such an inference. The test was simply this: Which should have the supremacy, their moral or their physical natures.
Whether they should be controlled by the demands of the spirit or the flesh, by faith or by sight, Whether they should seek as their supreme good, things heavenly and eternal or things earthly and perishable. If they should choose the former, they might hope for the favour of God forever, and need have no fear of death; if the latter, they would incur His displeasure, and, of necessity, have their portion in the perishable and transitory things of earth, like all other earthly creatures.
The trial of the first pair would evidently be the trial of the whole race of their descendants; for all are constituted alike. The stream cannot rise any higher than its source. The popular proverb is certainly applicable in this case: “It is not needful to drink the whole barrel to test the quality of its contents.” One taste will suffice for this. This will be especially evident when we consider the perfect equipoise of their natures; that they were swayed by no evil habits, or tendencies or hereditary bias, and were surrounded by hardly any other temptation to sin but in this one direction. No trial could have been made under circumstances more favourable to a successful issue. It proved conclusively, that the human race was as yet unfit for immortality. And if God had not intended to give us Eternal Life, under another probation, and better auspices, our case would have been hopeless.
Let us suppose that they had successfully passed through this first trial; this would not have placed them beyond the reach of temptation, so long as they remained in the flesh, the perpetuation of their lives would still have depended on their perpetual obedience. They could have attained to nothing in this life, beyond a contingent immortality, conditioned on their continued freedom from sin. Neither could their descendants, however free they might have been from any evil bias at their birth. Every one must have been on a continuous probation, with no security against falling excepting in himself.
Instead of complaining, ought we not to rejoice that we have had our trial in them, and that though we come into life under this forfeiture with all the disabilities it imposes, we come under a system of recovering grace, by which Eternal Life is again offered to us by a new birth through a Second Adam, and secured to all who accept of it through Him, beyond the possibility of loss?
Still further may we not inquire, whether mankind could have been qualified for this better life, but by a knowledge of good and evil? Whether they could have risen to that life above, without first having gone down to death through the sad experience of sin? Was not the Adamic state necessarily preliminary and preparatory to the higher Christian state? May we not see the wisdom of the Creator, as well as His goodness and mercy, in this plan of recovering grace? Instead of looking upon the fall of man as originally created, as a disaster altogether deplorable, and the scheme of grace consequent upon it, as an expedient to repair the mischief, and which at best is but partially successful; may we not suppose that He who is all wise, and sees the end from the beginning, and makes no mistakes, in His purpose to give immortality to man, knew how he could be best fitted for it, and secured in the enjoyment of the boon?
It seems to be a law of nature, and of providence and of grace also, that the inferior and imperfect must come before that which is higher and better; and that the highest stage is to be reached only by coming up through those that are below. “And so it is written, the first man Adam was made a living soul (or animal creature); the last Adam was made a quickening (life-giving) spirit. Howbeit, that was not first which is spiritual but that which is natural (animal) and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man was of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy, and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit in-corruption.”
We must first go through this lower stage and die, before we can rise to a higher and more enduring life in the kingdom of God. Did not our Lord teach this, when He said: “Verily, verily I say unto you, except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abides alone; but if it die, it brings forth much fruit.” And does not the Apostle Paul say the same in the chapter from which we have just quoted: “That which thou sows is not quickened except it die”? Is not this the plain teaching of the Gospel, that we gain infinitely more in Christ than we lost in Adam? That what we lost in the first Adam was, at best, but an earthly Paradise, but that in the Second Adam, we gain a celestial Paradise? That Christ came, not simply to repair the ruin of the fall, and to bring mankind back again into favour with God, but to raise them to a state infinitely higher than they could have been entitled to, had their earthly progenitor remained in the innocence of his first creation?
The first Adam had but a contingent life, at best, and this he forfeited for himself and his posterity as we also have done over and over again for ourselves by our own sins; but the Second Adam proved himself superior to the seductions of the great Deceiver. He possessed an absolute immortality in His own right; and this is the life He transmits to all His own children in a second birth, and by a resurrection from the dead; nor will He suffer the great Adversary to take it from them.
“My sheep hear my voice and I know them, and they follow me; and I give unto them Eternal Life, and they shall never perish; neither shall any pluck them out of my hand.”
“Because I live ye shall live also.”
“I am the Resurrection and the Life; he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live. And whosoever lives and believeth in me shall never die “
Note. We concur so heartily in the following sentiments expressed in a volume just issued, and they seem so apposite to the theme in hand that we take pleasure in giving them, by way of an annex to the foregoing Chapter.
“Is the gift of Eternal Life through Jesus Christ a perpetuation of tills present gift of life, or is it a gift of a higher order?
“It would be presumptuous in any man to attempt to tell what life is. Science has been pursuing the secret with microscope and scalpel, and tracing its footsteps backward along the ages. And yet she cannot cross the border- line of this mystery. All we know is, that it is from God, the Fountain of all Life. Science and Scripture unite in affirming that it is closely connected with this system of creation. Some scientific philosophers seek to convince us that this system furnishes from within itself the substratum and the potency of every form of life. And yet confessedly they have never penetrated to the origin of life. Their conjectures, therefore, are worth nothing alongside of the Bible declaration, that ‘the Father hath life in Himself,’ and that from Him all things live. But He has made nature to be the soil upon which life grows and is nurtured. It is the arena upon which it performs its functions and puts forth its energies. It is the domain it seeks to subsidize for its uses and fully possess.
“And hence we observe that all life in this system of nature seeks embodiment. A body is necessary in order to bring created life into connection with and dominion over God’s works. Our bodies are centres of the forces that play through this created system; batteries by means of which they are stored up for our use. I am persuaded that in our prevalent conception of the gift of life, we depreciate embodiment. We infer from Scriptures, that it is the only form of created life that can possess and enjoy our Father’s vast estate. Hence the importance of that cardinal doctrine of the New Testament, the Resurrection. Even He, in whom creation was headed up from the beginning, became embodied. And in Him the fullness of the Godhead now dwells bodily. Evil spirits appear to be the outcasts from this system. Hence Scripture gives no instance of the appearance of embodied evil spirits, except as they steal into and possess themselves of other persons’ bodies.
They even prefer swine to being disembodied. On the other hand, in all the instances in which good beings from the unseen world appear to men, there was a visible form.
“Looking now at the teachings of science and of Revelation concerning the progress of creation, we find that, from the beginning the Creator has been preparing it to be the domain of embodied life. We find an ascending series of created forms, from plants, and creeping things, until the whole is headed up in man, made in the image of God. But Adam was the first creation of man with a Spiritual nature capable of knowing God and of immortality through union in life with Him.
“Adam was a grand step upward in the ascending series of life. But our present inquiry is. Has the Creator taken the last step in this advance of life on the platform of His work? We reply. No. Adam was an earthy man, made capable of eternal life. But he lost this great boon by disobedience. Indeed it was never intended that he should attain and hold it for himself and his posterity. The casket of his manhood was too frail for such a treasure, his hand too weak for such a sceptre.
It was in the mind of God from the beginning of creation to produce on its platform a Divine man, immortal in his own nature, as the completed image of Himself, and worthy to wear as his representative the crown of this great system. The first man was but a mortal, corruptible image of the invisible God, a perishable model in clay, of the noble image in the mind of the Divine Artist, which was to hereafter stand on the summit of creation and wear its crown.
“The incarnation, therefore, was another step in the ascending series of creation, the birth into it of a heavenly man, but not the final step, as is assumed, in much of the Christian thinking of the day. Its highest exponents, as, for example, Joseph Cook, do not avoid this error of making the incarnation the climax of creation. It can be shown that this is a subtle point of departure from the faith once delivered to the saints. The Resurrection of Jesus in the glorified form of manhood, that was the culmination of all God’s wondrous working in creation along the ages. To stop short of this, to view the incarnation otherwise than as in order to the resurrection, is only to know Christ Jesus after the flesh, whereas we are henceforth to know Him in this character no more. It is to forget that if any man be in Christ he is a new creation. The newly created immortal man, the perfect image of the invisible God, was brought to view when Jesus rose from the dead. The ideal manhood, which had been the primeval thought of God, and the goal of His creative energy was then realized. Before this signal triumph Jesus was in the likeness of sinful flesh. Our flesh and blood even in Him could not inherit the kingdom of God. Hence His body was newly created in that fashion of Glory in which, as the risen man, He is now seated at the right hand of power.
“At the resurrection of Jesus, then, we have the introduction of the new and final form of embodied life, the divine manhood. And this is the grand, the culminating revelation of the Word of God, the mystery, which in other ages was not made known, and before the splendour of which the light which shines upon all heathen systems of religion, or of human philosophy, or from the highest watch-towers of modern science pales, as does a rush-light before the sun.
“If we were to ask Science whether the highest form of created life has yet appeared upon the earth, she cannot tell us. She leads up through all stages of life to the earthly man and exclaims, Ecce homo 1 Behold the man for whom the earth has been so long preparing! But she knows nothing of the coming man. She teaches no doctrine of resurrection from the dead.
“But this Word tells us of a new order of humanity. The Head and Type of it has already been here. He was made flesh and dwelt among us. But through death He passed beyond this mortal sphere out into immortal manhood. And all heaven uttered another Ecce Homo! Behold the man, the final result of God’s wondrous working along the ages, the consummate product of His wisdom and power in heaven and on earth. When Paul, then, speaks as he does in his salutation to Titus, of the ‘hope of Eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began,’ he is speaking definitely of that new order of life which is embodied in the new man, Christ Jesus. This is now God’s gift to us through Him. It is not a mere perpetuation of the order of life and manhood in which we were first created in Adam.
It is a new endowment to which we are born in Christ, in virtue of which we become Sons of God of a new order, a new and higher rank in creation. To this new manhood there pertains that life which is superior to all the forces and substances of the universe. Life, as we see it in these perishable forms, has power to subsidize the elements of nature for its support, and to direct its force for its own ends. But this it does now, not by inherent right, but in the way of warfare and subjugation, and in this struggle its powers ultimately break down. But Eternal life must bend all things in heaven and earth to its behest. It must be superior to all principalities and powers. All substances must wait upon its needs, and all forces become tributary to its aims. The harvest therefore, for which God has long been ploughing and tilling these fields of creation is not yet complete. A new order of being is to be produced, invested with Eternal life. Christ is the ‘first fruits’ in the new order. But we also are a kind of first fruits.’
“We are told that the whole creation is groaning and waiting for the manifestation of these Sons of God, They are its destined lords, and also its deliverers. They are that anointed race who are to subdue all its wide realms to the will of God, and make them vocal with His praise. And they cannot be fitted for this high office except as they rise in eternal life triumphant over all the forces and powers that prevail in this system. Man in flesh and blood is not worthy or capable of this dignity. But God, before the foundation of the world, provided for the redemption and reinvestment of man for this high office in the power of an endless life. And this, as we have seen, implies corporeity. Eternal life for man requires his new creation in body as well as spirit.
“In this way alone can he become a perfect image of God and a fit vessel for His eternal praise.” The mystery of Creation and of Man, Chapter 12. Reverend L. C. Baker.
CHAPTER 9
Inferential Evidence.
1. Animal Sacrifices.
2. Silence of the Scriptures,
The inferential evidence, from the Scriptures in support of our thesis, is so clear and strong, that we must call the reader’s attention to two points at least, under this head, before proceeding to examine that which is more direct and explicit.
I. The institution of Animal Sacrifices.
The prominent position that was given to this rite in the religious worship of God’s ancient people, from the very beginning down to the death of Christ the Great Sacrifice, shows that it had a peculiar significance. It took precedence of every other act of worship. In fact, their religious worship centred in this one rite. It was not merely the chief way, under the old economy, but the only revealed way of acceptable approach to God. It
seems to have been instituted immediately after the fall, even before our first parents were driven from the garden.
For the very next event recorded, after the announcement of the sentence, is this fact: “Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord make coats of skins and clothed them.” We may well suppose that these were skins of animals they had been instructed to offer in sacrifice; for they had not yet received permission to eat animal flesh. In the next chapter we read of the sacrifice “of the firstlings of his flock,” which Abel brought, and the offering “of the fruit of the ground” which Cain brought unto the Lord; and that, “the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering; but unto Cain and his offering He had not respect.” Why was the one more acceptable than the other? For aught that appears to the contrary, the offering of Cain was as pure, and as costly, and as freely made as that of his brother. The reason for this difference is quite obvious. The one was a sacrifice, and the other was not. In the offering of Cain, there was an acknowledgment of the Sovereignty of God. It was an act of worship. But there was no recognition of the forfeiture of his own life by sin, nor of his need of salvation from its penalty of death. But Abel, in pouring out the life of these innocent victims, acknowledged the forfeiture of his own life; and sought the mercy of God through these animal substitutes. Whether he had any intelligent faith in the Great Sacrifice yet to be offered, of which to us it is the evident type, we need not now inquire. It is to the import of the sacrifice itself that we ask attention. Why should the life of an innocent animal be taken and given to God by the worshiper?
What else could it mean, but that the life of the worshiper himself had been forfeited? Theologians tell us that it is an acknowledgment of the Sovereignty of God. So is all worship. So was Cain’s offering. It means vastly more than this. Viewed apart from this idea of the forfeiture of life, and the offering of an innocent substitute, the most worthy one that can be found this rite would seem to be without reason, and anything but acceptable to a holy God, who has a tender regard for all His creatures.
From the early institution of this rite, we see how it came to have a place in the religions of mankind everywhere. It was not a human device. It came down by tradition from the beginning. Though mankind departed far from the true God, and lost the knowledge of Him, yet they were not suffered to lose this one grand fact, that speaks so plainly of the forfeiture of life by sin, and of redemption as their only ground of hope.
This is one of the ways in which “God has not left Himself without a witness,” even amid the darkness of the heathen world. No other reason can be assigned why so singular and otherwise unmeaning a rite, should have been so universally adopted. It speaks plainly of the need of redemption by a substitute. It points to the Gospel yet to be revealed to the world. It is not to be supposed that its full significance was apprehended by these ignorant idolaters; nor was it even by the Ancient Hebrews; nor by Abel. It could not have been, till the blood of Christ, “which speaks of better things than the blood of Abel’s” sacrifice was poured out on Calvary.
We who live under the Gospel know that all these animal sacrifices, pointed to “the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world.” But it is to be feared, that many under the Gospel have but a very faint and imperfect idea of the true meaning of that Great Sacrifice made for their redemption from death.
Why must these animals be put to death? Why must their blood, which is their life, be poured out? They were not to be tortured, nor imprisoned; but put to death, and that too, with as little suffering as possible.
The significance of the act did not consist in the mere offering of the animals to God; but in the offering of their lives, in the spilling of their blood. So the virtue of the Great Offering consists, not in the sufferings which our Lord endured, as a false theology teaches.
These were brief, though severe while they continued; but not so severe as the sufferings of thousands who have been put to death under every form of protracted tortures that human and fiendish cruelty could devise. The schoolmen, who undertake to find the virtue of Christ’s sacrifice, in the agonies He suffered, and who estimate them as equal, in amount, to what would have been the accumulated agonies of all whom He redeemed from eternal suffering, miss its true meaning entirely. Thus we see to what preposterous conclusions this false dogma of immortality in sin and suffering will drive men in their efforts to explain the simple Gospel in accordance with it.
It was by the Death of Christ that we are redeemed from death, the death of a sinless man who could claim in His own right exemption from death, as Adam might have done had he continued sinless. It was no mockery of death by which He escaped from the body, for a time, that He might make an excursion into Hades and then return and take it, but an actual death, the same kind of death that man incurs by sin. All that was human in Him died His Divine Spirit could not die and then, quickened again by that same Spirit, He burst the bands of death, and rose in the same body, and yet not the same, for it was changed into a glorious, imperishable body, and made fit for the everlasting habitation of His immortal Spirit. It is not by His death alone, but by His death and resurrection that He becomes our Redeemer from death. If He had not risen, there could have been no resurrection for us. We had utterly perished. He died, then, not to save us from dying, but to redeem us from the power and dominion of death. Now He is qualified to become the Second Adam of all of us who trust in Him, and to immortalize us by a new birth and by a resurrection from the dead at His Second Coming, when “ He shall change our vile bodies that they may be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according to the working whereby He is able to subdue all things unto Himself.”
Viewed in this light, the sacrificial system becomes luminous, and sets forth emphatically, this great Gospel truth, that though we inherit death from our progenitors in the flesh, we have life again and immortality from our Spiritual Progenitor, the Eternal Son of God.
2. The Silence of the Scriptures as to the Natural Immortality of Man.
Our traditional theology teaches that every child of Adam that is born into the world is born to a life that is absolutely endless; that he can neither lose nor forfeit nor extinguish it by any act of his own, and that the Creator Himself never can, or at least, never will, for any cause whatever, destroy it, or take it away from him, however much he may despise or abuse the gift, or fail of the end for which he was created; that the flame of life, once kindled in infancy, will burn on and on so long as God Himself endures; that there is no power in sin which as the Scriptures say “brings forth death,” to put an end to it; that the waters of Lethe cannot quench it, nor the blasts of God’s anger in the judgment extinguish it, nor the gnawing worm, or devouring fire of Gehenna consume it, nor the agonies of the second death destroy it; but that it will survive the wreck of nature and the crash of worlds, and throughout all the revolving cycles of an unending future, hold on its way unextinguished and inextinguishable, like the life of the self-existent God, who gave it being.
We might reasonably suppose that a doctrine like this, when we consider the prominent place that is given to it in our theological systems and in the creeds of the Church, would be found somewhere set forth in the Word of God, or at least, that passages might be found that would serve as a foundation for such a belief. But so far from this, there is not one single passage in all the Bible that asserts or even intimates any such doctrine.
The honest advocates of this doctrine are obliged to confess that it is a deduction from philosophy, rather than from Scripture. And then, by taking these many passages of Scripture, that flatly contradict their dogma in an extraordinary and metaphorical sense, they would fain bring them into harmony with their philosophy.
But as for finding even one text that asserts it, they cannot. When you put them upon their philosophy, they are constrained to acknowledge their inability to demonstrate it. The late President Dwight, of Yale College, in his sermons. Volume 1, page 163, says:
“Among Christians I know of but one who has regarded the immortality of the soul as susceptible of demonstration. Should we believe with this ingenious writer that the soul metaphysically considered is so formed as naturally to be immortal, we must still acknowledge, because it cannot be denied, that its existence may terminate at death or at any other supposable period. Whatever has been created can certainly be annihilated by the power which created it. The continuance of the soul must therefore depend absolutely on the will of God. But that will can never be known by creatures unless He is pleased to disclose it. Without Revelation therefore, the immortality of the soul must be entirely uncertain.”
Very true. And how is it with Revelation? Neither he, nor any other man, has ever been able to find one single passage to sustain their doctrine. Let us not be misunderstood. It is not the doctrine of Christian immortality of immortality or eternal life by a new birth through Christ the Saviour, of which we are speaking. The Bible is full of this doctrine. It may be found in the Old Testament, though not so clearly revealed as in the New. It is the special theme of the Gospel, through which Life and Immortality are brought to light. But it is everywhere emphatically’ declared to be the special portion of the redeemed. It is given in the new birth, through Christ, and not in the natural birth from Adam.
This is the point to which the reader’s attention is especially directed. The Scriptures are not merely silent, with reference to this philosophic doctrine of the natural immortality of man; they not merely refrain from asserting it, they contradict it in every possible way. We have already sufficiently shown that the Greek adjective aionios, signifying eternal, is never, never used to qualify the word psuche, which means the natural life or soul of man. But it is only coupled with the word zoe, which designates that higher spiritual life, which is given in the new birth. In this connection it is employed over and over again, scores of times, and is usually translated Eternal Life or the Life Everlasting. The same is true of the analogous words in the Hebrew.
1. Now what do these advocates do when they would prove from the Scriptures the immortality of the natural man? Why, they transfer these qualifying adjectives from the word zoe, to the word psuche from the word signifying the higher spiritual life, which man receives only in the second birth, to that signifying the lower psychical life, which we all have by the natural birth; They take those passages of Scripture which predicate eternal life of the children of God as His peculiar gift, and apply them to the whole human family, without any distinction of character. In other words, they utterly ignore this main distinction which is everywhere made in the Scriptures between the regenerate and the unregenerate.
We have no wish to attribute intentional dishonesty any of our Christian brethren who are so hard pushed o sustain their dogma out of the Bible, which so manifestly contradicts it. But we have learned that good Christian men, when blinded by error, will take unwarranted liberties with the Scriptures to defend their favourite dogmas. This method of proving from the Bible the universal immortality of all men, is the same that the Universalist employs, to prove the doctrine of Universal salvation. After explaining away, as well as he can, those texts that directly contradict his doctrine, he takes all those passages that predicate salvation of the righteous, and applies them to the righteous and wicked alike. In no other way can either believers in Universal salvation, or believers in Universal immortality make the Scriptures seem to justify their position.
In proof of what we say, let the reader refer to any Bible text book, or collection of Scripture texts to establish the various doctrines of the orthodox system, which he may have at hand. We turn to the very convenient Bible Text Book of the American Tract Society, and we find that the judicious compiler under the head of Immortality cites no texts to prove that this is an attribute of man, simply because there are none. He cites only those that assert the immortality of God. But in the Roman Catholic Catechetical Compendium of Christian Doctrine by Reverend John Perry, the following instruction is given. “What do you mean when you say your soul is immortal? I mean that my soul can never die. How do you know this? We know it, 1. From reason. 2. From Divine justice. 3. From Divine Revelation.”
Under this last head two texts and only two are quoted, and both of them from the Book of Wisdom in the Apocrypha as follows: “God created man incorruptible” 2:23. “The souls of the just are in the hand of God, and the torment of death shall not touch them. In the sight of the unwise they seemed to die, and their going away from us was taken for utter destruction; but they are in peace. Their hope is full of immortality.” 3:1-4.
If the author could have found any texts in the Canonical Scriptures he would surely have quoted them, But even these two Apocryphal texts give no support to the doctrine. It was necessary to garble the first of these citations and to omit what immediately follows, or its testimony would be seen to be directly against the doctrine it is used to support. For the next verse reads:
“But by the envy of the devil, death came into the world; and they follow him that are of his side.” As for the second quotation immortality is declared to be the peculiar hope of the just.
Simmons, in his Scripture Manual under the title Immortality of the Soul, cites these three following texts and no other. Let us examine them, and see if they sustain this doctrine of universal immortality.
1. “My sheep hear my voice and I know them, and they follow Me; And I give unto them Eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand. “John 10: 27,28.
Is it possible that the compiler did not see, or that the reader can fail to see, that immortality is here declared to be the special portion of Christ’s people the peculiar gift of His grace? He says “My sheep.” “I give unto them Eternal life.” Why, instead of being a text to prove the immortality of the soul, the psuche the natural life of man, it is a most emphatic denial of the doctrine. It shows conclusively that it is not a natural gift, but a supernatural gift of grace.
2. “Who will render to every man according to his deeds; To those who by patient continuance in well doing, seek for glory and honour and immortality and Eternal life. Romans 2:6, 7.
And what shall He render to those who do not “seek for glory and honour and immortality”? The Apostle goes on to tell us in the twelfth verse, they shall “PERISH.” This text also, instead of asserting the natural immortality of all men, asserts just the contrary doctrine that it is the portion of those only who seek for it.
3. “Who hath saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus; but is now made manifest, by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ who hath abolished death and hath brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel.” 2 Timothy 1: 9, 10.
The author refers only to the last clause; we have quoted the verses immediately preceding, with which it is intimately connected. Here we have Death and Life contrasted, as almost always in the writings of Paul; the one as the natural inheritance of man from Adam, the other as the gift of God’s grace through Jesus Christ. Channing says, “ Immortality is the glorious discovery of Christianity!” Discovery? He should have said the glorious gift of Christianity. It was not discovered by Christianity, as the principle of attraction was discovered by Newton, who brought it to light as a universal principle of nature which had hitherto been only unknown on account of our ignorance. Immortality would not have been a fact but for Christianity. It was indeed God’s purpose, as the Apostle says, “before the world began” to immortalize man to give him Eternal Life, if he could be made fit for it; but not through Adam. From him we inherit only death but only through Christ, who hath abolished death and brought life and immortality to light by a second birth and a resurrection from the dead.
Dr. S. C. Bartlett pursues the same method in his well-known work, entitled Life and Death Eternal. In the second part of the volume, under the head of “A positive disproof of the doctrine of annihilation” he occupies a whole chapter in telling of Enoch and Elijah, who were translated to heaven, and of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, who were gathered to their fathers in peace, of Job and Moses and David and Daniel, and of the hopes they entertained of a better life beyond, and in quoting their language. We give a few extracts:
“It is recorded that ‘Enoch walked with God, and he was not, for God took him.’ Now it did not require the explanation of the writer to the Hebrews to unfold the meaning of this statement. A good man who walked with God while on earth, and the fact is twice affirmed, God therefore takes whither? To annihilation? To extinction of all conscious joy? Is that the mode in which God shows His love for a good man? The thought is ridiculous. He took him to Himself, to heaven; to be with Him on high, with whom he walked below. No man could miss the meaning. And the Sacred writer explains (Hebrews 11:5), ‘He was translated that he should not see death.’ This narrative occurring almost at the beginning of the sacred history, is very striking and weighty. It gives a key-note to the whole strain of the Scriptures.”
He indulges in similar remarks and inquiries in regard to the Psalmist. In quoting his language of confidence in God, and of hope for the future in the Psalms, he says:
“How plainly does the writer declare his confidence that God, who is his trust, will rescue him from the grave, and receive him to eternal joy in his presence,” etc.
Now what is the author’s purpose in all this? Is it to give the impression that those who believe in “conditional immortality,” deny the Eternal Life of the righteous? He knows that this is the very doctrine we most emphatically assert, and that these are the very texts we bring to prove it. Is it because he thinks by showing that because the righteous have the hope of Eternal Life, the wicked may therefore indulge the same hope, in spite of the uniform declaration of the Scriptures to the contrary?
Is it not rather because he can find no texts in the Bible to serve the purpose of his argument in favour of the immortality of the wicked; and so, to gain his point, he must ignore and break down the very distinction which is everywhere made in the Word of God between the portion of the righteous and of the wicked? If he would quote Scripture to any good purpose on this point, let him show that not merely Abel and Enoch and Noah left this world in the hope of an immortal life beyond, but that all of the fathers before the Flood, of whom it is said that “every imagination of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil and that continually,” were swept away, having the same assurance; that not merely Abraham and Isaac and Jacob were gathered to their fathers in peace, in the hope of a better resurrection, but that the beastly inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, who were consumed by fire from heaven, as unfit to live any longer on earth, were not destroyed, but only transferred to another fire below that shall prey upon them forever without consuming them; that Pharaoh and his magicians, as well as Moses and Aaron; that Saul as well as Samuel and David; and Ahab and Jezebel as well as Elijah and Elisha; that the false prophets as well as Daniel and Isaiah had the assurance the same assurance of an immortal life beyond the present. But there are no such texts in God’s Word and every Bible Scholar knows it; and every honest expounder of God’s Word will acknowledge it; and though the lack of such texts may prove a serious inconvenience to him, in the labour of proving that saints and sinners are alike immortal, he will not attempt to catch those who confidingly look to him for instruction “with guile,” by making the Scriptures seem to teach what he knows they do not teach.
Dr. George Dana Boardman, in his Creative Week, frankly says: “Not a single passage of Holy Writ from Genesis to Revelation teaches, so far as I am aware, the doctrine of man’s natural immortality. On the other hand. Holy Writ emphatically declares that God only hath immortality.” So Olshausen says in his commentary on Luke, sixteenth chapter; “The Bible knows not either the expression immortality of the soul or the modern doctrine of immortality.”
The author of Life in Christ well says on this point:
“In no single instance do we discover in the book of Psalms or in the poetical books, or in the book of collected Proverbs or weighty sayings of the wise, the expression of the Socratic hope of eternal life founded on man’s essential nature as eternal. The hope of Life is restricted to righteous men; to the true servants of God. There is not one ray of hope of an eternal future, which shines on the head of a rebel in the Old Testament. The immortality of the nephesh was a speculation unknown to the saints and prophets. ‘All the wicked will He destroy.’ ‘When the wicked do spring as the grass, and all the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that they shall be destroyed forever.’ No man lives “forever but in God.”
2. There is another way, which those who are skilled in dialectics have, of reading this doctrine of natural immortality into the Word of God. They say it is “assumed” to be a fact by the inspired writers of the Bible, that Moses and the prophets, that Christ and the Apostles, took it for granted, as a truth too evident to require any formal statement, that:
“It was not alone because the fact was admitted and might be assumed, but also because they were charged with messages of such tremendous import concerning the character and condition of that endless existence, as quite to throw into the background the abstract proposition of the soul’s immortality. To them the naked question of immortality, aside from these relations and issues, was of no account at all no more than the life of an oyster.” Life and Death Eternal, pages 191, 192.)
So says Archbishop Tillotson (Sermon 100): “The immortality of the soul is rather supposed or taken for granted, than expressly revealed in the Bible.”
So also the Presbyterian Quarterly (1860, p. 600): “The Bible generally assumes the immortality of the soul, as it does the existence of God.”
This may be regarded as a very adroit and ingenious way of escaping from the necessity of proving the doctrine that is confidently declared to be taught in the Scriptures; but is it honest? Is it fair treatment of the inspired volume?
In this way any doctrine not taught in the Scriptures, yea one which is emphatically contradicted by them, might be charged upon them. How do these advocates know that it is “assumed” by these sacred writers? Who has authorized them to say this? Why should a Divine Revelation, the very object of which is to enlighten us on this very point, assume it as a fact, without declaring it? This is the fundamental question that needs first to be well established “will the sinner live forever?” before “the conditions of that endless existence” are spoken of.
Is the immortality of the sinner so much more evident than that of his Creator, that it may be assumed, while that of the Creator needs to be asserted with constant reiteration? He is called the “Ever-living God,” “the Eternal God,” “the Everlasting Father,” the one “who is and was, and ever shall be,” “whose years have no end” , “who lives forever,” etc., etc. The very title by which He chooses to make Himself known to us is JEHOVAH or Jah which means the Self-existing, Ever-living one.
This is His most common designation and occurs hundreds and hundreds of times in the Old Testament and should have been so rendered instead of by the words “The Lord,” which our translators have improperly substituted. While on the other hand the title which God Himself has given to man is “Adam” earth-made. It is just on this very point that the Creator contrasts Himself with the creature. “I kill and I make alive, neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand; for I lift my hand up to heaven and say I live forever.” Shall puny man earth-made, “whose breath is in his nostrils” also lift up his hand to heaven and say “I too live forever!!”
No, no. It is not assumed by these Inspired Teachers; but by these philosophers. They would fain read it into the Word of God in spite of its plainest teaching to the contrary. In this, shall we not say however honest they may be, they are the servants, though indeed unwittingly, yet nevertheless actually, of him who first uttered the doctrine? We cannot doubt that if he were now here, as he was in Eden, he would exclaim, “This is exactly my doctrine,” “Ye shall not surely die, ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil forever!”
There are many other points under this head of Inferential Evidence, to which we would be glad to call attention; but we cannot make room for their discussion in this brief condensed volume. They are considered somewhat at length in the author’s larger volume, The Life Everlasting.
It ought to be remarked, before closing this chapter, that there are some half a dozen passages of Scripture that are very generally supposed to teach, by implication or inference, the doctrine of immortality in sin and suffering, and upon which, the advocates of the doctrine principally rely to support their position. These will be considered by themselves, in a subsequent chapter, after we have listened to the direct and explicit testimony of the Word of God to the doctrine for which we stand, that Death, actual and utter death is the common inheritance of all the children of Adam, and that immortality or Eternal Life is the gift of God’s grace through Jesus Christ, and is received only by a new birth and a resurrection from the dead.
CHAPTER 10
The Death Incurred.
We have seen how that man was originally endowed with alternative possibilities, that there were within him, as in an evenly adjusted balance, two principles contending for the mastery; the one spiritual and heavenly; the other carnal and earthly. Through the one he might, if he should so choose, look upward by faith to his Maker, and become permanently united to Him, and thus come into fellowship with those holy creatures that surround His throne, and share in their immortal destiny; or through the other, he might look downward to this earth, and unite himself, through the senses, with the perishable creatures of this world and share in their lot. He would be a spiritual and deathless creature, or a carnal and dying creature, according as the one or the other should predominate. We have seen how “the world and the flesh and the devil” prevailed to drag him downward, and he became a soulical, mortal man, and the progenitor of a race like himself. Now the Holy Law of God possesses this same twofold character; a spiritual and a soul’s significance, adapting it to both or either of these two natures in man. In losing his spiritual life if he can properly be said ever to have actually had a spiritual life in his natural state at any rate, in forfeiting his spiritual life through sin and coming under the spiritual penalty, which made him a mortal, he lost the sense of its spiritual character, as he did of everything else that was spiritual, and came directly under this law in its temporal application. The law itself lost none of its spiritual character, though it passed into desuetude or eclipse, to be again uncovered by Christ when He should come to bring to light the doctrine of spiritual life and immortality to man by a new birth.
No intelligent reader can have failed to observe how pre-eminently, if not exclusively temporal and earthly, the Old Testament dispensation is, when compared with the New. The rewards, the penalties, the blessings and curses of the law seem to be confined to this life, and were so understood by the great mass of those who lived under it. Health, prosperity, abundant harvests; long life, a numerous posterity; the favour of God and a peaceful death were the blessings promised to the obedient; and the reverse of all these to the disobedient.
Yet all these sanctions are capable of a twofold sense. They have a higher application, which was, no doubt intended, even though this were not apprehended by those who had no spiritual discernment, an application which Christ brought to light, when He came an application of which the Old Testament saints got glimpses, more or less clear, and which grew more and more perfect as they drew near to the light of the Gospel day. But not merely the righteous came to have anticipation of “some better thing” awaiting them beyond this life yet to be revealed, but the wicked also came to have more and more distinct forebodings of evil beyond the grave to disturb their security in sin. To the one, the many promises of Life which abound in the Old Testament, as well as in the New, seemed like the dawning of “light that arises in darkness”; to the other, the threatening of Deaths which are equally numerous, were like the rumblings of thunder from behind the dark cloud, which their vision could not penetrate. As we come clown the track of ages, these intimations grow more and more distinct, till they culminate under the Gospel, in a full announcement of Resurrection from the dead, a Judgment to come, and a Second Life one that is spiritual and eternal for the righteous, and a Second Death one that knows no waking forever for the wicked.
In contemplating the Divine Law and its penalty, as given to the Ancient Hebrews, through Moses, we should bear in mind, that God sustained a peculiar threefold relation to them; that of a Temporal Ruler taking cognizance of their physical and social affairs; that of a King over them in their collective and national capacity; and that of a Spiritual Sovereign, claiming as He does of all men the homage of their hearts. Now whether we view the sanctions of the Mosaic law as applicable to the individual, as regards this life, or to the Jewish people collectively, as a nation, or as having a deeper spiritual significance, the rewards and the penalties, are one and the same. The same words. Life and Death are used to express them. It is not always easy to tell in which of the three senses to apply them; nor does it seem to be intended that we should apply them exclusively in one sense.
The mass of the people, in their darkness and ignorance, gave them, at first, no doubt, a temporal application. But under the instructions of Moses, and the prophets God-inspired teachers they came gradually to see and feel that they had a broader and deeper signification than lay on the surface. These words, “Life,” and “Death,” which were constantly uttered in their hearing, became pregnant with meaning. They seemed to reach beyond the present world, and were full of hope and cheer to the righteous, and equally full of fearful forebodings and of terror to the wicked.
If we contemplate this law in its temporal and physical aspects only, we cannot fail to notice how prominently this penalty of Death is set forth. Those methods of corporal punishment, such as imprisonment, torture, etc., that are common to other governments, are hardly known if known at all under the Mosaic code. But Death is the one chief penalty. The penalty for Adultery was Death; for Blasphemy, Death; for Bearing False Witness, Death; for Idolatry, Death; for Incest, Death; for Man-stealing, Death; for Sabbath-breaking, Death; for Rape, Death; for Unchastity, Death; for Witchcraft, Deaths etc. Death was such an almost universal penalty that those who do not consider its significance regard it as unreasonable and barbarous. The mystery can only be explained by the fact, that Jehovah was not simply their Temporal, but also their Spiritual Ruler, and that the penalty of Death had a double significance, and was meant to have an application to both this life, and the life of the world to come.
The same is true, as regards the penalty of sin, in their national capacity. While the blessings of continued life, and prosperity under the favour of God were promised to them as a people, so long as they should be loyal and obedient to their Heavenly Ruler; the severest curses ending in death and utter extinction as a nation, were threatened in case they should turn away from Him, and reject His righteous authority and government. The curses and calamities and miseries, that should come upon them, and continue until they should be utterly destroyed and extinguished as a nation, are set forth in fearful array, in the closing chapters of the book of Deuteronomy. The catalogue is too long to be transferred to these pages. The simple point to which we wish to call attention is this: That the awful calamities and miseries predicted were to find their culmination and end in their utter destruction as a nation. As in the case of our first parents and their posterity, as individuals, sorrow and pain were to mark their whole course of departure from God, till they should return to the dust from which they came; such would be the sorrowful downward course of this disobedient people. These sorrows were but the preludes to their complete destruction, and the means by which it was accomplished. They all pointed and led to that final result, namely: utter ruin and extermination and extinction.
But many of the threatening of the law, are evidently too broad and inclusive to admit of any mere earthly or national application. They are directed against the sinning individual in the totality of his being. They include, most evidently all that he has or is, both in his physical and spiritual nature, both for this life and the life to come. But the same language is used in any and every case alike. The sanctions of the law, whether we regard it as a natural, or civil, or spiritual law are the same. They are Life or Death; Life or Death; Life or Death. The temporal sanctions of God’s law were intended to typify and enforce those that are spiritual, and which are more fully brought to light under the Gospel.
This Divine law must be self -consistent. Life and Death are antithetical term s, and they must be so understood in whatever relation they are taken. Death must be the loss or ending or extinguishment of whatever life is in question. If mere physical life is spoken of, then death must mean the ending of all physical life. If national life is spoken of, then death must mean the loss of national life. If psychical or spiritual life is spoken of, then death must mean the extinguishment of all psychical life. If the life of this world is spoken of, then death must mean the loss of an earthly life. If the life of the world to come, which the Scriptures tell us is Immortal, then death must mean the loss of the life of the world to come, or of immortality.
All this is so reasonable and evident that it would seem unnecessary to say it; but we are obliged to insist on it with special emphasis, because this is just where the advocates of the deathless nature of man endeavour to break the force of the passages we are about to cite, and escape from the conclusion to which if honestly accepted, they would inevitably lead them. They cannot but admit that death, when predicated of man in his relation to this world, implies the complete loss of all sensitive animal life. But when the same thing is predicated of him, in his relations to the other world, it cannot mean the same thing, they say; and why not? Simply because their philosophy of the deathless nature of man forbids them to understand it in this sense. It compels them to give another meaning to this word, death. It means “separation from God”; “loss of Divine favour”; “irregular functional action “; “devitalized”; “a state of sin and misery,” etc., etc., anything and everything dreadful, but just what it does actually mean Death, the extinction of life itself.
We must protest in the name of truth and reason against such conjuring with this plain Scriptural word, at the bidding of a pagan philosophy using it like the fabulous tent in the Arabian Nights, which was so elastic, that it could serve for a single man and be carried in his pocket, or stretched over a whole army, just as convenience might require.
Let us now give our attention to a few of the many passages scattered through the Bible, first in the Old Testament, and then in the New, that explicitly set forth this doctrine that Death and Destruction are the portion of the wicked.
1. The Old Testament.
The words of warning “Thou shall surely die,” uttered by Jehovah in the beginning; then the announcement to Adam of the fatal consequences of his sin, “Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return” then the record of his exclusion from the Tree of Life, and the reason for it, “Lest he put forth his hand and take also of the Tree of Life and Live Forever,” upon which we have already sufficiently commented, ought to be sufficient to establish our thesis, that man cannot live forever in sin; that since the fall he is altogether mortal, and must die.
We forbear to quote the many passages found in the Pentateuch, especially in Deuteronomy, in which Moses warned and threatened, and entreated the Israelites, using the words destroy, and perish, and die, and he brought to naught, etc., with all possible emphasis, lest the objector should say, they were used only in a political sense. But referring to the book of Job, we find such utterances as these:
“The candle of the wicked shall be put out.”
“They are as stubble before the wind, and as chaff that the storm drives away.” “They shall lie down alike in the dust, and the worms shall cover them.”
“The wicked is reserved to the day of destruction.”
“By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of His nostrils they are consumed.”
“He shall perish forever like his own dung.”
“He shall fly away as a dream, and shall not be found; yea, he shall be chased away as a vision of the night.”
“If He set His heart upon man, if He gather unto Himself his spirit, and his breath, all flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again to dust.”
“He comes forth as a flower, and is cut down; he flees also as a shadow, and continues not.”
“There is hope of a tree if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, but man dies and wastes away, yea, man gives up the ghost, and where is he? “
“As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood decays and dries up, so man lies down and rises not. Till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake nor be raised out of their sleep.”
The book of Psalms is full of such passages as the following:
“The way of the ungodly shall perish.”
“They are like the chaff which the wind drives away.” “Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing.”
“The wicked shall be turned into hell (Sheol), and all the nations that forget God.”
“The wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs; they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.”
“As wax melts before the fire, so let the wicked perish at the presence of God.”
“For lo; they that are far from Thee shall perish. When the wicked do spring as the grass, and all the workers of iniquity do flourish, it is that they shall be destroyed forever.
“For lo! Thine enemies, O Lord, for lo! Thine enemies shall perish.” “For yet a little while and the wicked shall not be.”
“His breath goes forth; he returns to the earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.
“The redemption of their soul [nephesh, life] is precious, and it [whether ‘it’ refers to soul or redemption the thought is the same] ceases forever. ‘
“None of them can by any means redeem his brother, or give to God a ransom for him, that he should still live forever and not see corruption.”
“For he sees that the wise men die, likewise the fool and the brutish person perish, and leave their wealth to others.”
“Their inward thought is, that their houses shall continue forever, and their dwelling places to all generations;
nevertheless, man being in honour abides not; he is like the beasts that perish.”
“Like sheep they are laid in the grave (Sheol), death shall feed on them, and the upright shall have dominion over them in the morning [there may be a hint here of a resurrection, and of an eternal life for the righteous, but surely of no such life for the wicked, for he goes on to say He shall go to the generations of his fathers; they shall never see lights.”
“Man that is in honour and understands not, is like the beasts that perish.”
“Let sinners be consumed out of the earth, and let the wicked be no more.” Solomon says in the book of Proverbs:
“The lamp of the wicked shall be put out.” “His destruction cometh as a whirlwind.” “He that speaks lies shall perish.”
“He that being often reproved, hardens his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.” “The expectation [tikvah, thread of life] of the wicked shall be cut off.”
“There shall be no reward [or literally acharith, no hereafter, no futurity] to the wicked. The candle of the wicked shall be put out” [what does this mean but that his life shall be extinguished?”
The prophets tell us:
“The soul that sins, it shall die.”
“The destruction of transgressors and of sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the Lord shall be consumed.”
“He shall be utterly cut off.”
“They shall be as though they had not been.” [can this be anything short of annihilation?] “They shall be as nothing.” [What then will remain?]
“They that strive against thee shall perish.”
“For behold the day cometh that shall burn as an oven, and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly shall be stubble; and the day that cometh, shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root or branch” [can any words be stronger than these to indicate the complete and utter destruction of the wicked?]
Some of these expressions may be understood as having a mere temporal application; but it is impossible to interpret them all in this way. We who are accustomed to read the Old Testament in the light of the New, can, perhaps, see a deeper meaning in them, than those to whom they were immediately addressed; but even they must have known and felt that their meaning was not exhausted this side of the grave. When the Law of God was revealed to the children of Israel, in such awful terrors from Mount Sinai, and Life and Death were set before them, and they were exhorted to “choose Life that they might live”; when again, the twelve tribes were set over against each other, half of them on Mount Ebal, and half on Mount Gerizim, and the one party was made to utter the blessings, and the other the curses of the Law, and each to respond to the other, “Amen”; when Jeremiah, the prophet solemnly warns and exhorts them in the name of the Lord, saying: “Behold I have set before you the way of Life and the way of Death”; again, when Ezekiel expostulates with them, saying by Divine command: “As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the Death of the wicked, but let the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn ye, turn ye, for why will ye die?”
And when, on other occasions substantially the same language was addressed to them, they must have known, and felt that something more than temporal life and temporal death was meant. For they could not hope to prolong their own life beyond its ordinary limit, nor to escape natural death. Surely these holy men were not mocking them with these words without meaning. What else could they have meant by exhorting them to choose life that they might live, but the Eternal Life of the world to come which is given to the righteous only, and which is more fully brought to light in the Gospel? and what, by that death which they are warned to turn from, but the Second Death in the all-consuming fire of Gehenna, to which the wicked will be consigned in the day of judgment, of which Christ and the New Testament writers speak more clearly? To this Testament we now turn.
2. The New Testament,
The passages which foretell, either in direct language or by figures of speech, the utter and everlasting destruction of the wicked are very numerous. We shall be able to find room for only a portion of them. Those we shall cite ought to establish the doctrine for which we contend, if it be possible to express it in Scripture language:
Matthew 3:10, 12. “Now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which brings not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire. Whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His floor, and gather the wheat into the garner; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” [Fire is not a preserving, but a consuming element. These fruitless trees, this worthless chaff, are cast into it, to be consumed utterly. It is called “unquenchable” because it cannot be arrested or prevented from doing its work. So the wicked are to be burned up, utterly consumed by the unquenchable fire of Gehenna.]
10:28. “Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul (psuche), but rather fear Him who is able to destroy (apolesai) both soul and body in [Gehenna, not Hades] hell.” [The first death does not put a final end to the man. But the second death, which God Himself inflicts when He casts the sinner into Gehenna, destroys all there is of him, soul and body. This Gehenna was the place just outside the walls of Jerusalem, where a fire was kept constantly burning, to consume the offal of the city that was cast into it; hence it was a fit type of that Gehenna, or lake of fire, into which the wicked were to be cast, to be utterly consumed.]
13:38-40. “The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; the enemy that sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the world, and the reapers are the angels. As therefore, the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of the world. The Son of Man shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; and shall cast them into a furnace of fire; there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.” [What language could be framed to express more definitely and vividly the utter destruction of the wicked at the last day, and the preservation of the righteous only, than this? The wicked are cast into this furnace of fire, not to be tormented forever, but for the same purpose that the tares are cast into it. That torment will accompany their destruction and that there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth is not to be doubted, but this is only incidental to the main object, which is their miserable and complete destruction.]
Luke 9:56. “For the Son of Man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.” [Not in the sense of saving them from dying, but from the utter loss of life.]
Luke 13:1-5. “There were present at that season, some that told him of the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with the sacrifices. Now Jesus answering, said unto them, “Suppose ye that these Galileans were sinners above all Galileans, because they suffered such things? I tell you nay; but except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish (osautos apoleisthe) or those eighteen upon whom the tower of Siloam fell and slew them; think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you nay; but except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish (omoios apoleisthe). [This cannot mean that they would lose their lives in the same way, by the cruelty of Pilate, or by the falling of another tower, for in this case the prediction was not fulfilled. Something more than a violent natural death is meant, most evidently. They should actually perish, if they did not repent.]
John 15:5, 6. “For without me (apart from me) ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and men gather them and cast them into the fire, and they are [tormented forever? no, but] burned.” [There is no Eternal Life out of Christ.]
Acts 3:23. “Every soul which will not hear that Prophet (Christ) shall be destroyed from among the people.”
8:20. “Thy money perish with thee.” [The same phrase eie els apoleian go to destruction is predicated of both Simon and his money]
Romans 2:12. “As many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law.” [Observe the word is perish not be punished, as Dr. Bartlett quotes it in one of his essays. We are not punished for being the children of Adam, though we have all become mortal and perishable through him. We are punished only for our own sins. But as mortal men, whatever be our moral character, we can only have Eternal Life through Christ the Second Adam our Saviour.]
6: 21. “For the end of those things [fleshly lusts] is death.” [Those who practice them are even now “spiritually dead” as it is called, but they lead down to actual death in the end.]
7: 5. “For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sin which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto [misery? no] death.”
9: 22. “Vessels of wrath fitted to destruction.” [Fit for nothing else, and unless saved by Christ this must be their end.]
1 Corinthians 15: 17. “If Christ be not raised, they also which are fallen asleep in Christ [as well as those who have died out of Christ] are perished. [This would be the common lot of all men, had not Christ died and risen again.]
2 Corinthians 4:3. “But if our Gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost.” [In other words, they from whom this gospel is hidden are in a lost or perishable condition.]
Phil. 3: 19. “Whose end (telos) is destruction.” [What can be more final than the end? Whatever miseries come upon men in the pathway of sin, the end of it all is destruction as is said in the next following verse.]
2 Thessalonians 1:9. “Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction, from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, when He shall come.” [From this we see that everlasting punishment is not necessarily everlasting torment-but utter destruction forever.]
2 Thessalonians 2: 10. “With all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish, because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved.”
1 Timothy 6:5. “Foolish and hurtful lusts which drown men in destruction and perdition.” [Olethron kai apoleian, two of the strongest words in the Greek language to express utter, total, complete ruination or destruction.]
Hebrews 6:4-8. “For it is impossible, if they (who were once enlightened, etc., etc.), shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance whose end is to be burned. [The Scriptures again and again assure us that this is the disposition that will finally be made of those who will not, or cannot be saved they shall be burned up as chaff.]
Hebrews 10:26. “For if we sin wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sin, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.” 12: 29. “For our God is a consuming fire.” [“A consuming fire,” not merely torments but consumes. There may be torment in the process, but it ends in consumption. It would not be possible to express in language more definitely or forcibly the doctrine for which we are contending that the unsaved will be utterly and forever destroyed and not, as our opponents say, kept alive, to be eternally tormented.]
James 1: 15. “Sin when it is finished brings forth death.” [Not simply misery; this is its more immediate effect;
but like a fatal disease it does not stop short of death.]
James 5: 20. “Let him know that he which converts a sinner from the error of his way, shall save a soul from death, and hide a multitude of sins.” [If unconverted souls are liable to death they cannot be deathless.]
2 Peter 2: 12. “But these as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, shall utterly perish in their own corruption.”
2 Peter 3:7-9. “But the heavens that now are, and the earth, by the same word, have been stored up for fire, being reserved against the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.”
“The Lord is not slack concerning His promise but is long-suffering not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.”
“They wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction.”
1 John 3:15. “No murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.” [Then surely he cannot be immortal.]
Revelation 20: 12. “And I saw the dead small and great, stand before God, and the books were opened, and another book was opened which is the Book of Life; and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the book, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and (Hades) hell delivered up the dead which were in them; and they were judged every man according to their works. And Death and Hell (Thanatos and Hades) were cast into the lake of fire. This is the Second Death. And whosoever was not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.” [It will be observed that this is after, not during what is called the intermediate state. Even were we to suppose this Hadean or intermediate state to be a state of conscious suffering for the wicked here is the end even of death and Hades; and all are cast together into this all-consuming lake of fire. Then to assure us that this is the literal destruction of death and hell, we are told in the verses immediately following that there is “ no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain; for the former things have passed away.’ Who shall venture to say, in spite of all this, that Death and hell shall not be destroyed, and that sorrow and crying and pain shall never come to an end?]
This sad array of Scripture passages all pointing in one direction, and leading to one conclusion, might be greatly enlarged. Indeed, we shall have occasion to quote others of the same tenor, when we come to show the contrast which is drawn between the lot of the righteous and that of the wicked. But the above ought to suffice for our purpose, if the testimony of God’s Word is good for anything on this question. If the force of these can be evaded, and their meaning explained away, then no doctrine can be proved from God’s Word to the satisfaction of those who are opposed to it. For this truth for which we contend is asserted in every way in which it is possible for language to assert it, positively and negatively, literally and metaphorically, by parable and by every variety of figure of speech. The wicked are said not only to die, to perish, to be destroyed, etc., etc., but also to be burned up, like chaff and stubble; to be utterly consumed root and branch; to be dashed in pieces as a potter” s vessel; to be ground to powder; to be thrown away as bad fish; to be thrown down like a house without foundation to wither like a branch that has been cut off; to consume away into smoke as the fat of rams; to perish like brutes in their own corruption; to become as ashes under the feet of the righteous; to be devoured; to be as nothing; to be as though they had not been; to be no more; not to be etc., etc. While these fearful figures express pain and suffering, and extreme anguish, as was doubtless intended, and in some cases perhaps, prolonged agony, they express more than this; they express death and utter destruction as the end and grand consummation of all these inflictions of Divine wrath.
But Dr. Bartlett and others for whom he speaks, object to any such understanding of these figures. He says the principle is unsound. And why? This is his reason:
“Its unsoundness appears at once from the fact that it necessarily cuts off the possibility of imaging forth any other penal transaction than a transient one, and forcibly turns all such representations into images of extinction [of course it does] for the reason that every process in a temporal world is temporary, and each process here that is most terrific and painful is incidentally short-lived.” (Life and Death Eternal p. 284.)
Verily this is a strange confession for one to make, who is sincerely endeavouring to ascertain what the Scriptures teach concerning the destiny of the wicked! If these vivid pictures of their complete and utter destruction are to be taken as true pictures as meaning what they seem to mean, why, his own doctrine of eternal sin and suffering must certainly be false. But this he cannot and will not allow. By what testimony, then, we ask, can his dogma be disproved? In what way would they have this doctrine expressed if it were true?
What language would be strong enough and explicit enough to convince him and those of his school? They admit that there is no proof of their dogma in philosophy, and that their main reliance must be on the Word of God. But when we show them that they have no warrant whatever for it in the Word of God, and when we cite to them text after text in long array, positively contradicting their dogma, they know how to explain them all away to their own satisfaction, and perhaps to the satisfaction of those who are not willing to receive the truth as it is taught in the Scriptures like practiced acrobats they are able to leap over any barrier that can be raised, and come down on their feet as firmly as ever.
These Scripture texts are no more to them, than the paper-covered hoops, that are put before the equestrian performers in the circus. They plunge through them and drop into their saddles again, as though there had been nothing in their way.
We quote to them the words of the Serpent, “Ye shall not surely die ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil,” and tell them that this is exactly their doctrine; and they think that we are very ungracious to class them with the Great Deceiver. We are indeed sorry, very sorry to do it; but if they will take up his doctrine and repeat it as their own, in flat contradiction of God’s Word, they must take the consequences. It is no fault of ours. What else did Satan teach but this very doctrine the immortality of the sinner?
Again we show them, that the Scriptures are absolutely silent in regard to any such doctrine as the natural immortality of’ man or the soul of man, as they phrase it and which they declare to be “one of the fundamental principles of the Christian system.” And they reply: “No matter; it is too evident to need to be asserted by these sacred writers. They “assume” it to be true. “To them the naked question of immortality, aside from these relations and issues, is of no account, at all no more than the life of an oyster.”
We point then to the Divine institution of sacrifices, in which the offerer is made to acknowledge the forfeiture of his own life in the death of the victim he offers to God; and to the Great Sacrifice on Calvary of which these animal sacrifices are the types, where the Son of God gave up His own pure life to redeem us from death; and we are told, that these sacrifices represent only the death of the body as for the soul, it cannot die; it is immortal.
Then we quote to them the familiar text, “The Soul that sins it shall die,” and a multitude of other texts equally explicit, and they reply that death when predicated of the soul does not mean actual but only spiritual death, which separates the sinner from God a forlorn, wretched, hopeless condition of being, in which the sinner continues to live or “exist,” to sin and suffer forever.
We then refer them to another numerous class of passages, in which sinners are represented as being cast into Gehenna to be consumed, soul and body together; which declare that they shall be burned up with unquenchable fire as the chaff of the threshing floor, as the useless tares or as stubble.
And they say: “O, no, you must not take these figurative illustrations in any literal sense; for they are ‘images of extinction they illustrate ‘temporary processes it necessarily cuts us off from the possibility of applying them to the case of the soul that cannot die, that cannot be consumed, that cannot be extinguished so that it shall cease to sin and suffer, as we hold.” So it does, and so it was meant to do. The fact is, the fault is not in these figurative illustrations, but in the doctrine itself. If they will accept neither the literal nor the figurative language of Scripture, in all its varied forms of expression, when it contradicts their dogma, then what authority has the Word of God over them; what can it have on this question? Would it not be more honourable and more honest to close this Sacred volume and to acknowledge what is so evidently true, that they hold this dogma as a self- evident truth, that no testimony whatever can disprove?
Note. Since the above chapter was written, the long-expected New Congregational Creed, prepared and concurred in by twenty -three out of a committee of twenty-five Doctors of Divinity, selected for this purpose, by the authority of the Triennial Congregational Convention as representing all the different shades of belief in their denomination, after more than three years of consultation, has been given to the public.
Of course, as a compromise, it could hardly be expected to express definitely and satisfactorily the peculiar views of any one individual. But we had hoped that these learned doctors, under the circumstances, would content themselves with a much shorter and more comprehensive creed, and that it would be couched, as far as practicable, in Scripture terms. But the use of Scriptural phraseology seems to have been studiously avoided; and in all its twelve Articles we find no recognition whatever of death as the penalty of sin; nor in professedly giving the true import of the sacrament of Baptism, is its real significance as symbolizing the death and resurrection of the believer to a new life through redemption by Christ even alluded to; nor in its definition of the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper is there any intimation that it points to Christ as the Source and Sustainer of that Life, and yet these are prime, fundamental principles of the Gospel as we understand it. But the criticism which our topic more especially suggests, relates to the last clause of the twelfth Article, which reads as follows: “We believe in a final judgment, the issues of which are everlasting punishment and everlasting life.” This clause is apparently quoted from Matthew 25:46, though the precise language of neither the common nor the revised version is followed; for there is no other clause like it in all the Scriptures.
If these words of our Lord had been intended to describe the issues of the last judgment of individuals after the resurrection, we may well understand this “everlasting punishment” of sinners to be the “punishment of everlasting destruction,” of which Paul speaks (2 Thessalonians 1: 9). But it is most evidently the punishment of the nations at His Second Coming, of which Christ is here speaking. But we object to the appropriation of this apparent phraseology of the Scriptures in the creed, to express the final doom of individual sinners consequent on the resurrection, not merely because the text had no such original application, nor because this antithesis of everlasting punishment and everlasting life is nowhere else found in the Word of God, but especially because it overlooks and ignores the real contrast which is constantly and everywhere else made in the Scriptures between the saved and the lost. It is one of Death and Eternal Life uniformly throughout the Word of God.
No careful reader of this Word can have failed to notice this; and no one, even if he were determined to put upon these crucial words the ethical sense of misery and happiness which our traditional philosophy requires, need make any objection to the use of this Scriptural antithesis. If then, the creed had read “The issues of which are (thanatos kal aidnios zoe) (there is no such phraseology as everlasting death, but simply) Death and Everlasting Life,” it would have conformed exactly to the teaching of Scripture on this point, and no one, however he might be disposed to interpret these words, could have made any reasonable objection.
But these cautious creed-framers, in their compromising spirit, have so far yielded to the mediaeval dogma of endless torment which is still found in our obsolescent symbols, as to refrain from the use of this eminently Scriptural antithesis, not only in describing the issues of the final judgment, but they have refrained from the employment of this word Death in any part of their creed, as expressing the Divine penalty of sin; and from intimating that the believer is indebted to redemption in Christ for his hope of Eternal Life!
CHAPTER 11
The Life Given Is The Unspeakable Gift.
In the foregoing chapter we have been considering the destructive effect of sin, and the necessary mortality of sinful man; not because this is our main theme, but as a kind of background to our main theme, which is that of Life Eternal through Christ. It was the more important to take this view, inasmuch as the traditional error of immortality for all men without any Saviour has painted this background in such false and lurid colours, as greatly to damage and obscure the Gospel picture that rests on it, and almost obliterate the real distinction between the lot of the saved and the unsaved, which is pre-eminently one of Life, Life without end, a life of purity and blessedness through Christ and with Christ in His everlasting kingdom.
It is only as we come to recognize the true condition of sinful man, and his consequent destiny, as one, not simply of suffering, but of death and destruction, that the Gospel of our salvation stands out in its real brightness and glory. Hence the Word of God, in the very beginning spreads before us an account of the fall of our first parents from their original holiness, and the sad and sorrowful and mortal doom which they brought upon themselves and their posterity, as a kind of background on which the glorious Gospel of our salvation is to be painted. First we have the Law with its fearful penalty of Death, and then the Gospel with its offer of Life.
Even in the sentence of condemnation there were intimations of mercy. Behind the dark cloud there were streaks of light. Voices of hope and cheer were heard mingling with the thunders of Sinai. The darkness of the long night that preceded the dawning of the day, was relieved by the shining of the stars in the firmament. Long before the rising of the Sun, there were many who waited and watched for His appearing.
The New Testament is not simply a fuller and clearer revelation of Divine truth than the Old. It is all this; but more. It is a new revelation. As in nature we find one stage following another in the work of creation, each higher than the one to which it succeeds; so is it in the revelation of Divine truth. As in nature each grade, while it includes all that is in the grades below, and exhibits it in greater perfection, contains something more that especially distinguishes it from those grades; so the New Testament, while it embraces all the truths of the Old, and reveals them more clearly, contains other and higher truths that distinguish it, as a New Revelation.
And still further; as every inferior grade overlaps that which is to follow, and foreshadows its peculiar characteristics, and perhaps, contains them all in a rudimental state; so the Old Testament contains, in an undeveloped form; in its types and symbols, in its prophecies and promises, hints, more or less clear, of the truths yet to be revealed in the New. But these two Revelations are separated from each other by a line as broad and distinct as that which separates any two grades in nature. If it be asked, what is that “something more,” that higher truth which is peculiar to the New Testament, and which gives it pre-eminence over the Old? we reply without hesitation: It is the Revelation of Life and Immortality for mortal man by a new birth and a resurrection from the dead; and the Destruction of all evil through the Almighty power of the Son of God our Saviour.
But this is not only a new and higher revelation, but the Life itself is a new and higher Life, and he, to whom it is given, is a new creature; “If any man be in Christ he is a new creature”; not new, in some unreal metaphorical sense, denoting a reformation of character, and the regulation of his conduct by better motives. It means all this, but more. He actually begins to be a new creature. There is the ingeneration of a new life within him by the Spirit of God. It is as superior to the old Adamic life, as it is more enduring. The one is natural, that is psuchical and hastens to death; the other is Divine and immortal. “That is not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural, and afterward that which is spiritual.” This new life, begotten not of flesh and blood, nor of the will of man but of God, may be faint and feeble at first, like the life of an unborn infant, but when this body of corruption shall be cast off, it will, in due time, take to itself a new spiritual body, like unto Christ’s own glorious body, and the subject of it will rise to meet Him, at His coming and to take his place in His everlasting kingdom.
* “If man were by natural constitution possessed of immortality or eternal life, then would we expect to find the Scriptures insisting only on a modification of that life a change of its dispositions and new direction of its powers as necessary to his seeing this kingdom of God Whereas, if it be true that immortal life is altogether distinct from natural life a new life, and from another source, then on the other hand, we would expect to hear of a new generation, and to find it written, ‘Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.’ This is what we find always insisted on in this Gospel.” Christian Life. W. de Bubgh.
See note at the end of this chapter.
There are many hints, more or less clear, of this new Divine Life scattered all through the Old Testament. The hope of it sustained and encouraged the faith of the patriarchs. Moses and the prophets exhorted to obedience and trust in God in view of it. David and the other psalmists made it the theme of their songs and prayers and praises. But only in the New Testament, is it distinctly revealed as the gift of God through Jesus Christ, by whose death and resurrection it is assured.
It is not necessary for us, who live under the full blaze of the Gospel to go back and cull out of the records of the old dispensation these anticipatory evidences of God’s gracious purpose to give to mortal man an immortal life by a new birth and a resurrection from the dead. After the sun itself begins to shine, we may dispense with the use of candles.
We come, at once, then, to the New Testament.
The Gospel of John opens with the declaration, “In Him was Life (zoe) and the Life (zoe) was the light of men.” He came, not to bear witness of that light, as did John the Baptist, but as the Life-giver Himself. “The Way, the Truth and the Life,” the very Source and Fountain of Eternal Life. The first Adam was, at best, but a living soul (psuchen zosan) the last Adam was infinitely more, a “ quickening spirit,” (pneuma zoopoioun life-giving spirit).
In our natural progenitor, was only the psuche life, which was transitory and mortal; and we could receive by natural generation from him nothing higher than this. In our Spiritual progenitor, was the zoe Life, which is spiritual and undying, and this is the Life which He gives in regeneration. The distinction between these two lives, the natural Adamic life, which is animal and transitory, and the supernatural life, which is spiritual and eternal, is everywhere clearly and definitely drawn, and preserved throughout the New Testament Scriptures.
These two words, psuche and zoe are used to designate them. It is a great pity that we have not two words in our English version, as in the Latin, anima and vita to represent them. By translating them both by the one English word, “Life,” this distinction has been greatly obscured, and the ordinary reader loses sight of it almost entirely, or at best, he comes to suppose that it is a mere ethical or tropical one; that the same word, life, is sometimes employed to designate man’s natural life all the life he is supposed ever to have and sometimes the purity and blessedness of that life; whereas the real Gospel distinction is as actual and broad as it possibly can be. There are two separate progenitors; two separate births; and two separate destinies. We would be glad so to emphasize this cardinal idea, which the traditional philosophy has practically ignored, as to give to our citations the force and influence they ought to have over the mind of the reader.
This is the grand truth our Lord would have taught to Nicodemus in the very beginning of His ministry:
John 3. “Verily, verily I say unto thee, except a man be born (or rather be begotten gennao) again he cannot see the kingdom of God. That which is born (begotten) of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born (begotten) of the Spirit is spirit. As Moses lifted up the Serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whosoever believes in Him, should not perish but have Eternal Life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have Everlasting Life. For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. [This word sozo, soter, soteria, usually translated save, Saviour, salvation in our version, is rendered (as we are told) in the Peshito or Syriac version (which is undoubtedly the oldest version, if not actually, as some think, the original text of this Gospel) to GIVE LIFE, Life-giver, Life. We have not this version at hand, to refer to, but it will be seen how this rendering throws great light on the meaning of these Scriptural terms, to save, salvation, Saviour. The idea is not a rescue from sin and misery merely, but from Death, the conferring of Life, Eternal Life, upon mortal men.]
Nicodemus had, like the Pharisees generally, vague notions of a life beyond the present, but it was only the prolongation of man’s natural life into another state, not a new life but the same old life of the soul, after it had escaped from the body; such a ghostly kind of life as the philosophy he had imbibed from the pagan world had taught him to believe in, and such as this same philosophy now teaches. But he had no conception of that new spiritual life, which comes only by a new spiritual birth, and which is the only foundation for any good hope of Immortality. He was destitute of that spiritual principle by which he could conceive of it. And so are natural men generally, and even many religious teachers at the present day. “The natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God because they are spiritually discerned; for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them.”
This is the doctrine our Lord attempted to teach to the woman of Samaria, at the well. But her carnal mind, un- illumined by the Spirit of God, could not rise to the apprehension of these spiritual and eternal verities. She understood the figures by which Christ would represent it only in their lower sense, or at best, only in some such mythical, ethical, unreal sense, as all carnal minds now put upon them. But Scriptural figures are employed to represent realities and not other figurative ideas; this spiritual life, of which Christ spoke is not an unreal life but an actual life and even more real if possible, and more substantial than the natural life of man.
John 4. “If thou knew the gift of God [Eternal Life through Christ] and who it is that saith unto thee ‘Give me to drink,’ thou wouldst have asked Him, and He would have given thee living water. Whosoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whosoever drinks of the water that I shall give him, shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him, shall be in him a well of water springing up into Everlasting Life.”
It was of this Life that Christ spoke in His discourse with the Hebrews, after healing the man at the pool of Bethesda. But their minds were too dark and grovelling to apprehend His meaning.
John 5. “For as the Father raises up the dead and quickens them, even so the Son quickens whom He will. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that hears my words and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath Everlasting Life and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from Death unto Life. For as the Father hath Life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have Life in Himself.
“Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming in which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice and shall come forth: they that have done good unto the resurrection of Life and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation (condemnation to death).
“Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have Eternal Life [or rather the assurance of it, but you will find no assurance of this, excepting through Me, as your Life-giver]. For they are they which testify of me; and ye will not come unto Me that ye might have Life.”
We desire to call especial attention to the passage just quoted, as absolutely conclusive of the doctrine for which we are contending, of Eternal Life only THROUGH Christ. The doctrine of a future life was not unknown to the ancient Hebrews. It was so far revealed in their Scriptures, that they had come very generally to accept it. But under the influence of the Grecian Philosophy, by which this religion had become corrupted, they had come to hold it as a philosophical doctrine of the immortality of the psuche or natural life of man, or if in any special sense, as their peculiar inheritance as the children of Abraham, and not as the special gift of God’s grace through a Saviour, and only to be received by a new birth. Hence, when Christ showed them how false were their hopes of immortality, excepting through Himself; and that there was nothing in their Scriptures the Divine authority of which they conceded to justify their hopes, they were offended, as men are now offended by the same doctrine; but if they will “Search the Scriptures,” they will find no doctrine of immortality for man, but through Christ, either in the Old or New Testament.
The same truth He preached after the miracle of the “loaves and the fishes”:
John 6. “Labour not for the meat that perishes, but for the meat which endures unto Everlasting Life, which the Son of man shall give you. I am the Bread of Life: he that cometh to Me shall never hunger, and he that believeth on Me shall never thirst.
“This is the will of Him that sent Me, that every one that sees the Son and believeth on Him may have Everlasting Life, and I will raise him up at the last day. Verily, verily I say unto you, he that believeth on Me hath Everlasting Life.
“I am the Bread of Life. Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness and are dead. This is the Bread that cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof and not die.
“I am the Living Bread which came down from heaven: If a man eat of this Bread he shall live forever. And the
Bread which I shall give is my flesh, which I give for the life of the world.
“Verily, verily I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, ye have no Life [zoen] in you. Whoso eats my flesh and drinks my blood hath Eternal Life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
“As the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father, so he that eats Me, even he shall live by Me. This is the Bread which came down from heaven; not as your fathers did eat manna and are dead. He that eats of this Bread Shall Live Forever. It is the Spirit that quickens (gives this new life), the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit and they are Life.”
Our Lord is not here speaking of happiness and misery hereafter, nor of holiness and sin, but of Life and Death. As the life of the body, the psuche life, is sustained by material food, so this higher zoe life, this spiritual life, which He gives, must have its spiritual food from the same source. This former life cannot always be sustained even by food supernaturally given from heaven.
Their fathers who ate of the manna in the wilderness are dead. They too, must die, if they have no higher principle of life ingenerated within them. This new life is received only from Him and can be maintained only by the closest union with Him. To such a life there is no end. The whole chapter is remarkable for the constant reiteration of this one great truth. But alas, they could not or would not, receive it. The idea of the natural immortality of the psuche had taken such firm hold of their minds, as to close them utterly to this great Gospel truth of Life and Immortality by a new birth through a Divine Saviour.
Not merely the Scribes and Pharisees, but many of His followers “were offended at His doctrine.” “From that time many of Sis disciples went back and walked no more with Him. Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away? Then Simon answered Him, Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of Eternal Life?”
How many there are of Christ’s, so-called, disciples even now, who cannot, or will not, accept of this teaching. It is too humiliating to their natural pride; it is too directly opposed to their psychological notions of the nature of man; it is too much at variance with the popular traditions of the church to be accepted by them. They are quite willing to receive Christ as a Great Teacher sent from God; as a Saviour from eternal sin and suffering; as a Giver of purity and joy and blessedness forever, to “immortal man”; but not as a Saviour from actual and eternal death; not as a Giver of Eternal Life. How shall they be made to understand, or rather to receive this great and glorious truth excepting by the Spirit of God?* May it please God to so bless our humble efforts to this end, that they may say with Peter, “Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of Eternal Life?”
John 8: “Then said Jesus unto them again, I go my way and ye shall seek Me and shall die in your sins. Whither I go ye cannot come. Ye are from beneath; lam from above. Ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, ye shall die in your sins; for if ye believe not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins.
“Verily, verily I say unto you, if a man keep my sayings he shall never see death [or rather not see death forever, eis ton aionay that is the death from which there is no resurrection, the second death, eternal death].
Again He teaches the same truth under the allegory of the Door and the Good Shepherd:
John 10: “I am the Door; by Me, if any man enter in he shall be saved, and shall go in and out and find pasture. The thief Cometh not but for to steal and to kill and to destroy. I am come that they might have Life and that they might have it abundantly. [The word is not more abundantly perisooteros as in our common version, but perissos, super-abundantly.]
*An unknown correspondent, who has recently come to the knowledge of this glorious truth, writes: “I verily believe it to be a revelation from the Lord, and that no man can or will receive it, unless it be given him from above.”
“I am the Good shepherd and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knows Me, even so know I the Father and lay down my life [psuche, natural life, not zde, life] for the sheep. And other sheep have I which are not of this fold. Them also must I bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd. My sheep hear my voice and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give unto them Eternal Life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand.”
This was the burden of His instructions to Mary and Martha at the grave of Lazarus. They were not entirely ignorant of the great Gospel doctrines of the Resurrection, the General Judgment, and the Life to come; for they had been under the special teaching of the Master. But their notions were very confused and imperfect. So when Jesus said to Martha, “Thy brother shall rise again,” Martha said unto him: “I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” Jesus said unto her, “I am the Resurrection and the Life. He that believeth on Me though he were dead, yet shall he live, and whosoever lives [or is alive at my second coming] shall never die.”
Those who have died a natural death believing on Him, shall be raised, and those believers who shall be alive at His coming again shall be changed without dying, and they all together shall enter upon that life which shall never end: over such the second death hath no power.
The same doctrine is expressed in His intercessory prayer:
John 17: “These words spake Jesus, and lifted up His eyes to heaven and said: Father My hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son may glorify Thee. As Thou hast given Him power over all flesh, that He should give Eternal Life to as many as Thou hast given Him. And this is Eternal Life, that they may know Thee, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent.”
The above citations are all from the Gospel of John. We might cite other similar passages from this Gospel. We might quote also not a few, of like import, from the other three Evangelists, but the Gospel of John is more full on this subject. It is the main theme of his Gospel, as it is also of his Epistles. In the first six chapters of this Gospel, he declares over and over again, no less than twenty -eight times, and more than fifty times in all his writings, that Christ is the only Source of Eternal Life.
If these citations already given do not suffice to establish this doctrine, no array of texts would suffice. Is it possible that this Eternal Life of which our Lord speaks so earnestly and with such constant reiteration, as the boon He came to bring to dying men, to provide which He gave up His own life, and which He freely offers to all who will believe on Him is not truly Eternal Life after all; but only a certain improved condition of life, pure and blissful indeed, but only an attribute of the Eternal Life which is the portion of all men? Can it be, that He meant by these high-sounding words nothing more than that He would engraft upon the naturally immortal life of His people, certain qualities of purity and blessedness that should endure forever, while those who refused to believe on Him, would have to spend their immortal lives in sin and misery? Is the distinction which He draws between believers and unbelievers a mere ethical and figurative one? Can it be possible that any true believer in Christ, or any one who accepts His words as true, should claim as his own inalienable prerogative this immortality, which He “who only hath immortality,” purchased for them by His own precious blood? This doctrine of Life and Immortality through Christ, the Life-giver, which illuminates every page of the Gospel, is indeed humiliating to the pride of man; but it is full of honour and glory to Christ, and full of comfort and joy to those who receive it, and full of hope to dying men.
O, my brothers in Christ! why will you agree with the enemies of your Lord to rob Him of His peculiar glory as the Giver of Eternal Life to His people? You indeed love and cherish Him, as you well may, as your Saviour from sin and misery. But He is infinitely more, He saves you from Death not a metaphorical death but an actual death, from which there would be no awaking without Him. It is because He has risen, that you will rise. It is because He lives, that you will live. And the Life that He gives you is a Life of blessedness and joy forever in His everlasting kingdom. “Give unto the Lord, O ye His people! give unto the Lord the glory due unto His name.”
And you whom He has sent to preach this Gospel, preach it in no meagre, stinted way, as though you were afraid of giving Him too large a share of honour in the work of your redemption, but preach it in all its fullness, as the Gospel of Salvation not merely from sin and misery, but from death itself. Why should you not begin even now the song which will be sung by all who reach their heavenly home, “Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power and riches, and wisdom and strength and honour and glory and blessing forever and ever!”
It was not until after the Holy Spirit was poured out with power upon the Apostles and early disciples of our Lord, that their minds were fully open to receive this truth. But when they did receive it, and “knew the power of His Resurrection,” they were lifted completely out of their former condition, and filled with a zeal and energy which nothing could withstand. This was “the unspeakable Gift,” which they burned to make known to their fellow-men. This is what the angel told Peter and the other Apostles to preach, when he had released them from the prison at Jerusalem: “Go stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this (zoe) Life.” And they gladly obeyed. This is what Paul and Barnabas preached at Antioch, first to the Jews, and when they refused to accept of Jesus as the Giver of this life they turned to the Gentiles, saying:
Acts 13:46. “It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy (by your unbelief), of Everlasting Life, lo! We turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Son commanded us, saying: I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the Word of the Lord, and as many as were ordained to Eternal Life, believed.”
Paul preached the same doctrine to the Athenians; but with their minds full of the fanciful notions of their poets and philosophers, concerning the spirit world and the immortality of all souls, they scouted the idea of Eternal Life only by a resurrection from the dead through Jesus Christ. Had he preached to them the doctrine of a spirit life, of future rewards and penalties, an immortal life, either of blessedness or misery, for all men, they would not have called him “a setter forth of strange gods”; for this is just what their own religion taught them. But the doctrine of “Jesus and the Resurrection”, and of immortality through Him only, was no more agreeable to them, than it is to the Platonists at the present day.
This is the leading truth that runs through all his Epistles, and the string upon which all the other doctrines of the Gospel are suspended. To the Romans, he preached that all, whether Jews or Gentiles, were under one common sentence pf death; for all had sinned and come short of the glory of God. Those who had sinned without law, must perish without law, and those who had sinned under the Law, must be judged by the law; that death reigned over all the children of Adam. But, by the grace of God, there was hope. The Gospel, which he was sent to preach, was the power of God unto salvation unto every one that believeth in Christ. “To those, who by patient continuance in well doing, seek for honour and Immortality (God would give) Eternal Life.” “That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto Eternal Life, by Jesus Christ our Lord.” To believers, he says, “What fruit had ye then, in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death; but now being made free from sin, and become the servants of God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end. Everlasting Life, For the wages of sin is deaths but the gift of God is Eternal Life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” God is a Sovereign in the bestowment both of natural and spiritual gifts. There is no such thing as spontaneous generation or regeneration. The children of God are begotten by God Himself, as truly as the children of Adam are begotten by their natural progenitor. This new life, which they receive from Him, concerns itself, not with carnal and perishable things, but with spiritual and eternal things. They who possess it are “led by the Spirit of God.” They will not come into condemnation to the second death. Nothing will be able “to separate them from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus,” by whom, and to whom they are henceforth to live as His chosen ones, and heirs of Eternal Life.
This same truth is equally prominent in both of his Epistles to the Corinthians. In the First he shows how impossible it is for human reason to attain to any true knowledge of the Gospel; how foolish the truth it reveals of Eternal Life through a crucified Saviour seems to natural men, “For the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” He was “determined to know nothing among them, but Christ and Him crucified.”
“Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man the things that God hath prepared for them that love Him.” “The fashion of this world passes away “; the prizes that natural men seek are corruptible, but theirs is incorruptible. And finally, coming to the great and glorious doctrine of the Resurrection, he dwells on it more at length, and shows how it is assured to us by the death and resurrection of Christ. If this assurance were taken away, we would be the most miserable of all men, for we would have no hope of any life beyond the grave; all who had fallen asleep in Him had perished not gone to a state of endless sin and misery have perished become extinct. He attempts to illustrate the nature of the spiritual bodies we shall take on at the resurrection, and show how glorious, and how incorruptible they will be; how entirely different from our gross fleshly bodies, which are fitted only for psuchical natures, and could not possibly inherit the kingdom of God, and how, simultaneously with the resurrection of the dead, the bodies of those who are alive at Christ’s coming, will be changed; “ In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on in-corruption, and this mortal must put on immortality and death be swallowed up in victory. O Death, where is thy sting? O Hades (or thanate O Death), where is thy victory?” Mark the strength of the expression this corruptible must put on in-corruption, and this mortal must put on immortality surely if incorrupt ion if immortality is then put on, it could not have been possessed before.
The Second Epistle is equally full of Christ and Him crucified, as the Source of Eternal Life to all His people. The apostle is determined to know nothing else among them, waiting anxiously for the time when his mortality “shall be swallowed up of life.”
So is it with all his other Epistles our quotations from which must be cut short. This is their central theme: “Christ our Life” , “In hope of Eternal Life,” “ Your Life is hid with Christ in God.” “When Christ who is our Life shall appear, then shall ye also appear with Him in glory.”
Peter, James and Jude follow in the same track. “Holding forth the word of Life.” Exhorting all to “Fight the good fight of faith, and to lay hold of Eternal Life: “To look for the Crown of Life which the Lord hath promised to all that love Him.”
The Epistles of John, like his gospel, are full of the same theme. He begins and closes his first epistle with this central thought of Eternal Life in Christ.
1. John 1:1. “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard and which we have seen with our eyes, and which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of Life. For the Life, was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and show unto you that Eternal Life which was with the Father and was manifested unto us.” 2:25. “This is the promise that He hath promised us, even Eternal Life. 3:14. “We know that we have passed from death unto Life, because we love the brethren. He that loves not his brother abides in death. Whosoever hates his brother is a murderer; and ye know that no murderer hath Eternal Life abiding in him.” 6: 9-12. “If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which He hath testified of His Son. He that believes on the Son hath the witness in himself. He that believeth not God hath made Him a liar, because he believeth not the record that God gave of His Son, and this is the record That God hath given to us Eternal Life; and this life is in His Son. He that hath the Son hath the Life and he that hath not the Son hath not the Life.”
How is it possible for any stronger, or more explicit affirmation of the doctrine for which we are contending, to be framed, than this? How is it possible to bring any better testimony or record or authority than is here given? The only way in which its force can be turned is to deny that (zoe). Life here means life. And this is just what our opponents are bold enough to do. They say it has an ethical, spiritualistic, metaphorical meaning. It means “purity,” “happiness,” “well-being,” “true functional action,” etc. anything but just what is Eternal Life, If they shall be permitted to change the meaning of such positive testimony as this, to suit their own convenience then their controversy is with God and not with us. But in taking leave of them, we must remind them of the remarkable words with which this testimony is introduced “He that believeth not God hath made Him a Liar, because he believeth not the record that God gave of His Son.”
Finally, in the Apocalypse the revelator gives us a panoramic view of the struggle between the Life-giver and him that “hath the power of death “on this earth, to the end of the age. We are permitted to see Christ as “the Lamb of God that was slain “victorious over all. His foes and Satan the murderer (the man-killer a xthro- poktonos) from the beginning, and all his hosts, bound, judged and “punished with everlasting destruction.”
And the redeemed from among the children of Adam, a mighty company whom no man can number, “whose names were written in the Lamb’s Book of Life from the foundation of the world,” clothed in white robes, are seen walking the golden streets of the Celestial Paradise, with crowns on their heads, and harps in their hands, singing praises to Him who bought them with His own precious blood. And they shall again “have a right to the Tree of Life” and “the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and lead them unto living fountains of water, and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.”
Note. Prof. Druramond in his recent able work entitled Natural Law in the Spiritual World teaches the same truth for which we are contending. Though he does not formally deny natural immortality nor teach in so many words the necessity of union with Christ in order to Eternal Life, yet if science be worth anything on this point, his book is a scientific demonstration of the truth that life only in Christ is God’s great law for the future of men. We quote the following passage:
“What now, let us ask, specifically distinguishes a Christian man from a non-Christian man? Is it that he has certain mental characteristics not possessed by the other? Is it that certain faculties have been trained in him. that morality assumes special and higher manifestations, and character a nobler form? Is the Christian merely an ordinary man, who happens from birth to have been surrounded with a peculiar set of ideas? Is his religion of that peculiar quality of the moral life, defined by Mr. Arnold as “morality touched by condition”? And does the possession of a high ideal, benevolent sympathies, a reverent spirit, and a favourable environment account for what men call his spiritual life?
“The distinction between them is the same as that between the organic and the inorganic, the living and the dead. What is the difference between a crystal and an organism, a stone and a plant? They have much in common. Both are made of the same atoms. Both display the same properties of matter. Both are subject to the physical laws. Both may be very beautiful. But beside possessing all the crystal has, the plant possesses something more a mysterious something called Life, This Life is not something which existed in the crystal in a less developed form. There is nothing at all like it in the crystal.
There is nothing like the first beginning of it in the crystal, not a trace or a symptom of it. This plant is tenanted by something new, an original and unique possession, added over and above all the properties common to both. When from vegetable life we rise to animal life, here again we find something original and unique at least as compared with the mineral. From animal life we ascend again to Spiritual life. And here also is something new, something still more unique. He who lives the spiritual life, has a distinct kind of life added to all the other phases of life which he manifests a kind of life infinitely more distinct than is the active life of a plant from the inertia of a stone. The spiritual man is more distinct in point of fact, than is the plant from the stone. This is the one possible comparison in Nature for the widest distinction in Nature; but compared with the difference between the natural and the spiritual, the gulf which divides the organic from the inorganic is a hair’s breadth. The natural man belongs essentially to this present order of things. He is endowed simply with a high quality of the natural animal Life. But it is life of so poor a quality that it is not Life at all. He that hath not the Son has not Life; but he that hath the Son hath Life a new, distinct and supernatural endowment. He is not of this world. He is of the timeless state of eternity. It doth not yet appear what he shall be.”
CHAPTER 12
Life versus Death.
In the two foregoing chapters, the reader’s attention has been directed to two classes of texts: Firsts those that teach that the portion of the sinner or natural man is death and destruction. Second, those that teach that the portion of the renewed or spiritual man is Life Everlasting. Under the designation of sinners is included the whole human race. As children of Adam we are all mortal, not mortal in any partial sense as to our bodies merely, but mortal in every sense of the word having no eternal life of any sort abiding in us by nature. Immortality is declared to be the special and peculiar gift of God through Jesus Christ, and only received in a new spiritual birth.
The two opposite doctrines of these two classes of men and there are only two classes recognized in the Scriptures are set forth both positively and negatively, categorically and figuratively, with such reiteration, and in such variety of language in every part of God’s Word, that these two prime truths might well be considered as established if anything can be established by texts of Scripture beyond all question, viz.:
1. That apart from Christ, the natural man has no possible ground of hope for immortality or eternal life.
2. That this immortality is just what every regenerated soul has assured to him through the death and resurrection of Christ,
But, as if to put these truths beyond all controversy and to make them stand out as clearly as possible, there is a large number of other passages which we have not yet cited, in which these two classes are brought into juxtaposition; and a comparison by contrast is instituted between them under a great variety of titles; such as “sinners and saints”; “the wicked and the righteous;” “un-believers and believers;” “reprobates and heirs;” “enemies of God and friends of God;” “the foolish and the wise;” “the tares and the wheat;” “the dross and the gold;” “the children of the world and the children of the kingdom;” “the children of God and the children of the wicked one;” “those who live after the flesh and those who are led by the Spirit; “and by a great variety of other titles, under which their opposite characters and destinies are set, the one over against the other.
The children of Adam by natural birth are shown to be like their progenitor, sinful, selfish, carnal, earthly, mortal, finite in their aims, and beset by a thousand ills as they run their transitory career, until they go down to Sheol (or Hades) and return to the dust from which they were taken. While on the other hand, the children of God, by a new birth, are, like their Spiritual Progenitor, pure in heart, heavenly minded, seeking those things that are spiritual and eternal; and though, while yet imperfect these two natures, the old and the new, mingle for a time, and struggle for the mastery in the same body, like the infants Esau and Jacob, the last born shall finally supplant the first, and come off completely victorious. And though the old nature shall go down to death and decay, the new man, created after the image of God in true holiness, shall take to himself a spiritual body, adapted to his spiritual nature, like to that of his risen Lord, and rise, like Him, immortal, both in body and in spirit, to ita inheritance, incorruptible, undefiled, and that fades not away, reserved for him in heaven.
It remains for us now to give attention to some of these antithetical passages.
It is not in the Gospel that this contrast is first instituted. From the time when God first began to choose to Himself a peculiar people, and the line began to be drawn between the sons of God and the children of men, a separate destiny was suggested to their hopes, and their faith laid hold of it, though it was but dimly apprehended for it was not until the coming of Christ that Life and Immortality were fully brought to light, as the peculiar portion of believers. Though a very prominent place is given to earthly blessings, in the good that is promised to the faithful, yet they finished their earthly course, and slept with their fathers, under a conviction, more or less distinct, that they had not exhausted the promises. They felt that something more was meant by the oft-repeated assurance that they should “inherit the earth” and “prolong their days.” Their faith lighted up the dark valley, and dissipated its chief terrors. The way to the grave became brighter and brighter, as the Gospel day began to dawn. While to the wicked, the shadowy terrors that came up from Sheol to meet them, as they went down into its dark chambers, became more and more fearful.
There is much that is mysterious to us now in the language of Christ Himself with respect to the future; and much more in that of the prophets; nor can we suppose that those to whom they were spoken fully comprehended them; and yet they felt them to be pregnant with meaning. In the giving of the Law from Sinai, when God proclaimed Himself as visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, to the third and fourth generation and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Him and keep His commandments; in the responsive utterances of blessing and cursing from Ebal and Gerizim; in the farewell words of Moses, “I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you Life and Deaths blessing and cursing; therefore choose Life, that both thou and thy seed may live”; there is, to us who read these solemn words under the light of the Gospel, a significance that is not exhausted this side of the grave, and even those who heard them must have felt that they were fraught with a deeper meaning.
The inspired prophetess sings “He will keep the feet of His saints, and the wicked shall be silent in darkness.” (1 Samuel 2:9.)
In many of the Psalms this contrast between the two classes is emphatically made. In the First Psalm it is said: “The Godly man is like a tree planted by the rivers of waters, his leaf shall not wither. But the ungodly are not so, but are as the chaff which the wind drives away.” In the Second, we have a vivid picture of the King in Zion possessing the uttermost parts of the earth with his loyal people while His enemies “are dashed in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” So is it with very many of the Psalms.
But it must suffice to quote more at length from the Forty-ninth, in which the two classes are distinctly contrasted, and the issue of their lives too plainly set forth to be misunderstood.
*We may ask, how the way of holiness could be called the way everlasting, in contrast to every wicked way (Psalm 139:24.) If the two ways were both everlasting; the one being the way of everlasting holiness and happiness; the other the way of everlasting sin and misery? S. Minton.
“They that trust in their wealth and boast themselves of the multitude of their riches none of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him (for the redemption of the soul is precious and it ceases for ever) that he would still live, and not see corruption. For he sees that wise men die; likewise the fool and the brutish person, and leave their wealth to others. Like sheep they are laid in the grave: death shall feed on them and the upright shall have dominion over them in the morning, and their beauty shall consume in the grave their dwelling (final home). But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave; for He shall receive me. He shall go to the generation of his fathers; they shall never see light Man that is in honour and understands not is like the beasts that perish.”
However vague some of these expressions may be and their imperfect translation makes them still more obscure the general idea, and the contrast are sufficiently plain. Nothing else can be meant than what is more fully set forth in the Gospel the resurrection of the righteous to a Life that shall never end, and the death and final extinction of the wicked.
These contrasts abound in the writings of Solomon. The book of Proverbs opens with an impressive picture of this sort; and such antithetical passages as the following are scattered here and there from beginning to end:
“The light of the righteous rejoices but the lamp of the wicked shall be put out. Though a sinner do evil a hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before Him. But it shall not be well with the wicked, neither shall he prolong his days, which are as a shadow, because he fears not before God.” “The fear of the Lord prolongs days, but the years of the wicked shall be shortened. The fear of the Lord prolongs days. [This expression ‘prolongs days’ means more than simply living to be old. It is of frequent occurrence and evidently carries the idea of ‘length of days forever and ever,’ which is elsewhere used] but destruction shall be to the workers of iniquity. The hope of the righteous shall be gladness but the expectation of the wicked shall perish. The righteous shall never be removed but the wicked shall not inhabit the earth. As righteousness tends to Life, so he that pursues evil, pursues it to his own Death. “Whoso finds Me, finds Life, and shall obtain favour of the Lord- but he that sins against Me wrongs his own soul; all they that hate Me love death.”
In the prophetical books this contrast is often set forth in beautiful and glowing language. In Isaiah the anxious inquirer is represented while in a scene of conflict, and of mingled light and darkness, as crying out from Seir, “Watchman what of the night?” and the cheering response comes from him who stands on the watch tower: “The morning cometh and also the night; the morning of victory and joy to the people of God, and the night of deeper darkness and death to His enemies. “Say ye to the righteous that it shall be well with him; for they shall eat the fruit of their doings. Woe unto the wicked; it shall be ill with him; for the reward of his hands shall be given him.” In the closing verses of this prophecy upon which we will remark in another place this contrast is sharply drawn. So also in Daniel we are told that the righteous “shall shine as the stars forever and ever” but the wicked “ shall be unto shame and everlasting contempt.”
*For a more particular notice of this passage the reader is referred to the next chapter.
In reply to the querulous complaints of the Israelites, that the ways of God were unjust and unequal, and that He showed no more favour to the righteous than to the wicked, the prophet Ezekiel was directed to say, that it is not so. God has no pleasure in the death of any one. It is His will that the wicked should turn from his evil way and Live. “Turn ye, turn ye, for why will ye die?” They could not have understood him as using these words in a mere earthly and temporal sense; for it would have been nothing but mockery had he meant nothing more than the first death, and the life that now is. The second death which is more distinctly revealed, after the corning of Christ through whom Life and immortality are brought to light was evidently here implied. The full significance of these terms may not have been as obvious to them, nor even to the inspired prophet, as they are to us; yet there is an implication of a life and death to come, of which they could not have been wholly ignorant. Malachi closes the Old Testament canon with a vivid picture of the preservation of the righteous, as the jewels of God; and the destruction of the wicked, whom the Lord shall burn up as stubble leaving neither root nor branchy in the dreadful day of His coming.
The New Testament.
Now comes John the Baptist, like the day star before the rising sun, or a herald in advance of the King to prepare the way of the Lord, saying: “Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” A new spiritual kingdom is to be erected on the earth. “The axe is laid unto (at) the root of the trees; every tree that brings not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire” for what purpose? to be burned up of course “His fan is in His hand and He will thoroughly purge His floor, and gather His wheat into the garner “ and what will He do with the chaff? Will He heap it up in another place and keep it also? No “But He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” Strange indeed it is, that this expressive phrase which emphasizes the sure and certain consumption of the chaff that is thrown into it, should be so perverted and reversed as to be made to promise the eternal preservation in torment of the human chaff that is in like manner cast into it!!
At last in the fullness of time the King Himself comes down, bringing with Him to earth, the Kingdom of Heaven. He comes to make a beginning of setting it up in this lower world, and to call men into it. But all men are by nature earthly, carnal, and under the dominion of temporal things. This is purely spiritual. Such as men are they have no fitness for it. They must be born again. They must become new creatures. Their natural birth gives them only a low and transitory life a soulical (psuche) or natural life. They must have a new spiritual life (pneumatikos life) in order that they may be fitted for His kingdom and for the Life Everlasting (zoe aidnios). This is the life He will give to His people. His own peculiar life that shall never pass away.
Because He lives they shall live also. The gate that leads to destruction (apoleian) not simply to misery, but to utter ruin is broad, and therefore many go in thereat. And because the gate that leads to life not simply happiness, but to (zoe aionios) life everlasting, is strait and narrow, few there be that find it.
“God so loved the world that He gave His is only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish” this means vastly more than being miserable “but have Everlasting Life.” They who build on any other foundation will be completely overwhelmed, when the final test shall come; but they who build on Him, like the man who built on a rock, will never fall.
Treasures laid up on earth will be lost those that are laid up in heaven will be secure forever. He is the Bread that came down from heaven; all who feed on this bread shall live forever. But material bread, even the manna that was miraculously given, can nourish only for a limited time. Their fathers who ate of it in the wilderness are dead, but those who eat of the bread that He shall give them will never die.
He gives the water of Life. Natural water is transient in its effects, but the water that He gives will be, in those who drink it, a well of water springing up unto Everlasting Life.
He is the true Vine. His people are the branches, and live by their union to Him as long as He lives, but the branches that are severed from Him must wither and die, and are fit only to be burned.
The kingdom of heaven is like a net that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind, which when it was full, they drew to shore and set down and “gathered the good into vessels but cast the bad away.” “It is like a field of grain. The good wheat is gathered into bundles and laid up in the garner; but the tares are not gathered into another garner to be kept but are gathered and burned in the fire.” Again, it is like a marriage supper of which none are entitled to partake but such as have on the wedding garment.
The wise virgins, whose lamps being filled with oil, are bright and burning, go in with the Bridegroom to the marriage, but the foolish virgins, having no oil in their lamps are excluded and their lamps go out. Expositors who teach that the lamp of life when once lighted up, can never be extinguished, have been greatly puzzled by this parable, and have been quite unable to agree upon what is meant by these lamps and the oil by which they burn; but when it is once admitted that human life is evanescent and must eventually go out, and that it is only the Divine Life in man, which the Lord Himself sustains, that endures forever, this parable is luminous and self- explanatory.
By these and by numerous other figures and illustrations our Lord sets forth in contrast the perishable nature of earthly things, and the certain destruction of those who choose them as their chief good, and the enduring nature of heavenly things and the Eternal Life of those who seek them. This is the primary, fundamental idea that runs through all His teachings: Carnality, sin, and death, Spirituality of mind, holiness and Life Everlasting. This is the contrast He is continually holding up before the minds of all men. This was, indeed, the grand object of His mission, to lift man up from his animalism, from sin and consequent death, into that higher, heavenly plane, in which only he could hope to live forever; to give him, in the place of his old Adamic, natural, carnal life, which cannot be perpetuated forever, a new spiritual life, His own peculiar life, which is a life of immortal blessedness. This is the great salvation He offers in the Gospel: Not merely a rescue from sin and misery but from Death itself, to which sin inevitably leads, when it is finished.
The moral law which had been given by Moses to the Israelites was holy, and perfect in its adaptation to their earthly life, though none of them were able perfectly to keep it. Its penalty of death was a righteous penalty. But now He uncovers a higher, a spiritual sense of which they had hitherto had no conception. He shows it to be equally adapted to His spiritual kingdom. It needs no change. Its sanctions. Life and Death, are still the same, though now to be understood in a sense infinitely higher than that which pertains to this world. Everything belonging to this world is material, sensual, perishable and evanescent. They who set their affections on it, and pursue its trifles must pass away with it. Everything pertaining to His spiritual kingdom is pure, incorruptible and eternal. The new life which He gives to His people is not their old life improved, rectified, and spiritualized, but it is a veritable, new life. They must be begotten again, from above, born again, and become new creatures.
Their desires, their affections, their aims, their motives of action, the hopes that inspire them, the means they employ, their weapons of offence and of defence are all spiritual. They still remain for a while longer in their mortal bodies, and their old psuchical life still lingers, like the flame of an expiring candle; but all this is soon to be changed. Their bodies with all their lusts are to be cast off, and they are to be clothed with bodies that are pure and spiritual like unto His own glorious body. “For flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.” In that world to which He will bring them “they neither marry nor are given in marriage neither can they die any more.”
At the final judgment of the nations at His Second Coming, He will gather them all into two classes and only two, “And He shall separate them as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He shall set the sheep on His right hand; but the goats, on His left.” “And these shall go away into everlasting punishment” the punishment of “everlasting destruction,” “but the righteous into life eternal.” It will be seen that the contrast here is not between the everlasting happiness of the one class, and the everlasting misery of the other as traditionalists would have it, but between the Everlasting Life of the one, and the everlasting punishment of the other which, that the antithesis or contrast may be carried out, must be the punishment of Death, from which there is no resurrection that is the Second Death.
The Apostles take up the same contrast that the Master had taught them, and carry it out in all their Epistles.
With them also there are but two classes; those who walk after the flesh, and those who walk after the Spirit. They are contrasted in their characters and in their destinies. Whatever of joy and peace they may have on the one hand, in this life, from a sense of Divine favour, or whatever of sorrow and misery they may have, as the fruit of sin; this is not the contrast to which we are pointed. It is the result or end of their opposite courses.
To the one, it is Life Everlasting; to the other. Death and destruction. Nowhere in all the Epistles can any such contrast be found as is drawn by modern theology Eternal Happiness and Eternal Misery. No careful reader of the writings of Paul can fail to have noticed how continually he brings these two words zoe and thanatos, Life and Death into juxtaposition and contrast.
He scarcely ever mentions the one alternative without bringing the other into notice in the same connection. “To be carnally minded is Death; but to be spiritually minded is Life and peace.” “For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die; but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body ye shall live.” Mark the antithesis. It is not ye are now dead, morally dead, neither is it, ye shall die the natural death to which all are subject but ye shall die: The Second Death is here evidently meant so also, the words shall live point to the life the Eternal Life beyond.
“He that sows to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption’” (phthora) dissolution, decay, death, the same word which Peter uses in speaking of those who as brute beasts utterly perish in their own corruption, “but he that soweth to the Spirit shall reap Life Everlasting” (zoe aionios).
“What fruit had ye then, in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? For the end of those things is Death.” “But now being made free from sin and become the servants of God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end Everlasting Life.” “For the wages of sin is Death; but the gift of God is Eternal Life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
The same contrast between the temporal and transitory-lot of all who choose this world for their portion, and the enduring inheritance of those who are the children of God by a new birth, is found in the Epistles of Peter and John. “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which lives and abides forever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower thereof falls away, but the Word of God endures forever.” “The world passes away, and the lust thereof; but he that doeth the will of God abides forever.” “He that hath the Son hath the Life, and he that hath not the Son hath not the Life.”
The antithesis here is not between future happiness and future misery; but between Life and Death Eternal Life zoe aionios, and thanatos Death. We do not say Eternal Death; for there is no such expression in the Scriptures. We find it in modem theology, by which is meant a state of eternal misery. But in the Scriptures we simply find thanatos death. For Death itself is a finality, and our natural or Adamic death would have been a finality, had not Christ redeemed us all from this curse of the law. Hence all men will have a resurrection; but only those who have been born again will have a resurrection to Eternal Life. “The rest of the dead” rise only to condemnation, and a death from which there is no resurrection. It is therefore called the Second Deaths Deuteros thanatos. The same word thanatos death is used in both cases, for death is the end or ending of life, of whatever kind it is. But in the case of the two lives, two distinct words are used, for the two lives, the psuche life and the zoe life as used in the Scriptures are quite distinct from each other; the first, as we have already shown, is our natural life which is transitory; the other is that spiritual life which we receive in the new birth.
This is Eternal Life, hence it is called zoe aionios. The Second death is put in opposition with this. If it indicated a state of sin and suffering which is eternal, there is no reason why the epithet aionios Eternal, should not be coupled with it as with zoe the new or second life. But this epithet is never joined with the word death in the Scriptures. Death is the negative of life, the absence of life, the withdrawal of all life and not a state or condition of existence, as the advocates of the doctrine of endless sin and suffering would like it to be.
But we must cut short our citations and our remarks on them, that we may find room before closing this chapter, for the parallel contrast which Paul has drawn in Romans, Chapter 5, and again in 2 Corinthians Chapter 15, between the First and the Second Adam.
This parallel has always been a source of great perplexity to those who hold to the Platonic doctrine of the natural immortality of man. And well it may be, so long as they hold to their anti-scriptural dogma. They must interpret it either on the one hand, so as to impugn the justice of God, or on the other, they must make nonsense of it. But if they could be persuaded to lay aside their blinding theory of the deathless nature of man, for the time being, and to give to the words Life and Deaths which are the key words in the contrast, their true and natural sense, while reading it, they could not fail to see a clearness and beauty in the Apostle’s argument of which they now seem to have no conception.
We have only room to indicate in the briefest manner possible the main points in this parallel. Adam and Christ stand respectively at the head of two kingdoms or dispensations; the one natural; the other spiritual. The natural or psuchical is first “afterward that which is spiritual.” Adam is a mere creature. He possesses at best, but a derived and dependent life. Christ as the Almighty Creator, is the Source and Fountain of all Life. To Adam, as an individual, was offered, and to us also through him as our representative, a natural, earthly immortality conditioned upon perfect obedience which was liable to be forfeited at any moment by sin. He forfeited it, both for himself and for us all by one act of sin. Christ also stood before the same law in the flesh, that He might become a perfect Saviour. His obedience was tested, “He was in all points tempted, as we are, yet without sin,” and through Him is offered to us, who trust Him, a heavenly immortality which cannot be forfeited or lost.
Adam was a mere earthly creature at any rate, he became such after his sin there was no spiritual life in him; his carnal nature was predominant and all-controlling, therefore he could not be otherwise than mortal and transitory. He became the progenitor of a race like himself, destitute of spiritual life, carnal, selfish, sinful and necessarily mortal, mortal in every sense of the word. Christ was a Spiritual Being; though in the flesh for a time, His spiritual nature dominated the whole man. This nature is communicated to us through Him by a new spiritual birth. “Because He lives we live also.”
Because Adam sinned, we all must die, irrespective of our own individual deserts even those “who have not sinned after the similitude of his transgression come under the same law of death by natural inheritance. Because Christ died and rose again, “we shall all be made alive,” irrespective of our individual deserts.
Both the death of the body, and the resurrection of the body, are equally involuntary, and equally comprehensive of the whole human family, and both without regard to individual moral character. But there is a life beyond the present which becomes ours only by our individual personal union to Him by faith. This is the Life Everlasting which is freely given to all who accept Him as their Saviour. And there is a Death beyond the present which is the “wages” of our own individual sins, and under which all who reject Him as their Saviour must fall. This is the Second Death from which there is no recovery. This cannot mean “spiritual death,” for it is the penalty of sin, and to suppose that God inflicts spiritual death or alienation of heart upon any man, would be absurd; neither can it be “eternal misery”; for there cannot be a first and a second eternal misery. Still further, if by death, eternal sin and misery be meant, as traditionalists assert, then, there has been no redemption from the curse of the law, for any of the children of Adam.
For Christ who has redeemed us, did not suffer eternal sin and misery, neither will the redeemed suffer any such penalty. Still further, again; if immortality be the common lot of all men, then all men are exempt from death. For immortality means exemption from death, and this means universal salvation. The fact is, those who would construe this penalty of the law as meaning anything else than Death in the plain obvious sense of the word, involve themselves in a net-work of difficulties and absurdities from which there is no exit, so long as they hold to their philosophical dogma of the deathless nature of man. But when it is once admitted that death means death, then the whole economy of the Law and its penalty, and of our redemption from its curse are perfectly clear and the justice and goodness of God are conspicuous. Christ by His death redeemed us all from the penalty of the first transgression \ but from the penalty of our own individual sins, there is no escape excepting by our personal, voluntary acceptance of Him as our Saviour, Life-giver and the salvation He offers; and this penalty is the Second death.
What may be the disappointment, dismay, despair, and rage of those upon whom this penalty falls, and how long their miseries may be protracted, we forbear to guess. We only know that they are in the hands of One who is holy, just and good; One who would have saved them if they had been willing to become fit for Eternal Life. But “the weeping and gnashing of teeth,” “the tribulation and anguish” of those who despised and rejected the offered Saviour, when they shall see “many coming from the East and the West, from the North and South, and sitting down in the Kingdom of God and themselves thrust out,” are not the penalty which is threatened, they are only its accompaniments. That penalty is Death itself; from which there is no resurrection. The same is true of the joys of the saved. These are not the gift of God through Jesus Christ; they are its accompaniments, the gift itself the “Unspeakable Gift “ is Eternal Life; the rewards attendant on it depend on their personal faithfulness, and are proportioned to their individual deserts. “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is Eternal Life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
To one who inquired of Mr. Spurgeon, what a certain passage of Scripture meant, he replied, “It means what it says.” So we must say of the passage just quoted and of the many other similar passages in the Word of God by which the grand distinction between the saved and the unsaved is made known to us. Can it be possible that the Scriptures should ring out, from beginning to end with these two words Life and Death, Life and Death, the two most important words as regards the destiny of man in all the Bible; words upon which the threatening of the Law and the promises of the Gospel are hinged, when they do not actually mean what they say? Can it be possible that our Lord should so repeatedly and emphatically represent the boon which He came to bring to perishing men as the boon of Life from the dead “Eternal Life” when He simply meant a certain condition of life? If the traditional doctrine of the natural immortality of all men be true, why should our Lord so uniformly have ignored it, yea, why should He have always and everywhere claimed that it is His peculiar prerogative to give Eternal Life, and never once have said or intimated that He meant by this, not the gift of life itself, but the gift of purity and happiness to men already immortal by nature?
This is incredible. Any theory of man that requires such a perversion of the plain letter of God’s Word, that throws such discredit upon the sincerity of Him whose name is Truth to sustain itself, must be founded in error.*
*We cannot forbear to quote a few sentences from a recent tract by the Reverend W. A. Hobbs, missionary in India, that has just come to hand entitled, Everlasting Life; What is it? And how may men gain it?
“To understand ‘Everlasting Life‘ as some people do as simply a figure of speech meaning Everlasting Happiness, and to teach ignorant persons that Everlasting Life and Everlasting Happiness are one and the same thing because the immortality of every man is already presupposed as a natural endowment is a gross perversion of the real meaning of words. Such an attempt to tone down the meaning of the word Life, probably would not have been thought of had not the notion that God created human beings an immortal race, necessitated the giving a figurative meaning to the words * Everlasting Life,’ because their creed forbade acceptance in a literal sense of such terms as ‘Perishing,’ ‘Destruction,’ ‘Second Death,’ etc., when applied by Holy Scripture to the wicked amongst men.
“Now if ‘Everlasting Life‘ means a continuity of existence in a glorified immortal body (after the resurrection to Life) for the believer in Christ only as contrasted with our Lord’s reference to perishing in the case of the unsaved one can see at a glance, why the Saviour so persistently used these specific words: But if all men are by nature immortal, then His almost exclusive use of the words ‘Life,’ and ‘Eternal Life’ in relation the gift of God, is both obscure and unappreciable. If that which He so frequently held out as a privilege to men of faith was already a heritage, be it for weal or woe, of the whole human race, it would seem that the words Everlasting Happiness would have expressed His meaning much more clearly: but the fact remains that no less than thirty- seven times He called the blessing He had to give ‘Life,’ and not once did He speak of it as Happiness. Surely, it is much more rational to believe that Jesus Christ intended what He so repeatedly said, than to make Him say what the words do not mean just that men may hug the unwarrantable notion that all the abominable and spiritually loathsome members of our race are stamped with the seal of Immortality.”
CHAPTER 13
Texts and Arguments Commonly Used to Support The Traditional Dogma.
We have read, with much care and attention, all the principal and more widely circulated volumes and essays and briefer arguments that have been published in support of the traditional dogma of immortality in sin and misery, and in opposition to the doctrine of Immortality only in Christ; but as we have had no intention of reviewing or criticising any of them in this brief volume, and have desired especially to avoid all personalities and to confine ourself as closely as possible, to the question in hand, we have rarely alluded to any of them in the foregoing pages excepting in two or three instances when it could not well be avoided. But our topic in this chapter, seems to call for, at least a passing notice, of the arguments and methods employed by these writers. This we will make as brief and impersonal, as possible.
We think, then, that we have good reason to complain of the method they pursue for they all pursue substantially the same method. It seems to us more like what is called among lawyers “sharp practice” or “special pleading,” than any fair attempt to answer our Scriptural arguments, or to ascertain and set forth what the Scriptures really do teach on this question.
We refer not now to the sneering and contemptuous language which so many of them employ toward us. This should be always expected, by those who venture to question any venerable and popular tradition especially one so venerable and popular as this. Nor do we refer to their very general and persistent misrepresentation of the doctrine we hold; for this is a very common device of men of many, otherwise good men, we are sorry to say when they are hard pressed in an argument. Hence they persist, in spite of our remonstrance, in calling it the doctrine of Annihilation implying if they do not actually say so, that we are advocating a scientific absurdity; when in fact, our doctrine is just the opposite of this; “not the doctrine of death, but of Life, Eternal Life in Christ. They must know that it is only the extinction of life, the destruction of the organization of the personality of the individual, and not of the materials that enter into that composition, which we maintain. As for the term annihilation, it is no more applicable here, than when any living animal or thing loses its life and its individuality by disorganization and decay.
But we now refer, more especially, to what we must call a sophisticated way of advocating their cause. For, in the first place, they assume the very point in question; the natural immortality of man, or rather of the soul of man, as they prefer to phrase it, and would in this way, rule us out of court, before the discussion begins.
The author of Life and Death Eternal in his preface boldly says: “We have commonly employed the term ‘Annihilation’ to designate the cessation of existence which these writers advocate. We are aware that many of them object to the term as not being fully expressive of their mode of stating and arguing the case. We would only say that we cannot be debarred the use of a convenient, indeed an indispensable term out of deference to their preferences.”
It may indeed be convenient and even indispensable for him to misrepresent and stigmatize the doctrine of his adversaries before attempting to disprove it, but is it honest? He well knows it is not a question of annihilation, as that term is generally understood the annihilation of substance but simply of the destruction of the individual.
They assume that there is an “existence” which is common to all the children of Adam, the saved and the unsaved alike, an existence that is indestructible. They will not consent to have this existence called life, though it has all the attributes of life; memory, consciousness, the capacity to enjoy and suffer; for this would show at once, their antagonism to the Scriptures. Of course the Life (zoe), which is promised through Christ, and the death (thanatos), which is the penalty of sin when it is finished, cannot be understood in any true or literal sense. They must be figurative expressions to denote, on the one hand, the purity, happiness and blessedness that are engrafted upon the existence of the saved, and on the other, the pain, misery and wretchedness that are inflicted
upon the existence of the lost. In other words, these terms “Life” and “Death,” in the Scriptures, when man is spoken of, are to be taken only in an ethical sense, as indicating states or conditions of existence. They evidently experience great difficulty in finding any substitute for these plain terms “Life” and “Death.” One of them, making no distinction between cause and effect, says that life means “union with God,” and death means “separation from Him” Another, that life is “true functional action,” and death, “false functional action”; ignoring entirely that state in which there is the loss of all functional action, which only is actual death. Another says that life is “vitalized,” and death “not vitalized”!
By these, and various other definitions, which need not to be cited, and by the habitual explanation and use of these words in an ethical and tropical sense, as denoting a state of purity and blessedness for the saved, and of sin and misery for the lost, on the part of these authors and commentators and teachers generally, who would sustain this dogma, this has come to be quite commonly understood to be the Scriptural sense of these terms, when the destiny of man is spoken of. They seem to think it strange that we will not accept of these definitions and explanations. They charge us with adhering too closely to the literal interpretation of the Scriptures, and of perverting or misunderstanding the meaning of this word “existence.” But is it not they who misinterpret it to serve their own convenience?
It ought to be evident to every reflecting person, that existence is a broader word than either life or death. Anything that is, may be said to exist, whether it have life or not; as for instance, a particle of matter, a stone, an animal, or a man. But anything, of which life is the chief or essential attribute, cannot be said to exist as such, without life. For example, an animal cannot properly be said to exist as an animal, after life is gone.
What is an animal? “It is an organized living being, endowed with sensation, and the power of voluntary action” (Webster). Of course, if these essential qualities of sensation and voluntary motion which constitute an animal, are wanting, something may exist in its place, but surely it is not an animal. It may be the dead body, or the bones, or the skin, or the remains of an animal, but not the animal itself. Much more, is this true of a soul, which is life itself; for the same terms nephesh (Hebrew), psuche (Greek), are alternatively and almost indifferently translated “soul” and “life” in the Scriptures. Whatever difference philosophy may have taught us to put upon these terms, at the present day, their meaning is nearly or quite identical in the Scriptures. We maintain then, that the existence of a life without life, or a soul without life, which is all that constitutes it a soul, is an impossibility. And especially to talk of a soul having all the attributes of life, such as consciousness, memory, the capacity to suffer and the power of action, and yet without life, is to talk nonsense, or fiction. And yet this is what they charge, not merely upon the poetical portion of God’s Word, but upon its plain, sober, judicial portions, yea upon all its utterances on this question of the future lot of man.
They not only assume for themselves the very point to be proved, the necessary immortality or eternal existence of all men, but carry it with them, into the interpretation of the Scriptures, and would have us to do the same. And when we ask them to point us to one single passage in which any such doctrine is asserted, they say that these inspired writers of Scripture assume it also, as well as themselves; that it is so evident as to require no such formal setting forth. And then in default of any such testimony, they do not hesitate as we have already sufficiently shown, in a previous chapter to take those passages which predicate Immortality of the righteous alone which are very numerous, and apply them to all men indiscriminately, in this way setting at naught the real essential distinction, which the Scriptures everywhere make, between the righteous and the wicked; namely, that of Life and Death.
Coming then to the argument with an assumption that begs the whole question, and discarding the very first principles of fair argumentation and Scriptural interpretation, it would be strange indeed, if among all the many passages relating to sin and its fearful consequences, the miseries it brings in this life, and the certain ruin to which it leads, and especially, those that depict the remediless condition of those who reject the Gospel, some might not be found, that could be so interpreted as to seem to favour the doctrine of endless misery. The character of the teachings of the Bible is such; its utterances are expressed in such a variety of ways and connections, and they are so scattered throughout the whole Volume, that, by taking isolated passages here and there, it is not difficult if one is so disposed, to make out a plausible case, in behalf of any proposition he may wish to argue. Hence there has never been any notion so wild and misleading, or so contrary to the general spirit and tenor of God’s Word, that its partisans have not been able, by seeking for it, to find some apparent encouragement in that Word for it, and to produce their “proof texts” in its favour.
It is of no avail whatever, to cite any number of passages, that contradict their doctrine, however clear and explicit they may be; for they know how to explain them all away, or to read another meaning into them, or at least to offset them by certain other texts, taken from the poets, sacred or profane, in which the same or similar words or forms of expression are used in a figurative sense. As the cunning magicians of Pharaoh, who confronted Moses when he attempted to prove by the exhibition of an actual miracle, that he spoke by Divine authority, were able to match it by a spurious one of their own devising, and in this way to nullify its influence and to harden the heart of their master against the truth; so the advocates of false doctrines, by adroit and too often unscrupulous methods, are able to “pervert the right ways of the Lord,” and to blind the minds of their followers to His truth.
If you grant to the advocates of this traditional dogma the privilege of begging the question to be proved, in the outset, and of assuming that the Sacred writers take it for granted without asserting it, and then, of changing the meaning of all the plain Scriptural words, that contradict their theory, and of reading their own views into passages that do not otherwise express them, and still further, of offsetting all the direct and literal assertions of God’s Word, in regard to the death and destruction of the wicked, by certain other passages wherever they can be found, in which similar expressions are used in a figurative sense, it is impossible but that they should be able to make some show of an argument in favour of their cause. And yet this is the privilege which they or, at least, many of them, claim.
In the volume entitled Life and Death Eternal many pages indeed one whole chapter is devoted to this one object of showing that the terms, “death,” “destruction,” “ perdition,” and the many other terms in which the lot of the wicked is described, are never to be taken in their true, literal sense, because, forsooth, in the book of Job, and elsewhere, similar expressions are used in a figurative sense. The author takes up these various terms seriatim and finds something to match them, of a tropical import, in some other portion of the Bible; This is what he himself avows, in his table of contents, as the substance of Chapter 4.
Therefore for this is the conclusion to which he would lead us whatever is said in the Scriptures by God Himself, or by His inspired servants, or by Jesus Christ and His disciples, soberly, positively, judicially, by way of warning and threatening, of the penalty of sin, and of its sure and certain results, is not to be taken in any true and literal sense, as meaning what is said, but only in such a poetical, mythical, transcendental sense, as the philosophy of Plato may find it convenient to accord to it!
Those who have been educated under the influence of this system of philosophy, and have followed the lead of these teachers, without any careful examination of the Scriptures for themselves on this question, are under the impression that this heathen dogma, of the necessary immortality of all souls, and the consequent doom of endless sin and misery of the unsaved, is abundantly taught in the Word of God. But when they come to investigate this point for themselves in an independent manner if they ever do, they are surprised to find, not merely, that it is not taught at all in the Scriptures, but that there are but few, so very few texts to be found in all the Bible, that can be made to give any encouragement to such a conclusion. There is scarcely any other false doctrine of the Papal church, which we, as Protestants, admit to be false, that cannot make a better show of support than this. We do not hesitate to affirm, after the most thorough examination, that there are not more than half a dozen passages in all the Bible, that would even suggest the idea of endless sin and suffering, to one who did not bring with him to its reading, this thought in his own mind. It is only by first reading this doctrine into these few texts, and putting them into false connections, and repeating them over and over again, and ringing changes on certain specious epithets they contain, that this cause is saved from absolute beggary.
We propose now, to examine critically, these half a dozen texts, not that we may “explain them away,” as is sometimes said, but that we may bring them back again to their true meaning, from which they have been perverted that we may recover them, like the sacred vessels, from the hands of the Philistines, and set them in their rightful place in the tabernacle of God.
The following passage in Isaiah 33:14. “Who among us shall dwell with devouring fire? Who among shall dwell with everlasting burnings?” is sometimes quoted to help out the rhetoric of those who are trying to describe the torments of the lost, and to give as lurid a glare as possible to the picture. It is possible that unlettered, and superficial readers may be led to suppose that the prophet is here speaking of the sufferings of the lost in hell; but the most cursory glance at the context will show, that the future state is not here in question, but he refers simply to the temporal miseries that are inflicted upon his people by their enemies. And in any case the evident reply which his exclamatory inquiry invites is, “No one can endure them.” There are, perhaps, two or three other similar expressions of impassioned outbursts of feeling which we need not stop to notice in this category; for no intelligent reader can mistake their meaning, or regard them as having any relevancy to the question under consideration.
Without stopping to comment on this, or other irrelevant passages, we now proceed to examine in their order these half a dozen texts, upon which the advocates of the doctrine of endless sin and misery principally rely for the support of their cause.
Daniel 12:1.” And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt. “
There are various translations of this passage; that given by Tregelles, who will not be suspected of having any heretical bias, together with other eminent Hebrew scholars, renders it thus: “And many from among the sleepers of the dust, shall awake; these (who awake) shall be unto everlasting life; but those (the rest of the sleepers who do not awake) shall be unto shame and everlasting contempt.” So also the learned Aben Ezra, in his commentary on this chapter, quotes Rabbi Saadias as declaring that, “Those who awake shall be (appointed) to everlasting life, and those who do not awake, shall be (doomed) to shame and everlasting contempt.” Accepting this as the true rendering, as is probable from the context, there is no reference here at all to the resurrection of the wicked, but only to that of the righteous, in what is termed the First resurrection, at the second advent of Christ, immediately after “the great tribulation,” as depicted in the first verse of this chapter, and more fully described in Matthew 24:21-30.
But whatever may be the true rendering, the reader should observe how this epithet, everlasting is applied; first to the life of the righteous, which is declared to be “everlasting life,” and secondly to the contempt (or abhorring, which is the rendering given to the same word Isaiah 66: 24), with which the wicked shall ever be regarded by the righteous. This contempt, the righteous, he will live forever, may well entertain forever toward ill the wicked who perish, as we now entertain a contempt for the treachery of Judas, eighteen centuries after he has passed away. Hence it is called in the text “everlasting contempt.” But as for the shame which is subjective on the part of the wicked, and may be supposed to be felt by themselves the inspired writer is careful not to characterize it by the epithet everlasting; for the passage reads “shame and everlasting contempt.” And yet many quote this passage thus: “Everlasting shame and contempt,” and charge the inspired prophet whether inadvertently or for the purpose of strengthening their position, we will not decide with saying just what he was so careful not to say. The author of Life and Death Eternal we are sorry to notice, does this same thing, as follows:
“The two eternal conditions proceed as cotemporaneous. Daniel 12:2, also describes in the same utterance the ‘life‘ of the righteous and the ‘shame‘ of the wicked by the same epithet ‘everlasting.’ It cannot without violence be understood otherwise than as declaring them to be equally and in the same sense everlasting”!! (p. 332.)
The above text is the only solitary one, that we know of, in all the Old Testament, that seems to be available for the support of the dogma we are opposing And even this has no force whatever in this direction, excepting by mistranslating and misquoting it.
Coming now to the New Testament, the first text that claims our attention is the following: Matthew 25:46. “And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: hut the righteous into life eternal.”
1. The Gospel of Matthew was written especially for the Jews, and no doubt, originally, in the Hebrew language. The Greek text, which we now have, is supposed to be a translation from the Hebrew, and our version is made not directly from the Hebrew manuscript, which is lost, but from the Greek, and is a translation of a translation. In some of the earlier Latin versions, which were probably made from the Hebrew, the words which are rendered “eternal punishment” from the Greek kolasin aidnion, are in those Latin versions, not supplicium ceternum, “eternal punishment,” but ignem eternum “ eternal fire.” This is probably the true rendering, as it is the expression used in verse 41, and elsewhere.
There is, however, no important doctrine involved in this question of the true rendering, unless one should insist on giving an exclusively subjective meaning to the word (kolasin) punishment, in the interest of the traditional dogma of endless suffering, as some of our opponents are inclined to do; this, by the way, may account for the substitution of the word kolasin in the place of ignem; for we shall find, that other passages bearing on this question, have evidently been tampered with to give them more force in this direction. But, accepting of the common rendering, it is to be remarked:
2. That neither this nor any other rendering of the text will sustain the impression, once very commonly entertained, that this scene is intended to represent the general judgment of mankind as individuals consequent on the resurrection. Nothing is here said of the resurrection of the dead, nor of salvation by grace through Christ, nor indeed of individuals as such. But we are expressly told, it is the judgment of the “nations,” or rather of the Gentiles, at the second coming of Christ. Our translators probably understood it according to the popular impression, as representing the final judgment of all mankind, after the resurrection. Therefore, by suppressing the little word “a,” the, and by rendering the phrase “ta panta ethne” all nations instead of all the Gentiles as they usually in more than ninety in stances, have rendered it, they have done what they could to sustain the popular impression. The word ta the, is however restored in the Revised version and the phrase is rendered “all the nations.” It would have more exactly expressed the sense in which those Jews, to whom our Lord spoke, understood it, if it had been rendered “all the Gentile nations”; for this was their usual way of designating all other nations of the world but their own.
It will be seen by referring to the chapters immediately preceding, that our Lord had been uttering a series of parables parables of judgment, of which this is the seventh and last. Most of the others may perhaps be regarded as more especially applicable to the people of the Jewish nation. This seems to have been uttered in answer to the inquiry of His disciples (Chapter 24:3), “What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the consummation of the age?” (see marginal reading in Revised Version), and is of a more general character. Hence, He replies, “When the Son of Man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He ait on the throne of His glory, and before Him shall be gathered all the nations,” etc.- While it seems quite evident that this should be understood as a prophetic parable referring to the judgment of the nations of the world, at the second coming, we have no purpose to serve in construing it, to the exclusion of the Jewish nation, but to bring out the truth, which our Lord intended to express, and which they understood Him to utter. Nor indeed, have we any other anxiety or desire to correct the popular impression concerning it, as a description of the general judgment of mankind after having been raised from the dead.*
* “This chapter describes a judgment of the living nations of mankind by the Son of Man. This, however, does not exclude the thought that His work of judgment comprehends also the generation of the dead. But here is portrayed the period of crisis and culmination in His work of judgment, so far as the earth is the area of it. Other Scriptures, as for example Revelation 20, teach that it must ultimately extend itself through all the regions of the dead, until even death and hell are cast into the lake of fire.” The Mystery of Creation, p. 166. Reverend L. C. Baker.
Let it be so understood if any one so desires and we will proceed;
3. To notice the rendering of this word aidnios. It occurs twice in this verse; kolasin aidnion and zoen aiunion; in the first instance, it is rendered “everlasting punishment,” and in the second, “life eternal.” It should have had the same rendering in both cases, and so it has in our Revised Version. It would not seem necessary to call attention to so small a matter were it not for the fact, that some are inclined to regard the word everlasting as having more strength and force than the word eternal. Perhaps the original translators did; for they have most evidently in other instances, if not in this, shown all the favour they possibly could to the traditional doctrine, which relies on these few passages for support.
Whether this word here is to be taken in its fullest sense of endlessness, or in an indefinite sense, or in the more limited sense of an age-long period, which it often has, it certainly has the same meaning and should have had the same rendering in both cases; for the allotments of both classes are plainly represented as parallel and synchronous.
4. But granting that this passage describes the general judgment of individuals, and that aionios is to be taken here in the infinite sense of endlessness, it is not to be assumed, nor conceded, that kolasin if this were the true original term, is to be understood merely in a subjective sense, as meaning simply suffering, as our opponents would have it.* It has an objective and administrative sense, which they would ignore, if they could.
*This is the position of the author of Life and Death Eternal. He labours earnestly through two or three chapters (see Chapters 6 and 7), to maintain it. “Future punishment consists in suffering,” is the caption of one of the chapters.
There may be a punishment of deprivation, as well as that of stripes. It is the barbarian’s notion of punishment to make it consist entirely, or as much as possible, of positive pain and agony prolonged to the utmost limit. During the dark ages this was the kind of punishment, it was supposed, that God would inflict, and tradition has handed down the notion to this day, among a certain class of theologians. But under all Christian and civilized governments, now existing, punishment is vindictive, rather than vindictive; it is not so much the object of wise rulers, to see how much agony they can inflict upon offenders, and how long they can protract it, as how they can best maintain the authority and majesty of the government. Hence, punishment consists more largely of the denial of privileges that otherwise might have been enjoyed, and in the deprivation of rights that have been forfeited. The very highest kind of punishment, called “capital punishment,” consists of taking away the life of the criminal, and yet this is inflicted with as little pain as possible! So, under the Divine government, those sinners who are found in the judgment to be unworthy to live, and whose names are blotted out of “The Book of Life,” whether they are cast at once into the fires of Gehenna, like the tares from the wheat field, or the chaff from the threshing floor, to which they are compared, or whether they are left to “perish in their own corruption,” may truly be said to be punished, not merely while the process of destruction is going on, but when it is finished, to have suffered an “eternal punishment.”
For they have been cut off from privileges which will be enjoyed forever by others, and which they also might have forever enjoyed, but for their sins, and their rejection of the salvation once offered them. There is nothing said of torment in the text. Nor is there anything in the word, kolasis, to indicate it. It simply reads “everlasting punishment.”
The verb kolazo from which this noun is derived, means “to prune,” “to cut off,” “to check,” “to repress,” as well as “to inflict torture”; and this idea of cutting off forever, expresses quite as well, if not better, the meaning of the noun kolasis. And when we find the punishment of sin everywhere else in the Word of God declared to be deaths and when in 2 Thessalonians 1:9, this is expressly said to be the punishment of everlasting destruction, what right has any one to say it is not?
5. We often hear it said, that this text proves that the torments of the lost will endure as long as the joys of the saved. It proves no such thing. If, indeed, the comparison here were between the torments of the one class and the joys of the other, one might very properly draw this inference. But there is no such comparison in the text. It is forced into this passage by the reader himself. What then is the comparison, or rather the contrast ‘here instituted? It is between the allotments of these two classes. To the one it is the allotment of Everlasting Life. Of course this life is pure and joyful, or it could not be everlasting; it is the life of Christ Himself in His people, which, of necessity, endures forever. But nothing is said of their joys in the passage. To the other, it is just the opposite, the loss of this Everlasting Life; it is the punishment of death and destruction. Whatever pains may be inflicted, or whatever anguish endured in the process, nothing is said of these here. And most evidently the contrast is not completed till the death, from which there is no recall ensues: “Sin, when it is finished brings forth death.”
Now whether this prophetic parable be interpreted as referring to the judgment of the nations at the second advent, or that of individuals at the last day, the lesson taught is the same. If to the former, it agrees perfectly with what is said elsewhere, in the Psalms and by the prophets, of the utter destruction of those nations that do not conform to the spirit and precepts of the Gospel “For the nation and kingdom that will not serve Thee shall perish; yea those nations shall be utterly wasted!”
If to the latter, it is what we are abundantly told, from the beginning to the end of the Scriptures, “that only the good wheat will be gathered into the garner for eternal preservation, and that the chaff will be burned up with unquenchable fire.”
6. Perhaps we should not leave this passage without remarking on the phrase (eis to pur to aibnion) “everlasting fire (in verse 41) prepared for the devil and his angels.” The same phrase occurs in Matthew 18:8. But elsewhere, as in Mark 9: 43 (which we will notice in its proper place), also in Matthew 3:12, and Luke 3:17, the epithet asbestos, unquenchable, is used, to designate a fire that is irresistible, that cannot be stayed from doing its work of destruction. But whether the epithet asbestos unquenchable, or aionios, eternal, be predicated of the fire, nothing of the sort is predicated of the wicked who are cast into it.
*The certainty that the blessedness of the righteous will be truly everlasting does not depend altogether on the use of the adjective aionios, in connection with the life promised to them. We are assured of this by a great variety of expressions. The heavenly inheritance is declared to be “incorruptible, undefined and unfading,” and “the crown of glory one that fades not away.” “This corruptible must put on in-corruption, and this mortal put on immortality.” The future life of Christ’s faithful servants is set forth as flowing from Him, and being like unto His life. “Because He lives, they shall live also.” “He is their life.” “They shall be made like unto Him.” “Whether they wake or sleep, they are to live together with Him.” “They are to be forever (pantote), with the Lord.” “Their vile bodies are to be changed and fashioned like unto His glorious body.” Appeal to Scripture. Reverend J. Barton.
If one chooses to understand these words in their absolute and unlimited sense, we do not care to contest the point with him. Be it that this element is perpetual and eternal in its existence and ever ready to do the bidding of the Supreme Ruler, if one wishes so to understand these expressions. But surely, this gives him no warrant for transferring these epithets to the worthless material that is cast into it to be consumed. The fire of Gehenna, in the valley of Hinnom, is said to have been continually kept up not because the carcasses that were thrown into it were never consumed, but because it was continually supplied with fresh material for consumption. What may have been the uses of this fire of God in the eternal past, or what may be its uses in the eternal future in burning up the chaff, and whatever is vile, and unworthy to be preserved in cleansing, in purifying this universe and keeping it pure (as the word pur imports), we cannot say.
But the conclusion that God keeps this fire perpetually burning, not for the purpose of consuming what is worthless and vile, but for the very purpose of tormenting those whom He cannot or will not destroy, and that they must be indestructible because this is the nature of the fire into which they are cast, is not merely a slanderous imputation on the character of God, but it is reached by a feat of argumentation such as nothing but a desperate cause would employ.
CHAPTER 14
Texts and Arguments Commonly Used to Support The Traditional Dogma
(Continued).
Mark 3:28, 29. “All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme but he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness but is in danger of eternal damnation.”
This passage, like the other passages that are the principal reliance of those who would maintain the doctrine of eternal sin and suffering as we have already noticed and shall have occasion to notice again has evidently-been tampered with. The Greek text varies in different manuscripts. Some read aloniou kolasios, “eternal punishment,” or excision; others aioniou kriseos eternal condemnation, or judgment or damnation as in our com- mon version. But other manuscripts, which are supposed to be more authoritative, have aioaiou amartematos eternal sin, and this is the rendering adopted in the Revised Version.
Those who hold to the idea of a future probation, and to the restoration of some sinners during an intermediate state, think they find some hint of it here, and in a few other passages of like import. Be that as it may, there is nothing to encourage the idea of eternal suffering here. The amended rendering is not “guilty,” or chargeable with eternally sinning for no one can be guilty of an act which is eternally future, but “guilty of an eternal sin” eternal in its consequences, one that is never to be forgiven, or in other words, of a “mortal sin,” which brings certain remediless death. There is another passage of similar import, in which the wrath of God is said to abide on the sinner, which perhaps we should notice in this connection, namely: “He that believeth on the Son hath Everlasting Life, and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life; but the wrath of God abides on him” (John 3: 36).
The wrath of God may be said to abide on men as long as they continue in sin, and if they were to continue to sin forever, then, no doubt. His wrath would abide on them forever. But this is just the point to be first established, before any such doctrine can be founded on it. There is no such assertion, nor any implication to this effect in the passage. It is only as one assumes, that they do live forever in sin, and reads this idea into the passage, that it seems to have any bearing on the question.
The word mend, abide, must have its limitation in the object spoken of. It frequently occurs in the Scriptures. Mary “abode” with Elizabeth three months. Christ “abode” with Zaccheus over night. Erastus “abode” at Corinth, how long we are not told, but surely not forever. We are told, however, that, “He that does the will of God abides forever” menei eis ton aidna. But we are not told that they abide forever, who do not the will of God, nor that the “wrath of God abides on them” forever; but on the contrary that He is to all such “a consuming fire.”
Mark 9: 43-50. “If thy right hand offend thee cut it off: it is better for thee to go into life maimed than having two hands to go into hell (ten geennan the Gehenna) into the fire that never shall he quenched (to pur to as heston inextinguishable fire). [Where the worm dies not and the fire is not quenched.] And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off’; it is better for thee to enter halt into life than having two feet to be cast into hell (Gehenna) [into the fire that never shall be quenched, where the worm dies not and the fire is not quenched]. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out. For it is better for thee to enter into the Kingdom of God, with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell (Gehenna) [fire] where the worm dies not and the fire is not quenched.”
1. Before trying to ascertain the true meaning of this passage, it would be desirable, if it were possible, to get hold of the original text. But this is probably hopeless; for like all the other passages relating to the doom of the wicked, it has undergone so many changes at the hands of partisan transcribers and others, and this work was begun so early that it is not possible to know certainly what was the original text. But the best scholars agree in rejecting several clauses, those that we have included in brackets, as spurious interpolations, and they are omitted in our Revised Version. Perhaps these additions were not made with any purpose of changing the meaning of the passage, nor do they essentially change it, but with the pious (?) endeavour to make it express more emphatically and impressively the sentiment the manipulators had in their own minds. In fact, King James’ translators seem to have joined in this pious effort, for, in translating the word ‘to pur to as- beston’, they have interpolated a little prophecy of their own into the text; and instead of simply rendering it, “the unquenchable fire,” as they should have done, as this is all that the original words mean, they have said “the fire that never shall he quenched.” This word asbestos is composed of two parts, the a privative, and shestos from shennumi to quench or extinguish. This a privative, no more means never shall be in this place, than it does when prefixed to any other Greek word: for instance, oratos means visible, and aoratos means invisible. No one would think of translating it never shall be visible.
2. The word here rendered, “hell,” is not Hades but Gehenna, the name of that valley outside of the walls of Jerusalem, into which dead carcasses and the offal of the city were cast, to be consumed by the fires that were kept constantly burning for this purpose, and by the devouring worms. It was not a place of torture for the living, but a place for the consumption of whatever was vile and offensive. It was not even a place of punishment, excepting so far as this ignominious disposal of the bodies that were cast into it, as not worthy of a decent burial, might be regarded as a punishment.
Hence, the word Gehenna became a synonym of the most ignominious kind of destruction. This is the sense in which our Lord uses it elsewhere, as in Matthew 5: 22, “Whosoever is angry with his brother, without a cause, shall be in danger of the judgment (condemnation of the judge,) and whosoever shall say to his brother Raca, shall be in danger of the council (Sanhedrim), but whosoever shall say thou fool shall be in danger of hell fire” (the Gehenna of fire). He is here to be understood as teaching, that it would be better to part with whatever is the most dear in this life, than to be led by it, to the loss of the life to come and to remediless ruin.
3. The phrase “where the worm that dies not, and the fire is not quenched,” is evidently a quotation from the last verse in the prophecy of Isaiah; which reads thus: “And they shall go forth and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against Me; for their worm shall not die neither shall their fire be quenched and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.”
We have in the concluding verses of this prophecy, a graphic picture of the restoration of the kingdom of Israel, and the final overthrow, and complete and utter destruction of all their enemies; and their decaying bodies are represented as food for the devouring worms, and the consuming fires of the valley of Gehenna. Our Lord applies this description to the case of the miserable destruction of all sinners. But those who would insist on using this reference, not as a symbol of the sure and fearful destruction of the wicked, according to the original meaning of these words, but as a symbol of the eternal preservation of the wicked in torment, find these figures too gross and revolting for any literal application; and so they spiritualize them by whose authority no one can tell by saying that “the unquenchable fire” means a tormenting conscience that can never be quieted, and “ the worm that dies not,” means a gnawing memory that never dies; and this conceit has been handed down from one religious teacher to another, and been so often repeated, that it is regarded by many as the real orthodox teaching of the Bible. But in order to get any support from this text for the doctrine of eternal sin and suffering, the advocates of this doctrine are obliged, not only to hold, that these worms are immortal worms, but also to understand this word die when applied to them, in a sense just opposite and contrary to that when applied to sinful men. In the first case, the worms that are said not to die are taken to be immortal, and in the second case Sinners who shall die according to the declaration of the same Scriptures they too, are taken to be immortal! This is the kind of exegesis to which they are reduced in their endeavour to sustain the doctrine of eternal sin and suffering! And this they claim as one of their strong proof texts.
5. The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus,
Luke 16:19-31. There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: and there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table; moreover, the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham s bosom. The rich man also died, and was buried: and in hell (Hades), he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and sees Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried, and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue: for lam tormented in this flame. But Abraham said. Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime received thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you, cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou would send him to my father s house: for I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said. Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him. If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.”
It is upon this parable more than on any other portion of Scripture, that our opponents rely for the support of their doctrine of immortality in sin and misery. It enters into all their arguments on this question. It is thought to contain the materials for answering all objections, and silencing all cavils. It is taken for granted, that our Lord here teaches, and intended to teach that the dead are conscious, that the souls of all men are immortal, and that on leaving this world, all men go at once into a state of blessedness and joy, or of torment that is absolutely unchangeable and eternal. It has furnished the materials, by the help of a lively imagination and fervid rhetoric, for the most fearful pictures of the never-ending agonies of the lost, in the world of despair. It has been employed as the theme of more terrific discourses, and exhortations and appeals than, perhaps, any other portion of Scripture. And yet when one comes to examine it soberly and carefully, he can find no good reason to suppose that our Lord intended to teach anything whatever in regard to the state of the dead. He had altogether another purpose, as we shall see.
That this is a parable, a prophetic parable and not a biographical sketch, is quite evident. It must then be treated as a parable, and be understood as a parable, to illustrate and enforce a certain truth. Its metaphors, its scenic representation, its personae are to be taken, not as realities, but as imaginary things. Much less can one take certain portions of it such as may suit his convenience and purpose as real, and reject such other portions as he cannot well use, as unreal. No parable can be explained in this way; or rather, if one be allowed to accommodate a parable to his purpose in this way, he ought, by ingenious manipulation, to be able to prove anything he may please.*
* “The parables may not be made first sources of doctrine. Doctrines, otherwise and already grounded, may be illustrated, or indeed further confirmed by them, but it is not allowable to constitute doctrines first by their aid. This rule, however, has been often forgotten, and controversialists, looking around for argument, with which to sustain some weak position, one from which they can find no other support in Scripture, often invent for themselves support in these.” Trench, on the Parables,
2. The scene of this parable is altogether an ideal or suppositional one and was meant to be so. It is supposed to be in the Hadean world, a place, or state rather, concerning which the Scriptures have taught us absolutely nothing, excepting that it is one of darkness and silence where the “dead know nothing” into which all men, both good and bad go when they leave this world. If the scene had been laid in Gehenna that place of fire into which the wicked are cast, as the Scriptures inform us, after the resurrection and the judgment, to be consumed, this parable would have seemed to afford some justification for the doctrine that has been founded upon it. The word Gehenna is the only word that is rendered Hell in our revised version; the word Hades is transferred to the text, without any change. If the authors of our old version had done the same, instead of unfortunately translating both words “Hell,” they would have saved a great deal of confusion of mind, and false reasoning from the parable, and in regard to the state of the dead generally. The two ideas represented by these two words. Hades and Gehenna are as distinct as they can well be. The one is the place, or state, of the dead without reference to their character, between death and the resurrection to judgment. The other is the place into which the wicked are cast after judicial sentence has been pronounced upon them, to be destroyed soul and body together. The Jews, especially the Pharisees, to whom this parable was spoken, had adopted very generally the fanciful and ghostly notions that prevailed among the heathen nations by which they were surrounded.*
“The Egyptians, Persians, Hindus and Greeks, with all of whom the Jews held relations of intercourse, had in their popular representations of the under-world of the dead, regions of peace and honour for the good, and regions of fire for the bad.” W. R. Alger. “Paradise is separated from hell by a distance no greater than the width of a thread.”
And our Lord constructed this parable as He did His other parables, to suit their notions of things without any design of endorsing or opposing them. When He uttered the parable of the shrewd, tricky steward who made “friends of the mammon of unrighteousness,” whom his lord not our Lord commended for his shrewdness, that He might give a lesson, as to that proper use of money, we are not to understand Him as recommending this sort of sharp practice in our business dealings with each other; nor by the parable of the “unjust judge,” to whom He likens Himself in one point, are we to understand Him as approving of the character of this selfish, hard-hearted judge; nor by the parable of the “Great Supper “ are we to understand Him as sanctioning the practice of giving great suppers, which in His day, if not in ours, were scenes of gluttony, drunkenness and revelry. Our Lord took the people as they were, and used their language, and adapted His illustrations to their modes of thinking and living. They had a thousand false notions which He did not attempt to correct. When our Lord said to the self- righteous Pharisees who murmured because of His compassion for sinners, that “there is more joy in heaven over one sinner that repents than over ninety and nine that need no repentance,” we are not to understand Him as admitting their claim to His favour, or as affirming that there are any among the children of Adam who need no repentance; but simply as addressing them on the basis of their own assumptions. It is not to the drapery of His parables, nor to the elements of which they are composed, nor to the scene where they are laid, but to the truth He would illustrate, that we are to direct our attention.
3. There is nothing in the circumstances or symbolism of this parable, that harmonizes with the representations given us everywhere else in the Scriptures concerning the Hadean state, or the rewards and punishments of the future world. So far as its pictorial conception is concerned, it stands alone and is quite unique. Nothing is said of the moral character of the two principal persons in this drama, of the rich man, whom tradition, not our Lord, calls “Dives,” because he was rich, and of Lazarus, a very common Hebrew name, meaning, without help. It is quite common to hear the former spoken of, as proud, sensual, miserly and every way corrupt; and the latter, as humble, patient, prayerful and pure in heart. Indeed, it is not possible to adapt this parable to the purposes of those who would use it to represent the future misery of the wicked, and the future bliss of the righteous, unless the one is shown to be, or assumed to be, a very bad man, and the other a very good man. But they are obliged to draw entirely on the imagination for all this. They have done this, so uniformly and so long, that such representations seem to them, no doubt, as facts and part of the parable itself.
Not a few of them will be astounded, if not offended, to be told that there is not one word or hint in what our Lord said, to show that the poor man was one whit better than the rich man. He is represented as poor, beggarly, and diseased, and all this might have been, as is usually the case, on account of his vices; and that he was made any better by his suffering, there is no evidence whatever. The other is represented as rich, and supplied with everything to minister to his earthly happiness, and, for aught that appears to the contrary, as good as any other rich man. They are also represented as taking their bodies with them into Hades, and as retaining full possession of all their physical organs and functions, and what is more, the rich man has five brethren still living upon the earth. Of course, this could not be after this world had passed away and the eternal state had commenced. Still further, Lazarus is in Abraham’s bosom, not with Christ in heaven, where the righteous will be in the eternal world. Nor does it accord with the representations of Scripture, that the saved and the lost should be within speaking distance of each other. In short, we have no reasonable ground to suppose that our Lord intended by this parable to teach anything concerning the rewards and punishments of the future state, much less to endorse the heathen notions of the intermediate state, which the Pharisees had adopted, or to give any sanction to the revolting doctrine of Purgatory, which the papal church has founded on this one single passage.
4. What then, did He mean to teach by this Parable? This should be very evident in view of the circumstances under which it was spoken, and the persons to whom it was addressed; and doubtless would be, were it not for the special efforts that have been made to make it teach something else. It was addressed to the proud, hypocritical Pharisees, who claimed to be the children of the kingdom through their father Abraham, and heirs of the promise in preference if not even to the exclusion of all other people. Indeed, they looked upon the people of other nations with contempt, and regarded them as hardly worthy to eat of the crumbs that fell from their well supplied table. They had been signally favoured of heaven. They might well be spoken of in this respect, as rich in all their high privileges, and clothed in purple and fine linen and faring sumptuously every day, in comparison with the poor Gentiles, who were famishing for the bread of life.
They supposed that these rich blessings were insured to them as the special favourites of heaven, and that this distinction between themselves and others would always exist. Our Lord had been uttering parables in their hearing by which He rebuked their pride and self-conceit and hypocrisy. He had set forth in strong colours the Divine displeasure toward them, for their abuse of their high privileges, and had showed them how vain were their hopes. He forewarned them of their rejection in favour of these very people whom they so much despised: “Then shall ye begin to say, we have eaten and drunk in Thy presence, and Thou hast taught in our streets. But He shall say, I know you not whence ye are; depart from Me all ye that work iniquity. 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.” Having spoken to them the parable of the presumptuous guest, who had taken the highest seat at the feast, and was humbled by being made to take a lower place; and of the Wedding Supper, and of the rejection of the guests first invited, because of their frivolous excuses, and of the invitation then given to the poor and the maimed and the halt and the blind to take their places; and then, of the lost sheep, and of the prodigal son, to show His tender regard toward those whom they regarded as unworthy of being recovered to Himself, and of the covetous, dishonest steward it is said that “The Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things and derided Him” (14th verse). Then follows this Parable of prophecy, in the same line and with the same general purpose, to show them how completely their high position would be reversed, in favour of those whom they now so much despised.
No prophecy of Scripture has been more exactly fulfilled than this. They have died as a nation, and lost all their high privileges and possessions. The very land which they once possessed has been taken from them. They have no country on earth they can call their own.
They are despised and deprived of their rights as citizens in other countries. They have been persecuted and oppressed, as no other people not even the Africans have been. The Gentiles, on the other hand, have taken possession of their country, and have entered into their high privileges, and have come to inherit, very largely, the promises made to the children of Abraham. They are this day, as it were, in Abraham’s bosom, and in the enjoyment of ten thousand temporal and spiritual blessings. There is, as it were, “a great gulf fixed” between the Jews and the Gentiles, not a gulf of space, for they are also within speaking distance of them. But they are distinctly a separate people in whatever part of the world they go to reside. They do not intermarry or intermingle with them. This line of separation has been wonderfully and miraculously preserved for these eighteen hundred years. They are still obstinate in their unbelief. Missionary labours have been less successful among them hitherto, than among any other people. Indeed, it may well be said, “If they hear not Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.” For they still have Moses and the prophets; and what is more, Jesus Christ, one of their own nation, and of whom Moses and the prophets testified, has risen from the dead and they will not hear Him.
But we need not draw out the parallel into other specifications, though it might be done. No one should attempt to make a parable “go on all fours,” as it is said, and extort special meanings from its details, after its general scope and bearing have been made manifest, as we think has been done in this case. The parallel between the history of this Jewish people, and the picture drawn of it, in this prophetic parable, seems to us too complete and perfect in the above specifications, to admit of any other interpretation.
How long this state of Jewish wretchedness and separation is to continue, the parable does not inform us. That it is an eternal one, the text furnishes us no evidence whatever to believe. This is one of the ideas that has been imported into it, by the spiritualistic theology which would make it descriptive of the eternal separation of the righteous and the wicked in the future world.
We are encouraged to believe, from numerous other prophecies, that “God will yet have mercy on Israel”; and that when “the fullness of the Gentiles” shall have come in, He will restore them to favour and abundantly bless them.
With the exception of one phrase, three times repeated in the Apocalypse, which will claim our attention in the following chapter, we know of no others, in the whole Bible beside these we have already examined which have been thought to give any support to the doctrine of endless torment. The support given by those already examined we have found to be more apparent than real, and only apparent because the idea has been imported into them. One looks in vain through the book of the Acts of the Apostles, and through all their Epistles for the expression of any such idea, or for any passage that can be made to accommodate the idea if read into it.
We have their discourses and letters to all classes of people. They are filled with warnings and exhortations and the promises of the Gospel. They describe the sad and perishing condition of those who are destitute of the Word of Life, and the high privileges of those to whom the Saviour has been revealed. They speak of His Second Advent, if the Resurrection and the Judgment, of the everlasting inheritance of the Saints, and of the utter destruction of the wicked; but we find not one word or lisp of what is called “the immortal soul, the death that never dies,” or of endless misery in hell. If such had been the truths they were commissioned to preach, they must have been sadly recreant to their high trust.
After Paul’s utter silence in regard to a doctrine which the so-called Christianity of after ages has considered so essential, how could he say, “I take you to record this day that I am pure from the blood of all men; for I have not shunned to declare unto you, all the counsel of God” “No, no, this doctrine is no part of the counsel of God. It is the doctrine of the great adversary, who was a liar from the beginning, and who has ever sought to malign the character of God, to corrupt, misconstrue, pervert His truth, and to blind the minds of men “lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” For in no way could He more effectually accomplish His purpose, in promoting scepticism and infidelity, and bring discredit upon the Bible, and the God of the Bible, than by promulgating this monstrous error, and then charging it upon the Scriptures, and causing men to believe it is a part of their teaching.*
* “The reason why infidels and sceptics of every grade have been only too willing to admit that the doctrine of man’s natural immortality, with the consequent doctrine of endless misery, is taught in the Bible is obvious. In no way can they more effectually bring reproach upon the character of its author. Indeed, this is one of their strongest arguments against it. All the more plausible arguments, objections and reproaches which such blasphemers as Ingersoll, Bradlaugh, and others of less note, bring against Christianity and the God of Orthodox Christians, are based on the supposition that the Bible sanctions all the horrid cruelties and injustices that our traditional theology charges upon the Deity. Our traditional “orthodoxy” is mainly responsible for supplying them with these weapons of attack. And yet, strange to say, we find the orthodox upholders of this doctrine, quoting the admission of these infidels and sceptics as so much evidence on their side. Dr. Bartlett, in his Life and Death Eternal, page 15, quotes this saying of Theodore Parker: ‘I believe that Jesus Christ taught eternal torment, I do not accept it on his authority.’ And again in the New Englander, Oct., 1871, he refers to the ‘Parkers and the Paines‘ as so much evidence on his side. So also the Congregationalist, of December 19, 1877, quotes this same utterance of Parker, and similar utterance of T. Starr King and Ernest Ronan, for the same purpose.”
CHAPTER 15
Texts and Arguments Commonly Used to Support The Traditional Dogma
(Continued).
VI.
Revelation 14:11. “And the smoke of their torment ascends up forever and ever (eis aionas aionon, to ages of ages) and they have no rest day nor night who worship (not who have worshiped, but who are worshipers of ) the beast and his image and whosoever receives the mark of his name.” Revelation 19:3. “And again they said Alleluia; and her smoke rose up forever and ever” (eis tous aionas ton aionon, to the ages of the ages).
Revelation 20: 9, 10. “And they (Gog and Magog with their hosts led on by Satan) went up on the breadth of the earthy and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved, city; and fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them (that is devoured all excepting Satan). And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are (or where they were cast one thousand years before, as we are told in chap. 19: 20) and shall be tormented day and night forever and ever.” (eis tous aionas ton aionon, to the ages of the ages).
The Apocalypse is extraordinary in its character, and certainly, the most difficult part of the Scriptures to interpret and understand; but we see no good reason to question its canonicity, as some have done. It has probably been subjected to more comment and speculation than any other book in the Bible. No two commentators have agreed in their explanation and application of its fanciful figures, its phantasmagorical images, its unnatural combinations of types and symbols and its fervid and extravagant language. We certainly do not profess to be wise enough to tell just what, and how much is meant by all that is shadowed forth in this prophetic vision; nor is it necessary that we should know, in order to show that these passages cannot possibly have the application our opponents would fain give them, nor be made the foundation of any solid argument in behalf of their doctrines; and yet there are no passages, upon which they place more reliance or which they more often quote in support of it, than these in which this phrase aionas aionon occurs. It would be difficult for them to draw out even a plausible argument for their view without them. The author of “Life and Death Eternal” puts them foremost, and last, and midway, throughout his book, quoting and repeating them more than thirty times like the refrain of a song, as though by their frequent repetition, he could make up for the lack of other passages to supply his urgent need; and yet all the seeming force they have is quite superficial, and comes from the sound of the words in the ears of those who have already assumed the point they wish to prove, and from the false association and application that are given them.
1. It should be borne in mind, in attempting to decipher the meaning of any part of this book, that it is quite unique in its character. It is neither sober history, nor sober prophecy. It is neither didactic prose, nor poetry; nor was it intended to be so taken; but rather as a vision as it really is a dramatic representation of what John saw, while in a trance, in the isle of Patmos - a panoramic view of the leading events in the future history of the world, in its relations to the kingdom of Christ, to the end of time, or rather to the end of the age or cycle through which it is now passing; and especially of the last great struggle between Christ and His enemies, and the final victory He gains over them. We contend that its kaleidoscopic imagery of word painting and hieroglyphics, is not to be taken in the same way, as we are to take the sober, plain, didactic utterance of the Gospels and the Epistles. It is no place to look for theological dogmas, or for texts in support of them. We certainly must protest against the practice, so common with advocates of this dogma we are opposing, of taking its images partly in a figurative, and partly in a literal sense, just because it best suits their purpose to do so; and of picking out here and there, from the midst of a dramatic scene, such words and phrases as can be made to fit into their dogma, and calling them “proof texts,” while their connection is quite disregarded, and all modifying circumstances are ignored.
2. All the argumentative force there is in these three passages, lies in the Greek phrase thrice repeated, aionas aionon, rendered in our common Version “forever and ever,” but in the Revised Version with the alternative reading “ages of ages.” It would have no force here, if the words were not wrested from their temporal and mundane application, which they evidently have in the connection where they are found, and predicated of the future world, to which they have no reference.
The word aion, from which our English word eon or aeon is derived, signifying age, a life time, a generation, a cycle, an indefinite period of time, duration, whether limited or unlimited, and therefore sometimes endless duration with its inflections and in various combinations, occurs nearly one hundred times in the New Testament, and is variously rendered according to its connection. Hence it is translated, “ages,” “ages to come,” “before the world was,” “since the world began,” “from the beginning of the world,” “while the world stands,” “the course of this world,” “forever,” “forevermore,” etc. The same is true of the adjective aionios, and its Hebrew analogue, olam. Though they are more commonly rendered “everlasting,” “eternal,” etc., their application is evidently quite as often to temporal and transitory affairs, as to those that are absolutely endless; and like the English words that represent them, their true signification in any text, must be determined, not by the words themselves, but by the objects of which they are predicated, and the circumstances of the case.
When this phrase is predicated of things naturally and necessarily temporal and temporary, like the priesthood of Aaron, the service of the temple, an earthly inheritance, the leprosy of Gehazi, the life servitude of the bondman, as it is in the Scriptures, or when the everlasting hills, and mountains, and doors, and chains, and fire, and punishment are spoken of, it is evidently limited by the nature of the subject, and by the common sense of those addressed, and there is no need of misunderstanding its application. We use the terms everlasting, forever, etc., in the transfer of property, and in other business transactions, and in the affairs of every day life in the same limited sense.
When this phrase is predicated of that which, in its own nature, is incorruptible, and which has been declared in other ways and by other forms of speech to be absolutely endless, like the life of God, who is elsewhere declared to be immortal, or that of His people, to whom He gives His own life, and which the Scriptures assure us “shall never be taken away from them,” we have no occasion, either in reason, or in the nature of things to limit the phrase. It takes all the force of which it is capable.
But when the term is applied to that which might be supposed to be endless without doing violence to reason, or to that concerning which, we have no other evidence but such as we find in the term itself, all we can do is to give to it the very indefiniteness which is its peculiar characteristic.
3. Now in the several passages under consideration we think it will be evident to every unbiased mind that this phrase aionas aionon was intended to be taken in a sense, more or less restricted and indeed must be so understood, if we would correctly interpret them; for (1.) It is predicated, not of individuals as such, but of impersonal or rather of personified organizations and associations of individuals. Such organizations must be punished, if punished at all, during their continuance in time, for they cannot, or at any rate the Scriptures teach us, they will not exist as such, in the world beyond.
The intelligent reader will observe, that we have in this book a vision of three great systems of evil that withstand the progress of the Gospel. They are described or personified as (a) Mystical Babylon otherwise called the Beast the great Whore and by a variety of other names. This is generally understood, by Protestants, to represent the Papal power. (b) The False Prophet by which the Mohammedan power is supposed to be meant, and (c) The Dragon which is thought to stand for the Pagan world which is most evidently under the control of Satan; and sometimes this title is employed to designate the Devil individually, or rather collectively, with all his angels, under the various titles of Satan, the Dragon, the Old Serpent, etc. For, as in a kaleidoscope, the figure assumes so many shapes it is not always possible to identify and define it with precision; nor shall we attempt to do so. These three opposing forces must be subdued and destroyed, before the Gospel can fully triumph in the earth. The book is largely occupied with detailed descriptions of these powers of evil, and of their conflicts with the people of God, and with Christ their great Captain. In the passages under consideration, we have foretold the final issue of these conflicts in their complete overthrow, punishment and destruction. It is true the worshipers of the Beast are spoken of as individuals, in some of these descriptions, as indeed they must be, in order to an understanding of what is meant by them.
But it is more generally in their collective capacity, and under one personal designation. Even when they are spoken of as individuals, it will be noticed, that the phraseology is peculiar. They are not said to be tormented for having worshiped the Beast, but while worshiping the Beast. They have no rest day nor night (proskunountes to therion) worshiping the Beast, or while continuing to worship him. But further on it is said (19: 3): “And Her smoke rose up to the ages of the ages,” i.e., the smoke of Babylon, or the Beast, or the great Whore, this great conspicuous organic system of evil. That it is the smoke of her utter destruction, as well as of her torment, we are assured by the words of the angel, who “took up a stone like a great millstone and cast it into the sea saying: Thus, with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down and shall BE NO MORE FOUND AT ALL.” (18:21).
(2.) The imagery here employed seems to be quoted from the prophecy of Isaiah, where the destruction of Idumea is set forth in the following words: “And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof, into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch; and it shall not be quenched night nor day, and the smoke thereof shall go up forever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste and none shall pass through it forever and ever (Isaiah 34: 9, 10).
The language here is as strong as it possibly can be, stronger if possible, than the corresponding phraseology, in its application to the destruction of Babylon. The Hebrew words are lanetsach netsachim, “perpetuity of perpetuity,” and yet no one thinks of giving it any other application, but that which is limited to this world. Indeed, the prophecy, in its spirit and real import, has long since been fulfilled, and the fires have gone out, and the smoke has ceased to ascend in any literal sense. Nor is there any good reason for giving to the highly wrought prophetic language of the Apocalypse, in which the same figure is used, any other application, but the necessity of finding something in the Scriptures to justify this doctrine of the endless torment of the wicked in a future state of being. Dr. Ives well remarks on this passage:
“No traveller finds, in the present condition of Ancient Idumea, the literal fulfilment of Isaiah’s poetic prediction. Desolate indeed is the land; totally ruined are the cities; but they are not now sending up the smoke of their burning. And yet the poet-seer is no false prophet. That doom, which, in the highly wrought language of poetry, he foretold, has overtaken those cities. We behold in it a destruction which is not only total, but ever continuing, and so, fitly symbolized by the ever-ascending smoke of their burning.”
The same may be said of the destruction of “Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities about them,” of which Jude says: they “are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” The fire made quick work with them, and the waters of the Dead Sea now roll over the plain where they stood. And yet the example of their destruction still lives, and ever will live, in the memory of the righteous as if the smoke of their burning ascended up forever and ever.
(3.) That this phrase is to be taken in its limited sense in these three passages, is further evident from the fact, that it is predicated not of transactions in the world beyond, but of those that have their course and full consummation in time, and long before the end of the world. It should be observed, that the destruction of the Beast and the False Prophet occurs before the Second Advent, and the Millennial reign of Christ with His saints on the earth; and that of the Dragon, though delayed till after the thousand years are accomplished, is anterior to the general resurrection and the final judgment, and the punishment of the wicked with everlasting destruction, “which is the second death.”
* “We are led to conclude that the ‘everlasting fire’ is not a fire of everlasting torment, but one of inevitable destruction, and this accords with the fact, patent on the face of the Scriptures, that every passage which alludes to future punishment, carries with it in some form, the idea of destruction. The very alternative of the Gospel is ‘perish’ or ‘have everlasting life.’ One passage, indeed, seems to be an exception to this uniform teaching. In Revelation 14: 10, 11, it is stated that a certain class of sinners shall suffer a special torment, the smoke of which ascends up unto the ages of the ages. Upon this passage the doctrine of an endless torment in hell mainly rests.
But not to speak of the inconsistency of this revolting conception of God with St. John’s definition of Him as Love, we submit that one or two such passages in the most obscure book of the Bible cannot set aside the multitude of plainer passages which represent the punishment of the wicked as ‘destruction.’ In a parallel passage in Isaiah 34, we read that the smoke of the fiery judgment which the Lord should send upon Idumea ‘shall go up forever.’ And yet the promise, through the same prophet, is that the whole earth shall be renewed. Mystery of Creation, page 178. L. C. Baker.
It is not necessary for us hero to consider minutely these conflicts, which are described with such graphic detail in this vision. It is the issue only that now concerns us. The Beast and the False Prophet seem to be intimately associated in their opposition to “the Everlasting Gospel.” Their origin, their life, and their destruction seem to be coeval, co-temporary and coterminous. Their common doom is thus described:
“Another Beast was taken and with him the False Prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the Beast and them that worshiped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake burning with fire and brimstone. And the Remnant [notice here, the distinction between the personified systems or organizations, and the individuals connected with them] are slain with the sword of Him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of His mouth, and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.“ (19: 20, 21).
But there yet remains another obstacle to be removed before the universal reign of Christ with His saints on the earth can begin: “The Dragon, that Old Serpent, which is the Devil and Satan” must be taken out of the way. But the time for his utter destruction has not yet come. He is only to be bound during these thousand years, and then, in like manner to be destroyed.
“And I [John] saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit (tes abussou, the abyss) and a great chain in his hand, and he laid hold on the Dragon, that old Serpent, the Devil and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, and cast him into the bottomless pit (the abyss), and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years should be fulfilled; and after that he must be loosed a little season.” (20:1-3).
Then comes the First Resurrection (e anastasis eprote, whatever may be understood by this phrase), which is followed by the happy reign of Christ with the martyred saints during the long millennial age. This we need not now stop to consider. At the end of this period, Satan is loosed for a little season. There is a general outburst of wickedness. Gog and Magog, under his leadership are gathered together, in numbers as the sand of the sea. They compass the camp of the saints and the beloved city. Fire comes down from God out of heaven and devours them i.e. the rank and file of these armies; but their diabolical leader is reserved for a more fearful destruction. Like the Beast and the False Prophet, he too is now taken and cast into the same lake of fire and brimstone where they were cast a thousand years before to be tormented to the consummation of the ages. Although it would appear from the language of Scripture, that there is such an actual personage as the Devil, alias Satan, alias that Old Serpent, alias the Dragon, we are not to suppose that he is ubiquitous as an individual. These appellations are more often used as a general term, to designate the associated hosts of evil that are actuated by one common evil purpose. In which of these senses we are to understand this description of his destruction in company with the Beast and the False Prophet, may be open to question. In view of the symbolical character of the whole vision, and the evidently symbolical character of the other two personages, there would be a manifest incongruity, to say the least, in giving a literal interpretation to the third. We therefore think that we should understand all three of them as symbolical personages or personifications. But we are not anxious to press this point, any further than to insist that they are not human beings whatever else they may be taken to be, and that their doom cannot he understood as the doom of mortal men. Indeed the resurrection, the general judgment, and the condemnation of the wicked of the human race to destruction in the Second death are after this, still in the future, and are made the subject of the remaining verses of this chapter. But after how long an interval, we have no means of knowing.
It is possible, yea probable, that a long period, how long we will not conjecture, may intervene between the events now described, and the last scene in this earthly drama. A vision of only the tops of the distant mountains is given to the seer while the peaceful valleys that lie between are hidden from view. Barnes says in his notes on this chapter:
“How long the interval will be between this state [the state of peace and prosperity after the destruction of Satan, as described in the tenth verse] and the next disclosed (inverses 11-15) the final judgment, is not stated. The eye of the seer glances from one to the other, but there is nothing to forbid the supposition, that, according to the laws of prophetic vision, there may be a long interval in which the righteous shall reign upon the earth.”
Professor Stuart expresses the same view, and says in reference to this period:
“Peaceful and triumphant will be her latest age. The number of the redeemed will be augmented beyond all computation, and the promise made from the beginning, that ‘the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head,’ will be fulfilled in all its extent and with a Divine plenitude of meaning.”
But in the consummation of the ages of the ages, the end is reached, and the prophet sees the last closing act in this earthly drama. The Judge appears seated on His great white throne. The heavens and the earth flee away from before His face, and there is no place left for them. The books are opened, the dead are raised and judged, every one according to his works; and all whose names are not written in the Book of Life are cast into the lake of fire then last of all, Death and Hades are cast into the same lake of fire. This is the Second Death.*
“If it be asked what the lake of fire does represent, we would reply the partial overcoming of evil and destruction of evil-doers at the beginning of the millennium, and their complete overthrow at the close of it. Fire is the most irresistible agent of destruction that we can know; and it is used here to give us the most vivid idea that could be presented to our minds, of the complete destruction of what is represented by the persons and things cast into it. The Devil probably represents all the evil connected with the unseen world; the Beast and the False Prophet the most conspicuous typical developments of human wickedness; death and Hades the physical evils introduced by sin. All will come to an end; every trace of sin and its results will be swept away forever.” Samuel Minton.
The glorious vision of the new heavens and the new earth that now follows, will be considered in the closing chapter. It would seem to be impossible in any form of words, whether in literal or figurative language, to describe or affirm more positively the complete and final destruction and extermination of all evil of all systems of evil, and of all evil agencies and things, than is foretold in this book of Revelation. Why, not merely the Beast and the False Prophet and Satan, alias the Devil, alias the Old Serpent, alias the Dragon, and all his servants, and all his works are destroyed, but death itself, which is the great work of this (anthrbpoktonos ) man killer, and Hades, the very prison-house in which they have been confined for there is now no longer any use for it are all together cast into this burning lake to be utterly consumed, and this old earth, which has been the theatre of the fall of man, and of his redemption, and of the long struggle between good and evil, and of the victory, too, of the Son of God, now passes away, and gives place to the now heavens and the new earth in which neither sin, nor sorrow, nor death shall ever be known, “for the former things have passed away.” This is the consummation for which Peter also bids us look:
“Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day But the day of the Lord will come in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, and the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Nevertheless, we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth wherein dwells righteousness.” (2 Peter 3.)
3. We need have no difficulty in understanding the general truth taught by this book. That it was given to comfort and encourage the hearts of the people of God, through the many trials that would come upon them, during this long struggle, and to assure them of the glorious issue of all these conflicts in the complete triumph of Christ and His followers, and the final destruction of all evil, is quite evident. No doubt it was given in the form best adapted to all the purposes for which it was intended.
It was not designed to be a didactic or doctrinal treatise, like the Epistles, nor like the practical discourses of our Lord. It was not intended that we should reduce its language to logical proportions, nor define with precision its dramatic imagery, and bring all the details of this panorama into place, as we would bring the events of a sober history certainly not, while in the midst of the scenes it is describing to us. No man but a fool is wise enough to do this. Nor will any sane man unless he has a theory to support, and then it is impossible to say what he will not do think of analysing all these grotesque images, and criticising their anatomy, the garb in which they are clothed, and the implements they use. No sober man will undertake to prove from the language here employed, that our Lord actually rides on a white horse, with a sharp sword in His mouth, nor that an angel actually stands in the sun, and throws a great stone into the sea, nor that there is somewhere a bottomless pit, fitted with a lock and key, and that a mighty angel will bring the key in one hand, with which to open the door, and a chain in the other, with which to bind an actual dragon, that he may cast him into it and lock him up for a thousand years, nor that there is a veritable lake of fire and brimstone, where myriads of millions of human beings are writhing in torture, without being consumed, in the presence of the Lamb and His holy angels and His redeemed saints, while the smoke of their torment will literally roll up forever and ever that is throughout the unending future of the world beyond.
And yet, strange to say, we find pious and otherwise rational men, so blinded by this heathenish dogma, and so pressed for arguments to support it, eagerly catching up such figures and phrases of this vision as will suit their purpose, and parading them as so many proof texts of the doctrine of endless sin and torment. They freely allow the unreal character of so many of these images and phantasms, as are not applicable to their purpose; but they hesitate not to pick out the “fire” and the “brimstone,” and the “smoke,” and the “torment,” and the words “forever and ever,” which they insist on using in the infinite sense of endlessness, from the mass of other symbols and applying them to What? not to the personifications of evil, of which they are predicated, but to living men, women and children like themselves!! But what is more astonishing while they insist that all other texts occurring in the didactic, doctrinal and legal parts of God’s Word that speak of “Life Eternal,” and “Death,” and “Destruction,” and “Perdition,” etc., should be taken as metaphors and in no literal sense; now when they come to that portion of His Word that is altogether metaphorical, they insist on giving to such fragmentary parts of it, as will suit their dogma, a strictly literal sense!! And still further, they are not content with giving them a full and literal application to the things of time and sense, to which they belong for they are evidently used with reference to events transpiring on this earth previous to the consummation of the ages, but they must wrest them from their terrestrial and temporal connection, and carry them over into the spiritual world, where the Scriptures tell us there are no such material agencies, no succession of day and night, no more pain, no more death, in order to prove that there is pain there, and death, and a lake of fire and brimstone there, and that mortal men are writhing there, and will writhe in unutterable hopeless agony, having no rest day nor night, while the smoke of their torments ascends up in the face of heaven forever and ever!
We verily believe that a more grievous perversion of God’s Word, a more complete reversal of its decided testimony from beginning to end, could not well be perpetrated.
CHAPTER 16
The Exodus of Sin and Death.
The Divine Revelation is dualistic in substance as well as in form. By means of two so-called Testaments the Old and the is New we have revealed to us two worlds, two Adams, two progenitors, two births, two covenants, two classes of men, two kingdoms, two Divine Advents, two lives, two deaths.
This Revelation makes known to us first the one, and then the other in this series of couplets, that we may compare them, and see how much superior the second is to the first, how much more substantial and enduring.
We have already alluded, more than once, to these contrasts, in the foregoing pages; but in this closing chapter, we must bring them together in a cluster, that their relation to each other, and their bearing on the question under discussion may be more clearly seen. This is rendered the more necessary by the fact, that the traditional doctrine of only one actual life, an immortal life for all men has made void some of these distinctions so sharply drawn in the Scriptures, and greatly obscured all the others, which would otherwise be apparent.
1. Firsts the creation of this lower world is graphically though briefly described. All is very good, yea, perfect according to its nature; but it is in its nature material; all its appointments are material, and under the reign of natural law, and therefore mutable and transitory. Afterward is revealed to us a brighter, better, more substantial and a more glorious world beyond, as yet, invisible, spiritual in its nature, under the law of holy love, and fitted, in its very nature, to endure forever. “For the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.” The existence and nature of this world to come are but gradually suggested to us; and it is only in the New Testament, and more especially, in its closing chapters, that its excellence and glory, as the Second Paradise, of which the First in Eden was but a faint type, are more fully and clearly revealed.
2. Next we have a record of the creation of the First Man “out of the dust of the ground”; the noblest of all earthly creatures, and yet, essentially earthly, as he proved himself to be, and as the name, “Adam,” which was given to him by his Creator, imports. “He became a living soul,” or creature, like the animals beneath him; but with this essential difference: There was given to him a capacity for a higher life the life of the spiritual world beyond, and he was intended for this by his Creator; but only by being established in holiness, without which he could neither possess nor enjoy it. Failing in this essential condition through sin, he proved himself unworthy of the boon, and sank at once, to the condition of an earthly and perishable creature. “That was not first which was spiritual, but that which was natural, and afterward that which was spiritual,” as is shown in the sequel. Now the way is prepared for the revelation of a Second Adam; born of a woman, yet begotten by God; the Son of Man, the Son of God; both Divine and human; the true link between this lower world, and that world of light, of which He is Lord of all; “Tempted in all points like as we are, yet without sin”; dying as a mortal, for the redemption of man, though possessed of an inherent immortality in His own right, which could not be lost, and so, “being made perfect through suffering, He becomes the Author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey Him”; and “to as many as receive Him, He gives power to become the Sons of God, even to them that believe on His name.”
3. The First Adam is the progenitor of a race like self, earthly, carnal, sinful and mortal. His children could not inherit from him an immortality which he failed to secure for himself. The Second Adam is the progenitor of a race, who are like Him, pure in heart, and spiritual in their natures, and who inherit from Him, His own immortal life. Though lingering here for a while, and subject to physical death, they shall in due time, enter upon that “ inheritance, incorruptible and undefiled, and that fades not away, reserved in heaven for them, who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time.”
4. There must be two births as well as two begetting. No child of Adam can inherit Eternal Life, except he be born again or rather from above (another). “That which is born (it should be rendered begotten, from gennao to beget) of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born (begotten) of the Spirit is spirit.” We inherit from Adam, in our first birth nothing but a natural, mortal, transitory life the life of the psuche, which is common to all earthly creatures. We inherit from the Second Adam, in our second birth from above, a supernatural, spiritual, deathless life, a life ingenerated within us by the (Pneuma) Spirit. This is the life which is so uniformly and repeatedly spoken of by our Lord as, “The Life Everlasting” (e zoe aidnios) a life which is directly from Him, and which only can “ make us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light.”
5. This dispensation of grace brings us under a new covenant. The First covenant was a covenant of works. “Do this and thou shalt live.” It was entirely legal. Its rewards and penalties, its motives, though pure, were earthly, and appealed to man’s psuchical nature. “It could never make the comers thereto perfect” that is complete. “For if the first had been faultless, then should no place have been found for the second.” But the second covenant is a covenant of faith, “Believe and thou shalt be saved.” It requires an implicit trust in an Almighty Saviour one “who is made not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.” Its appeals are to that higher nature, now begotten within the new man by the Spirit of God. Its motives, its rewards are spiritual, heavenly, eternal.
6. And so mankind come to be divided into two classes, and only two; “sinners” and “saints,” though designated by a great variety of other names in the Scriptures, as we have shown in a previous chapter.
The first class are carnally minded; live after the flesh; are controlled by worldly motives; seek for worldly gain, and have all their good things, which perish with their use in this life; and when this world is destroyed, they must perish with it, and with their treasures, for they have no inheritance beyond. The second class are spiritually minded; are led by the Spirit of God; through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the flesh; are controlled by spiritual influences; seek those things that are above, that are pure, substantial and eternal. Their choice is the good part that shall never be taken away. They and they only have eternal life.
7. Hence there are two kingdoms; the one of this world, over which the great enemy of God and man bears rule, as prince of this world, a kingdom of evil, of disorder, of sorrow, of darkness and of death; a kingdom that is doomed to be overthrown and utterly and forever destroyed. The other is the kingdom of God, of heaven, of our Lord; a kingdom of light and glory and power; a kingdom of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost, which, established by the Son of God, as His Everlasting Kingdom, shall endure forever.
8. To lay the foundations of this kingdom, the Son of God came in the flesh, as the Son of Man, to live under the law, to suffer and die; and then, victorious over the power of death. He rose and ascended on high, “leading captivity captive, and giving gifts to men.” We have the assurance that He will come again in due time, to gather in the fruits of His victory, to raise the dead, to judge the world, and then, to destroy it, or all that is destructible and vile in it, and to make all things new. “And unto them that look for Him, shall He appear the second time without sin (or apart from sin) unto salvation.” And in that new heavens and new earth wherein dwells righteousness, He shall reign over His ransomed people forever. To achieve this is the work of two Advents or epiphanies or comings; the First and the Second which are the theme of many of the Prophecies and Epistles.
9. Finally not to extend this category into other points that are less clearly revealed we ask especial attention to the First and Second Death, to which such prominence is given in the Word of God.
There is no vagueness in the teaching of Scripture with respect to these two deaths; and there ought to be misunderstanding of its doctrine nor would there be, were it not for the philosophy that denies the actuality of even the first death, because man is assumed to be an immortal being; of course, there is no place for a second death.
This fundamental error throws a cloud of confusion over the whole system of Divine Revelation. The radical distinction between the natural and the supernatural, between that which is physical, earthly and transitory, and that which is spiritual, heavenly and eternal, which is so sharply drawn in the Scriptures is quite ignored.
By a scheme of mystical, scholastic interpretation of the pivotal words of Scripture, and of its doctrines, the whole is brought under a system of naturalism; the higher is made to follow that which is lower, step by step, under a self-contained principle of natural development. Man, if indeed he had any definite beginning, had no such beginning as Moses tells of, or rather as somebody tells us in the book of Genesis. He has been rising or developing through a long succession of ages from one stage to another, and still has before him a career of progress, that is absolutely interminable. According to this philosophy there cannot be any such thing under the Divine government, as the penalty of actual death. Death, instead of being a penal infliction, is the door by which the righteous enter upon that higher state of existence for which they have been maturing here below. For the wicked also it is the door by which they enter upon a state of eternal sin and misery.
And then, as to the Second death, which, according to the Word of God, follows upon the Resurrection and the Judgment to condemnation, it means why it means a just nothing at all, only more sin and misery. These theological teachers have had a world of trouble in defining the First death, so as to save their dogma, ani not to seem to contradict the Scriptures; but they are completely baffled in their attempts to explain the meaning of the “Second death.” This will be evident to any one who will take the trouble to examine any of their commentaries on this point. Barnes makes the fears, the pains, the agonies that attend upon natural death, to illustrate the fears and pains and agonies of the sinner in the Second death. All this, no doubt, is very true. But he forgets that, in the first case, they all find their end in death itself, while in the other, he supposes them to continue forever. In this way he overlooks the main point in the comparison, and takes the circumstances attending the two events for the events themselves. For whatever be the accompaniments of this death and they must indeed be fearful, in the case of those who have persisted all their lives in the rejection of an offered salvation it is of the death itself, the final end of the sinner’s career, of which the Scriptures so emphatically speak, and to which we would invite especial attention. “Sin,” whatever miseries may attend its course, “when it is finished brings forth Death.”
Of course if there be no actual death in the first instance, there can be no actual resurrection from the dead. All those awe inspiring descriptions which we find in the Word of God, of the second coming of the Son of Man, in great power and glory, with all His holy angels, when the graves are to be opened, and the dead are to come forth from their graves, and all men, both small and great are to stand before His judgment throne, are to be taken as Oriental hyperboles, and as really meaning nothing more than the gentle emergence of the spirit from the body where it has been imprisoned, like the balloon when the tie is cut that holds it to the earth, and it rises to its proper place in the sphere above. Indeed, as for all who have gone before us, we are to believe, according to the teaching of Hymeneus and Philetus, “who erred concerning the faith,” as Paul tells us, “ and overthrew the faith of some,” “that the resurrection is past already,” so far as that kind of rising can be called a resurrection.*
* Since writing the above paragraph I have listened to an impressive sermon from an orthodox minister, on the text, “He that converts a sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death,” etc. He gave a formal definition of Death thus: Death is severance from God.’ Severance from God will surely result in death. But it is not death itself. It is no more death than abstinence from food is death, or the severance of a branch from the vine is death. Why should our religious teachers constantly put the cause for the effect, when speaking of the death of the sinner? It is that they may substitute another effect in the place of death and so permit the sinner to live after he is dead. Ask them what severance from God is, and they will not say “death,” but “a state of sin and misery.” What then, is the second death? It is severance from God, or more sin and misery!”
“While the reformers rooted out the medieval doctrine of Purgatory, they failed to substitute a better theory of the middle state, and left it for our days to reconsider this whole question and to reach positive results. The Protestant creeds almost wholly more the middle state, and pass from death immediately to the final state after the general judgment, and the old Protestant theologians nearly identify the pre-resurrection state of the righteous and wicked with their post-resurrection state, except that the former is a disembodied state of perfect bliss or perfect misery. By this confusion the Resurrection and the general Judgment are reduced to an empty formality.” American Presbyterian Review, October 1883. Doctor Schaff.
“Any careful reader of the New Testament and of the sermons and letters of the apostles must see at once that nowhere does our modern preaching differ from theirs so widely as at this vital point. To them this was the grand fruit of the Redeemer's toil, the sublime hope of the Church, the great deliverance of the human race, for which even the whole creation was in travail. There is not a recorded sermon or Epistle of the apostles which does not at least allude to it, and in most of them it flames out into a great light, which from their high tower of hope, they fling out into the world's darkness. We hear, indeed, the fact of a risen Christ now and then feebly preached, but how seldom a sermon, such as Paul preached before Felix, which covers the wide field of this grand “hope toward God.” And all that splendid truth concerning things to come, of which this hope is the centre, many Christians are as ignorant about as babes. Even good people pronounce such themes unprofitable.” The Eschatology of the Future. L. C. Baker.
So also, there is to be no actual personal second coming of our victorious Lord to take the government of a ransomed world, and to rule in righteousness over his loyal, holy people. The language of Scripture, in which this is so clearly and positively foretold, is to be taken in a metaphorical sense, to indicate a kind of invisible, impersonal parousia long since passed; and that great event, for which the early Christians waited and prayed with longing desire, and for which, so many of His people are still praying and waiting and watching with joyful expectancy “and so much the more as they see the day approaching,” is all a delusive dream! Indeed, there is to be no such complete victory; no such universal kingdom as we have been taught to pray for, but only a partial victory, in which the great Adversary of God and Man shall be permitted to retain possession of all the captives he has hitherto taken, and all he shall yet take to the end of the world, and then, one province, at least, is to be given over to their eternal occupancy, and there are to be two Everlasting Kingdoms, a kingdom of light and a kingdom of darkness; a kingdom of holiness and a kingdom of sin; a kingdom of joy and blessedness; and a kingdom of wailing and woe, running parallel with each other to all eternity. In short, all the great doctrines of our holy religion must be explained away, or modified or spiritualized to accommodate this ruling dogma. It has so enthroned itself in the so-called “orthodox” system, that like the sun and moon and eleven stars, in the dream of Joseph, they revolve around it and do obeisance to it.
But we cannot pursue this line of thought further. We have done what we could in the foregoing pages, within such restricted limits, to set forth the evil origin, the disastrous influence, and the anti-scriptural character of this dogma, and to reset in their proper places in the evangelical system, some of the more important doctrines it has displaced, perverted and obscured, with the earnest hope that our labour may not prove to be in vain. And now, as a proper sequel to our chapter on the “Genesis of Sin and Death,” we must ask the reader's attention in the closing pages of this last chapter to what, in the terms of Scripture we may call the Exodus of Sin and Death.
We are so accustomed to the mixture of good and evil in this imperfect state, that it is difficult for us to conceive of the one without the other. Holiness and sin, joy and sorrow, life and death, light from above and darkness from beneath, mingle together in this midway sphere. Everything that is true and bright and lovely has its counterpart, in that which is false and dark and hateful. It has always been so in our experience, and we naturally come to feel that it must always continue to be so. Or, if these extremes do not meet and mingle in the same scene or person, they must somehow be perpetuated as cotemporary with each other, and necessary to a complete universe. It seems unnatural, from our past experience and training, to think of a heaven without a hell somewhere to balance it; of the King of glory with His holy angels, without thinking of the Devil and his angels also; of the ransomed of the Lord, rejoicing forever in the kingdom of light and life, without thinking also of the lost, suffering and wailing forever in a kingdom of darkness and death. The idea that the time ever will come, or can come, or ought to come, when there shall be no sin anywhere, no sorrow, no darkness, no death, no devil, no hell, but one complete rounded universe of holy, happy creatures, centring in God, and revolving round Him as the Source of their life and all their blessedness, seems so strange and extravagant to those who have been trained to regard sin and suffering as an integral part of the universe, that they are afraid to indulge it. They look with suspicion upon any one who ventures to express the hope of such a consummation, as though he were giving up an essential part of the orthodox faith. To most Christians, evil seems to be as permanent a part of the universe as good; the eternal existence of Satan the destroyer, as certain and logically necessary, as that of Christ the Saviour.
“The smoke of their torment shall ascend up in the sight of the blessed forever and ever and serve as a most clear glass always before their eyes to give them a constant, bright and most affecting view. This display of the Divine character and glory will be in favour of the redeemed, and most entertaining, and give the highest pleasure to those who love God, and raise their happiness to ineffable heights. ''Should this eternal punishment cease and this fire be extinguished, it would in a great measure, obscure the light of heaven and put an end to a great part of the happiness and glory of the blessed.” Hopkins' Works, Volume 2, pages 457, 458,
Theologians have undertaken to show that this perpetual antagonism or antithesis is necessary in the very nature of things, or, at any rate, the continued existence of sin, with its consequent suffering, is necessary to the maintenance of the holy obedience and blessedness of God's loyal subjects. Zoroaster and his followers held that there are two eternal principles ; the one good, and the other evil ; both without beginning, and both without end, eternally in conflict with each other ; the one they called “ Ormuzd “ and the other “ Ahriman.”
But these Christian theologians, less consistent than they, hold that, while there are now two such principles at war with each other, only the good had no beginning and is eternal in the past; evil is an interloper ; and dates its origin in time ; but now that it has begun to be, it must forever remain, to mar the beauty of this once perfect system. God Himself cannot, or does not choose to eradicate it or put an end to its existence.
But, in opposition to these heathen and sophisticated Christian teachers we hold to the Scriptural doctrine of the eternity of the good, both a parte ante and a parte post, and the transitory nature of evil. Evil is but an Episode in the unfolding of God's perfect plan. As it had a beginning in time, so it shall have an end in time. However necessary it might have been to this incipient, preparatory stage of our existence ; however useful as a foil or background to the picture yet to be, or as a means for the display of the riches of God's grace ; however necessary night may be to the introduction of the day, or the knowledge of evil to the more perfect knowledge of good, or the experience of death to the enjoyment of life eternal, or of sin, to “ the bringing in of everlasting righteousness”; it is but incidental and temporary after all, and not integral and perpetual ; and the tune will come, when, having fully served its purpose, whatever that purpose may be, it will come to an end.
“What is the chaff to the wheat,” that it should be garnered and preserved forever? Why should the staging, used in the erection of a building, be suffered to remain forever, after the edifice is finished, to disfigure its beauty? Of what value are the chips and debris but to be destroyed? Why should the fogs and mists that usher in the coming day, remain forever to obscure the light of the risen Sun? Why should the Almighty be beholden to the devil to aid Him in sustaining and perpetuating His righteous government over His holy and blessed subjects?
We believe that the devil and all his works will be utterly destroyed; that “death shall be abolished, and swallowed up of life”; that all evil shall give place to good, and that the time will come, when “sorrow and sighing “shall be unknown, “and there shall be no more pain” ; that the victory, which the Son of God shall gain over all His enemies, and the enemies of His people, will be complete, wanting nothing. “For it pleased the Father that in Him should all fullness dwell, and having made peace through the blood of His cross, through Him to reconcile all things unto Himself, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven” ; “He shall gather together in one all things in Christ, and in the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven and things in earth and things under the earth, and every tongue shall confess, that He is Lord to the glory of God the Father.”
To us, this glorious consummation seems essential to the idea of a perfect Deity; One who is perfect in goodness to desire, perfect in wisdom to plan, perfect in power to execute all His purposes of supreme benevolence. But we believe it mainly because this is just what His Word tells us; we believe it in spite of Manichaean or Grecian philosophy; we believe it in spite of theological scholasticism and traditionalism. “Let God be true — but every man a liar.”
The difference between us and these teachers consists really in the different ideas we entertain of the power and perfection of our Leader. Our arguments have been directed sometimes to one subordinate point, and sometimes to another, but, in fact, the question in dispute is, “What think ye of Christ?”—What of His desires? What of His purposes? What of His promises? What of His power to execute them? Is there any limit to His goodness, power and truth? or any such limit, as to hinder Him from destroying the devil and all his hosts, as He has threatened to do — from desiring to put an end to all sin, and succeeding in His efforts “to make all things new,” as He has abundantly promised?
They believe that the natural life, — that which was given to man in his creation, — was an immortal life, and subject to no conditions for its endless perpetuity. — We, on the contrary, believe it was made conditional in the very outset, and liable to be forfeited by sin, and that man had no guarantee of its continuance, only as he should show himself worthy of immortality and be fitted to enjoy it.
They believe that “all mankind, by their fall, lost communion with God, are under His wrath and curse, and so made liable to all the miseries of this life, to death itself, and to the pains of hell forever,” and all this as their natural inheritance, by birth from Adam. — We believe the consequence of the fall to be, “cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth unto thee. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the ground. For out of it wast thou taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.”
They believe, that God will punish the unsaved children of Adam in another life, as well as in this, and eternally punish them, as well for the sin of their progenitor as for their own sins. — We believe that He will punish no one hereafter, but for his own sins.
They believe, that future punishment “will consist in intensity of sneering,” and that this suffering will never cease. — We believe that this punishment will consist in such suffering only, as each individual sinner shall deserve — no more and no less — and that beyond the second death there is to be neither sin nor suffering.
They believe, that the great end which Christ proposed, in the struggle in which He is now engaged with Satan in this world, — the very object for which He came down from heaven and died, — was to get back what He could of the territory that had been lost, and to recover a certain portion of the human race from the power of the adversary, and to make them pure and blessed forever in heaven, and, as for the rest, to get them with their diabolical leader safely under lock and key, where He can torment them unceasingly and forever; and that in the accomplishment of all this, “He will see of the travail of His soul and be satisfied.”
We believe that He had an end infinitely higher and more glorious in view, in His advent to earth. He came to die with man, and for man, the just for the unjust, that He might redeem him from death, impart to him His own pure immortal life by a new birth, raise him from the dead immortalized, and made meet for an inheritance in His everlasting kingdom. And that He will accomplish all this for all who will accept Him as their Saviour, and submit themselves to His heavenly discipline. As for those who “judge themselves unworthy of Eternal Life,” their forfeited, miserable lives will not be, cannot be perpetuated forever anywhere; their names “will be blotted out of the Book of Life.” They will utterly perish in the Second death. “He shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom, all things that offend, and them which do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire,” and they shall be consumed like the chaff from the threshing floor, and there shall be thenceforth, “one fold and one shepherd.”
It is not according to the Divine method to reveal spiritual truth in logical propositions, nor to reveal it all at once; but only so far and so fast as man can receive and use it. To the most enlightened of the Old Testament Saints, many of the facts and principles of the Gospel, that are now clear to the child, were revealed only in dim and shadowy outlines. To those who were under His more immediate teaching, the Master said, “I have many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now.”
We must not expect, even under the clearer light of “these last days,” to be able fully to understand and describe that which is peculiar to the dispensation yet to come, — the dispensation of immortality, in a spiritual state — or to be able to fix the precise and definite meaning of all the many allusions to it in the Scriptures. The inspired writers themselves did not fully comprehend the full import of the language they used; and surely it is not the intention of the Spirit that inspired them, to give to us — even were it possible for us to comprehend it— a literal, definite and accurate account of the spiritual and eternal world that lies before us. All we can hope for now is to be assured — as we may be — of its actual existence, to know what are our present and practical relations to it, and to get such glimpses of its excellence and glory, as shall stimulate us to wise endeavours, and cheer our hearts, and strengthen our faith in that Adorable Leader who has undertaken to bring us thither. All this we have in the Word of God. It gives us every assurance we need, of His wisdom, goodness and power, and of the complete victory He will gain over all His foes and our foes, and of the glorious consummation, that will finally crown His self-sacrificing work of love.
The celestial Paradise, with its spiritual beauties and glories, and “filled with the fullness of Him that fills all in all,” so graphically described in the closing chapters of the Apocalypse, was foreshadowed, and as we believe, meant to be typified by the terrestrial Paradise, described in the second chapter of Genesis, with its earthly beauties and pleasures, where everything, according to its material nature was “ very good.”
The enigmatical address of God to the Serpent that had seduced our first parents from their allegiance to their Maker, we understand to be prophetical of the issue he had challenged; “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed, and it shall bruise — (or rather crush) — thy head and thou shall bruise his heel.” His career of apparent success for a time, would be followed by a crushing overthrow and extermination. The wounded heel may be made whole, but the head is the citadel of life. If that be crushed, death must sooner or later ensue. It is a popular saying, that a serpent will retain a sort of vitality till the sun goes down, even if his head be crushed, but the morning of the next day, will find him quite dead.
The many promises that God made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob concerning their posterity, and the extermination of all their enemies, and especially the solemn oath He made to Moses: “As truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord,” are to be taken in no partial, restricted, temporal sense, but as giving the assurance, that not merely the surface of the earth shall be cleansed and become the habitation of a holy people, but that it shall be cleansed in every part, and that there shall be no dark Hadean depths, within its bowels, into which the miserable victims of His wrath shall be thrust to sin and suffer forever.
The book of Psalms is full of promises, more or less explicit of the coming glory under the reign of Christ. We understand them as predicting, not simply a millennial period that shall endure only for a time — but as promising the establishment of “a kingdom that shall never end.” “His name shall endure forever.” All nations shall call Him blessed. “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, who only doeth wondrous things; and blessed be His glorious name forever. Let the whole earth be filled with His glory. Amen; and Amen.”
The prophets describe, in the most glowing terms, the completeness of the victory over all evil, and the fullness of the glory of His everlasting kingdom. There shall be nothing to hurt or destroy throughout all the length and breadth of it. “The ransomed of the Lord shall return and come to Zion with songs; and everlasting joy shall be on their heads ; and they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.” “The mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees shall clap their hands.” “Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree; instead of the brier, shall come up the myrtle tree, and it shall be to the Lord for a name and for an everlasting sign, that shall not be cut off.” “In the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.”
The Old Testament closes with a description of the gathering in of God's people as jewels into His kingdom, and the utter destruction of all the wicked. When He cleanses His threshing floor, it will not be to gather the good wheat into one garner, and the chaff and the tares and the worthless rubbish into another — into some dark corner — there to be left to rot, and to give forth its pestilential stench forever; nor will He cast it into a fire that shall smoulder and fume and smoke, but refuse to consume it. But “the day cometh that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be as stubble, and the day that cometh shall hum them up saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.” God forbid that we should hold to any philosophy that will not permit us to believe in so glorious a consummation.
More especially in the New Testament, the main object of Christ's coming is declared to be, “that through deaths He might destroy — not imprison and torment forever, but destroy — him that had the power of death, that is the devil.” Hebrews 2:14. “For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil.” What are the works of the devil, but sin and sorrow and death? Indeed, Satan is now destroyed in every other sense, but that of his personality. What further destruction remains for him or can he have, but the destruction of his being? The demons themselves were conscious of their impending fate, and cried out, when they saw Jesus, “What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God; art thou come hither to torment — to bring us to trial and punishment — before the time?” Matthew 8:29. And again, changing the words, but not the thought, “Art thou come to destroy us?” Luke 4:31. Peter and Jude both assure us, that they are even now kept in everlasting chains — or chains from which they cannot escape — under darkness unto the judgment of the great day — that day in which they shall be judged and destroyed.
This was the burden of the preaching of John Baptist, as he went forth saying: “Repent ye for the kingdom of heaven is at hand, — and now the axe it laid at the root of the trees, therefore every tree which brings not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire, — whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His floor, and gather the wheat into the garner ; but He will burn up the chaff, with unquenchable fire.” This is what our Lord Himself taught in the sermon on the Mount, and by many of His parables; such as “The Tares and the Wheat” ; “The Drag Net” ; “The Talents” ; “The Foolish Virgins” ; and in the scenic representation of the judgment of the nations, when He welcomes into His everlasting kingdom only those who are fit for Eternal Life, and consigns the wicked to everlasting punishment, which we are elsewhere told, is the punishment of “everlasting destruction,” when the “Lord shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Nowhere in all the Epistles is there any hint, that the conflict now going on between Christ and Satan shall issue in anything short of the complete and utter destruction of this great adversary of God and man, “whom He shall consume with the Spirit of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming,” “According to His good pleasure which He hath purposed in Himself, that in the dispensation of the fullness of time. He might gather together in one, all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are in earth.”
Paul also, in the parallel between the first and the second Adam, as we have already noticed in his first epistle to the Corinthians, shows how that which is base must come before that which is pure, and that which is natural before that which is spiritual, and that which is temporal, before that which is eternal. In glowing language he describes the glorious consummation, when that which is imperfect is done away, and that which is perfect is come, and the righteous dead shall have been raised and immortalized and glorified with their risen Lord, and exclaims, “Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule and all authority and power; for He must reign till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall he destroyed is Death.”
Peter likewise in his Second Epistle describes the coming in of the last day, and the complete destruction of all the wicked, in that general conflagration, “when the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the earth shall melt with fervent heat,” and then he adds, “Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for the new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwells righteousness.”
But it is reserved for the last book in the Bible, as we might naturally suppose, and especially for its concluding chapters, to give us the fullest description of the closing scenes in this earthly drama, and the most perfect picture of the world to come. We will not attempt to follow the course of this wonderful vision, through its scenes of conflict and carnage, and fire and smoke, in which our Lord, now as the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the Ending, which was and is and is to come, the Almighty, and now as the “Lamb of God, which was slain from the foundation of the world,” and now as a glorious conquering Prince, is described as waging war with the many protean forms of evil, personified under every actual and imaginable symbol or image. The grotesque imagery of beasts with many heads and horns, of dragons belching forth floods of water, of horses breathing fire from their nostrils, of locusts with scorpion stings, of angels flying through the air with vials of wrath, or with sickles, with which to reap the harvest of the earth, which the Seer employs, the impossible figures he introduces, the extravagant language he uses, are such as to defy all logical analysis or definite and precise application. Nor is it at all necessary to a most clear understanding of the object for which he employs them, and of the truth he intends to express, and of the certain results toward which they all point us; namely: the overthrow and abolishment of all evil, and of all opposition to the Gospel, whatever form it may assume, or however strongly it may be entrenched, or however vigorously it may contend, and the ultimate reign of righteousness, peace and love throughout the universal kingdom of God.
We see how mystical Babylon, that had so long held sway in power and pride, is overthrown and consumed by fire, like Sodom of old; how the Beast and the False Prophet, whatever forms of organized evil they may be thought to represent, are unceasingly tormented and then consumed in “the lake of fire and brimstone,” and how finally, the great Head-centre of all this apostasy and iniquity, the Arch enemy of God and man, is first bound for a season, and then, when his time is fully come, is judged and destroyed with all his hosts in the same lake of fire with the Beast and the False Prophet.
Then after how long an interval we know not Cometh the end. The Judge is seated upon His great white throne, and before His face heaven and earth flee away; the dead, small and great, stand before Him. The books are opened, and every one is judged according to his works. And another book is opened, which is the Book of Life. And whosoever is not found written in the Book of Life (en te hiblo tes zoes) is cast into the lake of fire prepared for the devil and his angels. This is the Second Death. And Death and Hell also are cast into the same all-consuming lake of fire; and this old earth, with its Sheol, its Hades its Gehenna its Tophet its Tartarus or by whatever name the place of the abode of the wicked herein confined may be known, is consumed with the visible heavens, in one general conflagration; and the curtain falls upon time, and eternity begins.
Once more for a little season it is lifted, and we look in, for a moment, upon the glories of the celestial and eternal world. We see a new heaven and a new earth, “for the first heaven and the first earth are passed away.” We see the “New Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven,” with its jasper walls, its pearly gates, its brilliant palaces, its golden streets and a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb and in the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, is the Tree of Life bearing twelve manner of precious fruits.
There are no cherubim with flaming swords to guard its approach. The gates are not shut by day there is no night there. We see its celestial and glorified inhabitants, clothed in white, with crowns on their heads, and harps in their hands, singing praises unto God and the Lamb. “There shall be no more curse.” “There shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain, for the former things are passed away.”
The Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and lead them unto living fountains of water, and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and they shall see His face, and His name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there, and they need no candle, neither light of the Sun, for the Lord God gives them light and they shall reign forever and ever.
These sayings are faithful and true. “He which testifies these things saith surely I come quickly. Amen, even so come Lord Jesus.”
NOTE (to the Second Edition).
We have said little or nothing in the foregoing pages with respect to the Salvation of Infants and others who die without having committed actual sin, simply because the Scriptures are so almost absolutely silent on this question; and we do not care to impose any speculations of our own upon the reader. But let it not be inferred that our doctrine interposes any obstacles to a bright and cheerful hope concerning them. Indeed, it is infinitely more encouraging every way than the traditional doctrine we are opposing.
Of course, we hold with traditional theologians, that physical death is the common lot of all the children of Adam in consequence of sin. But here we separate. They hold to the abominable doctrine that we are all under the doom of eternal misery in a life beyond, in consequence of the sin of our first parents, and that all who are not saved must inevitably suffer it; and their theology presents us with no logical scheme for the salvation of those who pass out of life free from all actual personal sin, from this horrible doom, nor any hope, excepting that it is too horrible to be believed.
But we hold that no creature is punishable in another life but for his own personal sins and as for the Life Everlasting it is not a reward of merit to any one, nor given on account of superior excellence, but it is a pure gift of free grace: and as such, we know of no reason why it may not be given to mortals who have not lived long enough to sin, as well as to those who have actually sinned.
We cannot believe in the final salvation of all men, because the Scriptures forbid us to hope for it in the case of those who deliberately reject that Saviour through whom alone Eternal Life can be given; but the case of those who have never rejected any such offer is quite different. As to the conditions of its bestowment upon them, we do not profess to be wise above what is written.
On this question then, so far as the Scriptures leave us uninstructed, every one must have the liberty of entertaining such an opinion as his sense of the wisdom, justice, goodness and grace of God, as made known in the Gospel of His Son, will warrant.
SUPPLEMENT.
The Two Doctrines of Human Immortality Contrasted.
In our reading on both sides of this question of Human Immortality, and this has embraced a very large number of authors, we have noted many striking passages, a few of which have been introduced into the body of this volume; others have been added as foot notes since completing it: there are still many others, some of which, for the material is too copious to admit of anything more than here and there certain fragmentary selections, will, perhaps, serve a useful purpose, by being gathered into this supplementary note, under the two classes to which they belong, and placed side by side on opposite pages. The reader will then be able, at a glance, to see what has been said by various authors, inspired and uninspired, theological, philosophical, polemical and poetical, on this question pro and con. and by comparing these opposing views with each other and with the Word of God, he will be able easily to decide for himself which of these two conflicting theories has the sanction of Scripture, and which is in conflict with it.
While this question presents a great variety of phases, there are in reality but two sides to it, or two main theories concerning it. We understand them to be substantially and in general terms as follows:
[N. B. The reader will understand that the Scriptural view is continued throughout on the Left hand pages; and the Anti-scriptural view on the eight hand pages, to the end.]
JEHOVAH
STATEMENT OF DOCTRINE
“Thou shalt surely die.” Jehovah.
Exemption from death was assured to Adam on condition of perfect obedience. Failing through sin, to secure this, he became a mortal man, and the progenitor of a mortal and sinful race.
But a second Adam, even the Son of God from heaven, who is both sinless and absolutely immortal, has been provided, by whom the whole Adamic race have been redeemed from death, and through whom immortality is again made possible for every one who will receive it in the way made known in the Gospel; “For God so loved the world that Re gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have Everlasting Life.”
Those who fail of this great salvation, whether many or few, must of necessity, utterly and forever perish in the
Second Death from which there is no recovery.
“And the Lord God commanded the man saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eats thereof thou shalt surely die.” Jehovah.
“And the Lord said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now lest he put forth his hand and take also of the Tree of Life and live forever Therefore the Lord sent him forth from the garden of Eden to till the ground from whence he was taken.” Jehovah.
What can these words mean unless they mean what they say, that God would not allow the life of man to be endlessly perpetuated after he had sinned, that this was the very reason why he was debarred from the Tree of Life “Lest he put forth his hand and eat and live forever, Therefore,” he was driven from the garden.
And the Lord said “Cursed is the ground for thy sake, in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy (natural) life till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken. For dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.” Genesis 3: 17, 19, and
6:5. Jehovah.
“The wicked is reserved to the day of destruction.” Job.
“The wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs; they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.” David.
“The lamp of the wicked shall be put out.” Solomon. “The soul that sins, it shall die.” Ezekiel.
“The destruction of transgressors and of sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the Lord shall be consumed.” Isaiah.
“They shall be as though they had not been.” Obadiah.
“The day cometh that shall burn as an oven, and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly shall be stubble; and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.” Malachi.
“Whose fan is in His hand and He will thoroughly purge His floor, and gather His wheat into the garner; but the chaff will He burn up with unquenchable fire.” John Baptist.
“Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God. As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”
“I am the Door; by Me if any man enter in he shall be saved. I give unto them Eternal Life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand.” “If ye believe not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins.”
“Ye will not come unto Me that ye might have life.”
“This is Eternal Life that they might know Thee the only true God and Jesus Christ, whom Thou has sent.” Jesus Christ OUR Lord.
“There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved; neither is there salvation in any other.”
“But these, as natural brute beasts— shall utterly perish in their own corruption.” — “The day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” The Apostle Peter.
“The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is Eternal Life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
“If ye live after the flesh, ye shall die; but if ye, through the spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. He that sows to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that sows to the spirit, shall of the spirit reap Life Everlasting.”
“If our Gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost” — “whose end is destruction.” The Apostle Paul.
“Sin when it is finished, brings forth Death.” “Let him know that he which converts a sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and hide a multitude of sins.” The Apostle James.
“This is the record, that God hath given to us Eternal Life, and this Life is in His Son. He that hath the Son, hath the Life and he that hath not the Son, hath not the Life.” “And I saw the dead stand before God, and the books were opened, and the dead were judged, and whosoever was not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.” The Apostle John.
Not one word or hint of the natural immortality of man, which occupies so prominent a place in the writings of the Post Nicene Fathers, can be found in any of the writings of the Earlier Fathers. They always and uniformly speak of Immortality and Eternal life as the Gift of God to the redeemed and the peculiar portion of believers; and of the wicked as doomed to Everlasting destruction. It is not till after Platonism has been engrafted upon the teachings of Christ and His Apostles, that we find any other doctrine. — We can find place for only a few brief citations. For a more full and complete confirmation of this position, the reader is referred to the “Ante Nicene Christian Library,” edited by A. Roberts d.d. and J. Donaldson LL.L.
“Thou shalt not join thyself to those who are condemned to death.” “He that chooses evil shall be destroyed together with his works.” “They that put their trust in Him shall live forever.” Barnabas, AD 90.
“How blessed and wonderful are the gifts of God — Life” In Immortality! etc. 1 Epistle of Clement, AD 100. “Those who possess these virtues. . . abide unto Eternal Life.”
“They shall live in the world to come.”
“Sin brings death.”
“All who will not repent have lost their life.” “They are ordained to death.”
“They condemn themselves to death.”
“Life is far from them,” etc., etc. Hermas, AD 104.
“Be vigilant as God’s athlete; the reward is in-corruption and Eternal life.”
“The bread of God which is the body of Christ, I seek and His blood, which is love incorruptible and perpetual life.”
“Christ is our inseparable life.”
“That He might breathe the breath of immortality into His Church.”
“The bread which is the medicine of immortality, our antidote, that we should not die, but live forever.” Ignatius, AD 107.
“There are two ways, one of Life and one of Death.” The way of Life is this “This is the way of Life.” “Now the way of Death is this” “Thou shalt share all things with thy brother; for if ye are partners in that which is deathless (athanato), how much more in things perishable” (tots thanatois), etc. Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, — recently discovered manuscript— probable date A.D. 100-150. Anonymous.
“God alone is uncreated and incorruptible; but all things beside Him are created and perishable. For this reason souls both die and are punished. For the soul cannot live of itself as God does. But as the personal man does not always exist, and body and soul are not forever conjoined, but whenever this harmony may be dissolved, the soul leaves the body, and the man is no more; so likewise whenever it is necessary that the soul should no longer be (Einai) the vital spark leaves it, and the soul is no more, hut itself returns whence it was taken.”
“God delays causing the confusion and destruction of the whole world, by which wicked angels, and demons and men shall cease to exist.” Justin Martyr, AD 135.
“Death was sent as a benefit to Adam, that lie might not continue forever existent in sin.”
“When thou shalt have put off mortality and have put on immortality, thou wilt worthily see God. For God shall raise up thy flesh immortal with thy soul, then having become immortal, thou wilt see him who is immortal, if thou believe on him here.”
“But some will say, was man made mortal by nature? By no means. Immortal? Nor do we say that. If immortal. He would have made him a god. If mortal God would have seemed to be the author of sin. Therefore He made him neither mortal nor immortal, but capable of both, so that if he was carried to the things that lead to immortality, he might receive immortality as a reward and become godlike. But on the other hand, if he should turn to the works of death he might become the author of death to himself. Now God repairs the evil. For as man brought death upon himself by disobedience, so by obeying the will of God, he that chooses may obtain for himself the Eternal Life. For God has given us a law and holy precepts which every one who does, may be saved, and obtaining the resurrection may inherit immortality.” Theophilus, AD 182.
“The unbelievers and the blinded of this world shall not inherit the world of the life to come.” “The Apostolic doctrine is that they who believe in Him shall be immortal.”
“Life is not from ourselves, or from our nature, but it is given or bestowed according to the grace of God; and therefore he who preserves the gift of Life, and returns thanks to Him who bestows it, he shall receive length of days forever and ever; but he who rejects it, and proves unthankful to his Maker for creating him, and will not know Him who bestows it. He deprives himself of the gift of duration to all eternity. And therefore the Lord speaks thus of such unthankful persons. If you have not been faithful in that which is least, who will commit much to you? Intimating thereby unto us that they who are unthankful to Him with respect to this short transitory life which is His gift — the effect of His bounty — shall he most justly deprived of length of days for ever and ever.”
“For it was to this end that the Word of God was made man, and He who was the Son of God became the Son of Man, that man having been taken into the Word, and received the adoption, might become the Son of God. For by no other means could he have attained to incorruptibility and immortality. But how could we be joined to incorruptibility and immortality, unless first incorruptibility and immortality had become that which we also are, so that the corruptible might be swallowed up by incorruptibility and the mortal by immortality, that we might receive the adoption of Sons?”
“This was done that man should not suppose that the incorruptibility which belongs to God, is His own naturally, and also, by not holding the truth, should boast with empty pride, as if he were naturally like God. For Satan thus rendered man more ungrateful to his Creator, obscured the love which God had toward man and blinded his mind, not to perceive what is worthy of God, and comparing himself and judging himself equal with God. This, therefore, was the object of God’s long-suffering, that man, passing through all things, and acquiring the knowledge of discipline, then attaining the resurrection from the dead, and learning from experience what is the source of his salvation, may always live in a state of gratitude to the Lord, having obtained from Him the gift of incorruptibility that he might love Him the more, and that he may know himself how frail and mortal he is; while he also understands God that He is immortal and powerful to such a degree as to confer immortality upon what is mortal and eternity upon what is temporary.” Irenaeus (Lib. 3: 18, 19.) a.d.208.
“Will you lay aside your habitual arrogance, O men, who claim God as your Father, and maintain that you are immortal, just as He is? Will you inquire, examine, search what you are yourselves; whose you are; of what parentage you are supposed to be; what you do in the world; in what way you are born; how you leap into life?
Will you, laying aside all partiality, consider, in the silence of your thoughts that we are creatures either quite like the rest, or separated by no great difference?” (Cap. 2:16.) “Your interests are in jeopardy — the salvation I mean of your souls; and unless you give yourselves to know the Supreme God, a miserable death awaits you, not bringing sudden abolishment, but destroying by the bitterness of its grievous and protracted torment. None but Almighty God can preserve souls; nor is there any one beside who can give them length of days, and grant them a spirit that shall never die, except He who alone is immortal and everlasting and restricted by no limit of time.” (Cap. 62.) *’ For souls are of a middle or intermediate quality, as has been learned from Christ’s teaching, and they are such that they may, on the one hand, perish, if they have not known God; and on the other hand, be delivered from death, if they have given heed to His threatening and proffered favours. And to make manifest what is unknown, this is mans real death — this which leaves nothing behind. For that which is seen by the eyes is only a separation of soul from body, not the last end of abolishment; this I say is man’s real death, when souls which know not God shall be consumed with raging fire in protracted torment.” (Cap. 14.) Arnobius, AD 300.
“Man stands erect and looks upward because immortality is offered him. though it comes not unless given from God. For there would be no difference between the just and the unjust if every man that is born were made immortal. Immortality, therefore, is not a law of our nature, but the wages and reward of virtue.” Lactantius, AD 310
“In putting departed souls in heaven, hell and purgatory, you destroy the arguments wherewith Christ and Paul prove the resurrection. What God doth with them, that shall we know when we come to them. The true faith puts the resurrection, which we are warned to look for every hour. The heathen philosophers denying that, did put that souls did ever live. And the pope joins the spiritual doctrine of Christ and the fleshly doctrine of philosophers together things so contrary that they cannot agree. And because the fleshly minded pope consents unto heathen doctrine therefore he corrupts the Scriptures to establish it. If the souls be in heaven, tell me why they be not in as good case as the angels be, and then what cause is there of the resurrection?” William Tyndale.
“I permit the pope to establish articles of faith for his faithful followers; such as the bread and wine are transmuted in the sacrament: that the divine essence is neither generative nor generated; that the soul is the substantial form of the human body; and himself is the ruler of the world and king of heaven, and Cod of earth; and that the soul is immortal; and all the numberless prodigies of the Romish dunghill of decretals.” Martin Luther.
“The human soul is not a simple abstract entity, but is a concrete thing. As such it is subject to the laws of dissolution. Sin is per se destructive. It ruins. It destroys the soul that practices it. The punishment of hell consists in the sinner being left a prey to the process of destruction, which is already preying upon his very being. The completion of this process is absolute death, — that is, it is the completed destruction of that concrete reality, which constitutes the human personality. The dissolution of material organisms is a species of combustion. This holds true of the destruction of the soul. As the dissolution of material organisms is their combustion, so the corrosive and disorganizing action of sin upon the soul, is the soul’s combustion. In this sense the scriptural figure of hell-fire is strictly grounded in reality. The wages of Bin is ruin, destruction, death. As the flame feeds upon the consuming candle until its whole substance is dissipated and exhausted, so the wasting disease of sin feeds upon the substance of the soul, until the personal organism is entirely broken down and destroyed.” Dr. Richard Rothe.
“The doctrine of the immortality of the soul and the name are alike unknown to the entire Bible.” Olshausen.
“I must add that not a single passage from Genesis to Revelation teaches, so far as I am aware, the doctrine of man’s natural Immortality.” Creative Week. G. D. Boardman.
“The doctrine we maintain is this — that when God made man, He made him capable of immortality upon the fulfilment of certain conditions. Immortality was, and is, a gift of grace; not a natural endowment to be inherited by natural means. I use the phrase ‘Conditional Immortality’ to indicate that, in our opinion, no man will live forever on account of any intrinsic qualities which he has, but on account of a vital faith, by means of which the true Christian is brought into union with the Source and Giver of all life.” Immortality in Christ. Reverend S. H, Warleigh.
“The natural dignity and the natural immortality of man have, in the light of revelation, vanished into air. His body corruptible, his mind earthly, have turned out to be but the shadows and representation of something better.” Soul and Spirit. D. Thom d.d.
“Life to the godless must be the beginning of destruction since nothing but God and that which pleases Him can permanently exist.” Bampton Lecture. Dr. Thomson, Archbishop Of York.
“Evil possesses no divine attribute; it had a beginning and it shall have an end. Evil is an accident of existence; it is not an essential, and it must be utterly extinguished. With the destruction of evil persons, all evil deeds and evil principles shall die.” Man next to God. S. H. Warleigh.
“If I believe in the hopeless doom of incorrigible sin, and also in the undimmed glory of a perfected Kingdom, I must believe in the annihilation of the incorrigibly wicked. Fire, in the Bible, is generally an emblem of destruction, not of torment. The chaff, the tares, the fruitless tree, are not to be tortured, but to be destroyed. The Hell-fire spoken of in the New Testament, is the fire of Gehenna, kept burning outside the walls of Jerusalem, to destroy the offal of the city, here was the worm that dies not, and the fire that is unquenched ; emblems of destruction, not of torment. I find nothing in the New Testament to warrant the terrible opinion that God sustains the life of His creatures throughout eternity, only that they may continue in sin and misery. That immortality is the gift of God through our Lord Jesus Christ, that man is mortal, and must put on immortality, that only he can put it on who becomes, through Christ, a partaker of the divine nature, and so an inheritor of Him ‘who only hath immortality,’ that eternal life is life eternal, and eternal death is death eternal, and everlasting destruction is destruction without remedy — this is the most natural, as it is the simplest reading of the New Testament.” Lyman Abbott.
“The immortality of the soul is neither argued nor affirmed in the Old Testament.” Perowne. “Eternal fixity and duration belong only to those who are in accordance with God.” Dean Alford.
“Hope in death can only spring from the principle of Immortality, and this principle has no root save in Christ.” Principal Tulloch.
“If there be one blessing more than another which the Scriptures agree in ascribing to Christ as its Author, and for which the believer is taught that he is wholly indebted to redemption IT IS IMMORTALITY.” De BURGH.
“Eternal Life, as I believe, is the inheritance of those who are in Christ. Those who are not in Him will die the Second Death from which there will be no resurrection.” K. W. Dale d.d.
“It seems a strange way of understanding a law which requires the plainest words, that by death should be meant Eternal Life in misery.” John Locke.
“The Bible is silent on the point of an absolute and unconditional immortality of all men.” Reverend H. H. DOBNEY.
“Search the Bible through from beginning to end, and you will nowhere find sinners addressed as immortal beings.” Reverend Thomas Davis.
“Christianity treats man, not as immortal, but as a candidate for immortality.” J. Parker d.d.
“ My mind fails to conceive of a grosser misrepresentation of language, than when five or six of the strongest words which the Greek tongue possesses signifying destroy or destruction are explained to mean ‘maintaining an everlasting but wretched existence.’ To translate black as white is nothing to this.” Dr. R. F. Weymouth.
“The doom of the wicked is everywhere spoken of in the Holy Scripture in terms which imply the obliteration of their entire being and existence.” Reverend W. Ker.
“Throughout the Epistles there is not a single passage which could justify the assertion that the lost soul shall forever continue to exist in torment.” Edward F. Litton.
“Paul, Peter, John, James, and Jude all agree in teaching that destruction is the last judgment of God upon impenitence.” Reverend W. Griffith.
“The final destiny of man as a sinner is that he shall be, in the end, as though he had never been.” Reverend E. W. Taunton.
“The common theory of Eternal misery involves God, His whole administration and His eternal kingdom in the deepest dishonour that the mind of man or angel can conceive.” Dr. E. BEECHER.
“It would blanch the intellect, reduce the mind of the Christian to a state of idiocy, deprive him of life, were he adequately to conceive of it.” Reverend W. Archer Butler.
“Were I compelled to stand alone, I would not shrink from declaring, that this doctrine of Eternal torment, directly impugns the character of God.” Reverend D. Wardlaw Scott.
“It seems all but inconceivable that when God is all in all, there should be some dark spot, where amid endlessly self inflicted suffering, or in the enhancement of ever-enduring hate, rebel hands should be forever raised against the Eternal Father and the God of Everlasting love.” Bishop Ellicott.
“I acknowledge my inability to admit this belief, together with a belief in the Divine goodness.” John Foster. “We would express our conviction that the idea of the immortality of the soul has no source in the Gospel; that it comes, on the contrary, from the Platonists. and that it was just when the Coming of Christ was denied in the Church, or at least began to be lost sight of, that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul came in to replace that of the resurrection.” Hopes of the Church. J. N. Darby.
“That the soul is naturally immortal is contradicted by Scripture which makes our immortality a gift dependent on the Giver.” Richard Watson.
“The wicked are never spoken of as being kept alive but as forfeiting life.” Archbishop Whately. “An immortality inherent in man is an unscriptural figment.” W. F. Mortimer d.d.
“It is worthy of remark that the doctrine of eternal torment is found neither in the Apostles Creed nor in the Nicene Creed, nor in the two principal Confessions of Faith of the Sixteenth Century, viz. : the otherwise rigid creed of the French Reformed Church, and in the thirty-nine articles of the Anglican Church. And we believe that if their dogma has been handed down throughout the Protestant Churches it is simply as an Inheritance from the errors of the Middle Ages and from the speculative theories of Platonism. If we examine the writings of the earlier Fathers, Barnabas. Clement of Rome, Hermas, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin, Theophilus of Antioch, Irenaeus, and Clement of Alexandria, we find them all faithful to the Apostolic doctrine of the final destruction of the wicked. The dogma of everlasting torment did not creep into the Church until she yielded to the influence of Platonic philosophy.” Emmanuel Petavel d.d.
“Imagine numberless creatures produced out of nothing delivered over to torments of endless ages, without the least hope or possibility of relaxation or redemption. Imagine it you may: but you can never seriously believe it, nor reconcile it to God and goodness.” Dissertation 60. Bishop Newton.
“That this eternal life will be a happy, holy life is certain; and these terms are used to show its nature. But the term Eternal is used to show its duration. No other life will be eternal but the life of holiness and happiness.” Reverend G. R. Kramer.
“Immortal life is possible for man; but some alas, imprisoned by earthly things, will never find it, but perish in their own corruption.” Reverend J. D. Wilson.
“Immortality is a blessing to be sought, not a birthright legacy.” Reverend A. A. Phelps.
“If immortality is inherent in all men, it is very plain that it cannot be ‘the gift of God’ to the obedient.” Reverend Alfred Graham d.d.
“The Scripture doctrine of Immortality has usually been discussed as a matter of mere speculative belief concerning the destiny of the lost. This, however, is only the reverse side of the medal. The obverse side — the positive statement of the doctrine, tells of the reciprocal relations existing between Christ and His Saints. These relations are based on the possession of a common life, just as are the relationships of an earthly family. The non-immortality of those who do not possess this life is a corollary and necessary result of the doctrine, but it is by no means the substance of the doctrine itself.” William R. Hart.
“There is a doctrine which degrades man and dishonours God and makes the entire scheme of the universe a disastrous failure; a doctrine everywhere current, which has for ages dominated theology, driven multitudes to madness or atheism, corrupted the Gospel, obscured the light of Revelation, and brought fearful discredit upon the ineffable character of our Father in heaven : namely the doctrine that all souls are deathless.” William Leask d.d.
“Paganism taught immortal-soulism before Christ or Moses or Abraham. Satan taught it in Eden. It cannot be true, else it would be incorrect to say that ‘ Life and immortality are brought to light in the Gospel.” D. H. Chase d.d.
“The world contains a harvest of innumerable human beings, some of whom allow themselves to follow the perishable destiny of animal life, while others prepare for a superior life.” Charles Lambert.
“If the soul cannot perish after the manner of things compared according to quantity, i.e., by division, it remains subject to the condition of things compared according to quality; in other words, it is capable of increasing and decreasing by degrees in all its properties and manifestations whatever. It can therefore undergo gradual diminution, and perish at last by extinction.” Charles Renouvier.
“Restore the true doctrine of immortality and you will have 4ie most potent weapon ever forged for the defeat of that Nationalism and its twin Agnosticism which are eating the vitals out of our modern Christianity.” M. W. Strang.
“I am quite sure that the common opinion about this doctrine of immortality is not derived from Christian origin, but from the dogmas of Greek philosophy which made God and the world equals, and naturally would find the source of divine and immortal life in nature, especially in the nature of man. The Gospel teaching us that there is no life except from God’s will, compels us to think that there can be no Everlasting life, but only in God, and in those natures that are got from Him.” Professor Hermann Schultz.
“Since I have reached and rested in the conclusion that the ultimate doom of the impenitent is death, and not eternal life in agony, a great black cloud seems to have rolled away from the face of God, and I see Him, not only as my loving Father, but as the loving Father of all His creatures.” Prof. Clement M. Butler d.d.
“I know of no subject that so magnifies Christ. How it exalts His power, wisdom and majesty. God gave to us Eternal Life, and this life is in His Son. Redemption in this sense is a thousand times greater than that which merely saves an immortal soul from sin and misery. It bestows the inestimable boon of Life, as well as pardon and bliss. This view gives a new meaning to the grand old coronation hymn, ‘All hail the power,’ etc. To me it gives a new power in preaching. It is like standing on the Mount of Transfiguration rather than on Golgotha, — it is Life instead of death, glory instead of shame.” C. R. Hendrickson d.d.
“This doctrine (of immortality in sin and misery), more than anything else in religious teaching, is accountable for the open infidelity and the secret unbelief that prevail. It represents the Bible as absolutely committed to something utterly incredible. It blots out the light that should lead to God. It hinders the conversion of the world. The thoughtful among the more civilized non-Christian nations reject Christianity at once, on account of it. Missionaries go out to preach it, and are stopped in their work by misgivings, until they can see their way to renounce it as some are doing. At home, in very many cases, the impossibility of preaching eternal punishment often makes the preacher altogether silent as to that tribulation and anguish which will assuredly be the portion of every man who persists in doing evil.” Lecture on Tennyson’s “Despair.” Thomas Walker Esq., London.
“Such is the horror arising from the prevalent creed, that it is seldom applied either to living multitudes, or to dead relations. A hopeful case is made out for almost every one who dies, in direct opposition to Christ’s words, that destruction is certain for all except those who “hear His sayings and do them.” The effect, moreover, of the existing opinion is to lower the Standard of Morality to Zero; since the hell believed in is too dreadful for all except gigantic offenders. Thus Christ’s words on “wrestling to enter into life,” become practically inoperative. The masses harden themselves in wickedness, and Christians deliberately set aside the Lord’s lesson on the ‘fewness’ of the saved.” Life in Christ. Reverend Edward White.
“Nowhere in the Word of God is immortality ascribed to unbelievers. In the only four passages in which the term occurs it is once mentioned as the object patiently sought for by all who know and obey the truth (Romans 2:7), in another place as the special bestowment upon the “called of God,” according to His purpose (2 Timothy 1:9, 10); is still another it is promised at the resurrection to all who “bear the image of Christ” (1 Corinthians 15:51-54); and finally, it is named as essentially belonging to God alone (1 Timothy 6:16). I think every intelligent Bible scholar in Christendom will indorse the accuracy of this statement. Heathen philosophers have taught, and modern poets have sung the universal immortality of man, without regeneration; but surely with Christians at least, that ought not to weigh against the plain declarations of God, especially as it was Satan himself who first proclaimed the same stupendous lie, in the garden of Eden, when he said to the woman, ‘Ye shall not surely die’, after God had explicitly declared ‘you shall.” Lay Sermons by J. F. Graff.
“We conclude, therefore, that the first death puts an end to the life of the body; the Second death consists chiefly in the destruction of the soul.” Emmanuel Petavel d.d.
“It is only a metaphysical quibble, when it is objected that it is impossible for anything that exists to suffer absolute destruction; for we do not talk of absolute destruction, or destruction of substance, but are only saying, that the organized creature called man, being a sinner will be dissolved or perish under the punitive infliction of God’s wrath.” J. H. Chamberlain.
“Is it so very dreadful a thought that there is really no immortality for man in sin — no immortality for him at all except in Christ.” J. M. Denniston.
“That a creature must exist forever, whether God wills it or not — that God can give life to a creature, but is unable to withdraw the life He gave, — that He created a soul, but is unable to let it drop out of existence, is such a monstrous absurdity, that it may well bear away the palm from all other absurdities.” I. Jennings.
“But in our time another idea is being advanced into prominence in relation to this matter, and made a test of orthodoxy on the subject— an idea which, I venture to say, is beyond all expression, the wildest absurdity that could be broached in the name of sound doctrine. I allude to the notion that God will sustain in existence to all eternity, creatures, the sole end of whose existence, has become active, implacable, and unchangeable hostility to Himself. If there is one conception in the whole field of human thought more monstrous than another, it seems to me to be that conception. I look upon this eternity of sinning, as the heresy of all heresies, because it contradicts and contravenes every other conceivable truth in its deepest essence and ground.” Everlasting Punishment. Reverend Fergus Ferguson.
“In regard to the penalty of sin, I believe in the Scriptural doctrine, that ‘the wages of sin is death,’ but I do not believe that ‘death’ means what the Westminster Confession says it means— existence in unspeakable torment both of soul and body in hell, for ever.” Statement under trial for heresy of David Maceae.
“The doctrine that the very object of the Incarnation is to immortalize mankind, furnishes the vertebral column, so to speak, on which the fabric of a coherent theology can be built.” Life in Christ. Edward White.
“Human Immortality is a contradiction in terms; for what is human cannot be immortal, and the moment it becomes immortal it ceases to be human.” Robert Ashcroft.
“The Christian religion, in offering duration to the individual is, as we have said explicit and logical; but it is also conditional. It is difficult for the mind reared among the familiar speech with which most of us dispose of this subject, to be alertly aware of the fact that immortality is nowhere proved to be a natural right, yet such is the fact. Like suffrage, immortality is not a right, but a privilege. It is not property, but a gift. The gift is offered to you or me upon conditions which we can accept or deny at will. The Founder of our religion makes, we may say that He constitutes, the conditions. Everlasting Life is. in fact, according to this religion, bestowed by Jesus Christ upon the human soul.
“The conditions of immortality wholly refuse to rest upon the piers which hold the conditions of conquest in the life of time. Brute force ceases now to keep its relative value in this larger contest. There is what may be called a brute force of the mind, of which this is equally and terribly true. Sheer intellect has no greater chance at everlasting life than sheer muscle. Immortality is not promised by the Creator to great men. Mere mind holds no passport to Eternity. There is no ‘limited express‘ to Paradise for able people. Goethe, for being Goethe is none the more likely to last forever. Frederica, so far as we can see, stands quite as good, or a better chance. The law of selection would seem to be at once, severe and delicate. The obscurest mother, transmitting a pure heart to her boys, never having heard of protoplasm, and knowing no philosophy beyond her prayers, may enter into this higher contention with an equipment which the discoverer of the missing link might envy. It is quite conceivable that the soul of a felon might survive the soul of a prince or a priest. The tests of this world fail. Fine causes and finer sequences enter the list.
Who are we that we should win? What is our standard of success? What the temper of our weapons? The stranger without our gates or the servant under our feet may be fighting for a soul’s life where we are fooling with it, and may, therefore, be better worth life, and so the more likely to live. For law is but law, and spiritual law loses nothing of its grip for gain in quality and holds us none the less robustly because of a touch so velvet.” North American Review, June, 1884. Elizabeth Stuart Phelps.
“The Scriptural doctrine, as we have felt constrained to declare it here, removes, we believe, a great stumbling block from the path of believers. We are no longer compelled to conceive of God as possessing two different natures; on earth tender and beneficent, even repaying man’s ingratitude and wickedness by His mercies; but beyond the tomb, unmoved by the endless tortures and excruciating pains of His enemies. We read with horror the stories of the Inquisition, or the relation of the conquest of Mexico by the Spaniards; of the Emperor Montezuma broiled on a gridiron over a slow fire; of the men tortured and driven mad by drops of water falling day and night upon their foreheads; but what are these agonies of a few days or hours, hideous and revolting as they may be, in comparison with a scorching fire, which after millions of ages, shall have only begun its work?” Struggle for Eternal Life. Emmanuel Petavel.
“No man can deny that God is able to destroy what He was able to create. No man can deny that God had a power to choose whether He would inflict death upon the sinner, or an endless life of agony. Which would He choose, the gentler or the more fearful doom? Will you say the latter? Why? There must be a reason. Is it to please Himself? He repudiates this kind of character (Ezekiel 18:28). Is it to please His angelic or redeemed creation? They are too like Himself to take pleasure in such a course. Did no pity visit the Creator’s bosom? They would look up in His face and plead for mercy.
Is it to terrify from sin? To terrify whom? Not the lost; they are handed over forever to blasphemy and evil. Is it then to terrify the unfallen, and preserve them from sin? Would it? What is sin? Is it not pre-eminently alienation from God? What would alienate from Him so completely as the sight or the knowledge of such a hell as Tertullian taught? Pity, horror, anguish would invade every celestial breast. Just fancy a criminal with us. He has been a great criminal. Let him be the cruel murderer; the base destroyer of woman’s innocence and honour; the fiendish trafficker in the market of lust; the cold-blooded plotter for the widow’s or the orphan’s inheritance. Let him be the vilest of the vile, on whose head curses loud, deep and many, have been heaped. He is taken by the hand of justice. All rejoice. He is put to death! No; that is thought too light a punishment by the ruler of the land. He is put into a dungeon, deprived of all the necessaries of existence; tortured by day and by night; guarded, lest his own hand should rid him of a miserable life; and all this to go on till Nature thrusts within the prison bars an irresistible hand, and frees the wretch from his existence.
Now what would be the effect upon the community, of such a course? The joy at the criminal’s overthrow would rapidly change into pity, into indignation, into horror, into the wild uprising of an outraged nation to rescue the miserable man from a tyrant worse than himself, and to hurl the infamous abuser of law and power from his seat. And this is but the faintest image of what a cruel theology would have us believe of our Father which is in Heaven! Nature steps in, in the one case and says there shall be an end. Omnipotence, in the other, puts forth its might to stay all escape, Forever and forever! Millions of years of agony gone, and yet the agony no nearer to its close! Not one, but myriads to suffer thus! Their endless cries! Their ceaseless groans! Their interminable despair!
Why, heaven and earth, and stars in their infinite number — all worlds which roll through the great Creator’s space — would raise one universal shout of horror at such a course.
Love for God would give way to hatred. Apostasy would no longer be partial, but universal. All would stand aloof in irresistible loathing from the tyrant on the throne, for a worse thing than Manichseism pictured would be seated there — the one eternal principle would he the principle of evil.” Duration and Nature of Future Punishment, H. Constable.
“Let us ask the advocates of endless tortures, whether they are exalting God by their doctrine What interest ought Christians to have in all this, that they so zealously try to prove it of their Friend and Father? How can it exalt Him?
Would an earthly friend be exalted, if but a millionth part were attributed to him? It is vain to say that He is not connected with this torture. The bodies of men could not be exposed to the intense and constant, and endless action of fire and yet be endlessly kept in life and feeling without a miracle. The law which God has imprinted on Nature is, that whatever is subjected to the action of fire shall come to an end. Men’s bodies are material, are capable of being acted on by fire, and of being consumed by it. This is God’s own natural law, which He refers to again and again in His Book; and if human beings are kept in this torture, and yet preserved alive, it must be by the immediate miraculous interference of God; and if He does this at all, it can be only for the purpose of torturing them. In the ordinary course, they would be consumed, but if the doctrine of endless pain be true, He keeps them in sensitive life, in order to punish them. Fancy, if you can, the good God exercising His miraculous powers on purpose to torture millions, billions, trillions of His poor creatures; and thus keeping them alive as long as He Himself exists, with no other view than endlessly to punish them; and that though they lived only a comparative moment of time and did only those things which naturally sprang from their fallen condition, which they could not help, and from adverse circumstances which they could not control. Could any one give even the devil a worse character than this? We seriously and solemnly ask Christians, especially the teachers among them, whether they can really think that they glorify and exalt God by attributing to Him such a procedure as this? As for ourselves, we must humbly and earnestly, and with a broken and contrite heart, supplicate pardon from Him, that we have ever given countenance to what is so opposed to His character and revealed truth, and so injurious to His cause and kingdom. O ye teachers of the Bible, were you to attribute this deliberate, this malignant hate to ourselves against our fellows, we could bear the stigma; but we will no longer suffer you to misrepresent and malign the character of our Beloved, our best Friend, the Source of all goodness and love. We utter our solemn, our indignant protest against it. If we could, we would post it up on every church and chapel door in the realm, and at every corner of every street. We would proclaim upon the house tops that He is not the God you represent Him to be. We would try to rescue His character and depict Him in His own attractive loveliness and goodness; and not in that garb by which you have alienated millions from Him. Those who love Him, do so in spite of this part of your teaching.
“Why, O why, will you alienate man? Why will you persist in thus falsifying the character of your heavenly
Master? You are certainly bearing false witness against God.” Man Next to God. H. S. Warleigh.
“All teaching which makes the soul immortal, by virtue of a primitive essence is concealed pantheism.” Prof. E Naville.
“After all, what necessity exists for our becoming immortal?” Dean Bois, Montaubon.
“Rash the attempt, though so many have tried it to establish the soul’s immortality by arguments founded on its spiritual nature.” Professor Gaussen, Geneva.
“Those only can be sure of immortality, who, while here below, have laid hold on Eternal Life.” Pasteur Gerold, Strasburg.
“Seeing that man is not self-contained, nor holds in himself the source of life, but, on the contrary, fetches everything from God, should he seek to separate himself from that Source and fall back on his own energies; what other result can ensue but that his personal resources being speedily drained of vitality, he day by day degenerates toward non-existence. Behold here, the whole question of life or death.” Father Gratry.
“We drink the life of God: we may cease to do so by a voluntary act, and carry on the warfare for a while by the force remaining to us from our creative impulse. That force will soon be spent, and our isolated life will be falsehood and torment. The existence which man’s personal liberty has enabled him to detach from the Godhead, expires in a languishing agony.” Professor Secretan.
SATAN
“Ye shall not surely die.”—Satan.
STATEMENT OF DOCTRINE.
An unconditional and inevitable Immortality was assured to Adam in his creation; and he was constituted the progenitor of a race of beings who like himself are immortal. By sin he incurred for himself and all his posterity
the wrath and curse of God, and the consequent doom of Everlasting punishment (in the sense of endless torment or misery) beyond this life; from which doom there is no salvation but through a Divine Saviour.
Such a Saviour has been provided in Jesus Christ. At this point believers in the natural and necessary immortality of man divide into two Schools, viz.: 1. Partialists, who hold that this endless punishment will be the certain doom of a portion of the human race; 2. Universalists, who, revolting from so dreadful a conclusion, hold (with more or less confidence), that every individual of the race will, sooner or later, be saved to a blessed immortality.
“And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die; for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof your eyes shall be opened ; and ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil.” Satan.
“The soul was created immortal. Both the body and the mind of man were originally formed and destined for Immortality. After the apostasy, however, the body was sentenced to return to dust. [The Bible says ‘Thou’ not thy body, but thou thyself.] But the soul was left possessed of the never dying principle with which it was originally endowed; was incapable of dissolution and indestructible except by the exertion of Almighty Power.” Theology Sermon 22. T. Dwight.
This is Platonic Scholasticism. It has been read into the Scriptures. It is not found there. No such distinction is made in them between Adam’s body and Adam’s soul. The command is addressed to one individual Thou; and the penalty falls upon the whole individual. In the death threatened by God, and in the death denied by Satan, and in the death which it is said “ he died,” the same word muth is used throughout, and must carry the same meaning and be equally inclusive.]
“With lies ye have made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad, and strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him Life.” God thus rebukes, by the mouth of Ezekiel, The False Prophets.
Some hold that children derive their immortality by traduction from their progenitor; others that it is directly from God, by creation; while conditionalists hold that it is bestowed as a special gift, only by a spiritual or second birth.
What may have been surmised or said or taught by such ancient philosophers and theological speculators and poets as Thales, Zoroaster, Heraclitus, Empedocles, Pythagoras, Xenophanes, Anaxagoras, Democritus, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Zeno, Epictetus, Pliny, Seneca, and other famous men of the pagan world, it does not concern us now particularly to inquire. Some of them argued the indestructible nature of the human soul as a logical deduction from the postulate of its eternal pre-existence; others entertained ideas of a metempsychosis or universal transmigration of souls, and of ultimate absorption into the divine essence and complete loss of all personal identity; others of an utter extinguishment of all being in death; others of a shadowy, ghostly existence after this life, and of various pleasures for the good, and of tortures for the bad, ending perhaps in their annihilation, or in their purification and restoration to happiness or perhaps, in the final destruction of both in the general consummation and ruin of ail things. Their ideas were so vague, fluctuating, fanciful, conflicting and contradictory, as to forbid the belief that they were very generally seriously entertained by those who put them forth, or by those upon whom they were imposed. They are such at any rate, as to defy all attempt to classify or arrange them on either side of this question.
Nowhere throughout the pagan world, either in ancient or in modern times, un-illumined by the light of Divine revelation do we find any such doctrine of an individual personal immortality as now so generally prevails throughout Christendom, much less any conception of that way of attaining to it as is brought to light in the Gospel. Even Plato the wisest of all the pagan philosophers was constrained to say, “It appears to me that to know them (the truths relating to the destiny of man) clearly, in this present life, is either impossible or very difficult. We must wait till some one, either God or some inspired man teach us— and remove the darkness from our eyes.” — What then are we taught by these premonitions of the future, these anxious desires, these hopes and fears which are common to all thinking men even in the darkness of heathenism? — Surely, not that the immortality for which men naturally long is assured to them; but rather the contrary — that they are made with a capacity for an endless life and that they might possess it if they were only fitted to enjoy it; but that the boon has been forfeited, and that no mere man is wise enough to tell how it is to be regained or able to attain to it without divine help. Here in this universal sentiment, is seen the necessity for the Gospel.
It is to this sentiment that it addresses itself. It is this, indeed, that makes it a Gospel — a message of good tidings to perishing men. Hence the Apostle Paul writes to the Galatians, “If any man preach any other Gospel unto you,” any other than that Eternal life can only be found but in Christ — “Let him be accursed.”
From the middle of the second century onward, we notice a marked change in the teaching of the Fathers in the character of the questions they discussed and in the phraseology they employed, introduced by the Platonic philosophers who had come into the Christian church. Questions relating to the nature of man, the soul of man; the nature of the punishment that would be inflicted on the wicked, and similar themes come now prominently into view. There is an evident effort to bring the doctrines of Christianity into accord with the popular teaching of the schools. Dropping the idea of the eternal pre-existence of the soul as taught by Plato, but which is too evidently atheistic to be retained, these Christianized Platonists endeavoured to show that the doctrine of natural immortality, as taught by him, is substantially the same as that taught by the Scripture— that the redeemed are not actually made immortal by a new birth from above, but that they are naturally and inherently immortal. In this way the vital distinction between the saved and the lost was effectually ignored, and the real fundamental principle of the Gospel was hidden from view. Those phrases, such as “the immortal soul,” “the never dying soul,” “the death that never dies,” that have become so common in our so-called Christian teaching, now begin to appear in their writings.
The doctrine of the eternal torment of the unsaved, as a logical deduction from that of the necessary immortality of all souls, now begins to find advocates. Even Justin, who was an earnest Christian teacher, had been so thoroughly imbued with this philosophy before his conversion, that he brought much of it with him into his Christian teaching. He still continued to wear the philosopher’s garb, and though he was for the most part faithful to the Gospel in the main, here and there ambiguous expressions leaning toward the Platonic view of the human soul may be found in some of his writings. But these views were more and more decidedly expressed under his successors, until eventually the teaching of Moses and the Prophets and of Christ and the Apostles was completely subordinated to the philosophy of Plato; and this was made the rigid and unbending rule for the Interpreting the Scriptures.
But the gross vehemence with which this fearful doctrine of the eternal torment of the unsaved was urged by Tatian, Tertullian, Hippolytus and others, and the lurid pictures which were drawn of their hopeless agonies, produced a reaction in the minds of many who were of the same philosophic school; and as a consequence, we soon find Clement of Alexandria, and Gregory Thaumaturgus, with many others, especially Origen the most prominent of all, devising and advocating schemes of a general restoration, by which, not the wicked themselves, but only their sins were to be destroyed or purged away in eternal fire, while their souls were to be made pure and blessed forever. This doctrine, with various modifications, is having a remarkable revival in our day. Hence in the citations which follow under the general head of the natural and inevitable immortality of man, a great variety of views will be found expressed. No attempt will be made to classify them, or to arrange them in doctrinal or chronological order.
Athenagoras in the closing years of the second century was one of the first if not the very first who explicitly taught this doctrine. He says:
“Knowing that when released from this life, we shall either live another nobler, not earthly but heavenly — or if we share the ruin of others, a worse life, even in fire — for God did not create us like sheep or cattle, to serve a purpose, and then perish and disappear.” [This by the way is the very argument Dr. T. Dwight in his system of theology employs to prove the necessary immortality of man. He says (Sermon 28) that the “death” threatened to Adam “could not have been annihilation; for this was certainly no part of God’s design in the creation of man.”]
“Eternal Life will be the lot of the damned.” “Every soul is immortal.” “The philosophers know the difference between secret [ignis sapiens) and common fire. That which serves for the use of man is of quite another nature from that which ministers to the justice of God, whether it hurls thunderbolts from heaven, or belches forth from the volcano, for it burns without consuming and repairs what it preys upon. The mountains remain though ever burning; the man who is struck by lightning is not reduced to ashes by the fire. Here is a witness of the eternal fire, an emblem of judgment perpetually feeding its penalty. The mountains burn and ever endure; why not guilty men, the enemies of God?”
“You are fond of spectacles; but there are other spectacles; that day which is disbelieved, derided by the nations, the last and eternal day of judgment, when all ages shall be swallowed up in one conflagration — what a variety of spectacles shall then appear? How shall I admire, how laugh, how exult, when I behold so many kings and false gods in heaven together with Jove himself groaning in the lowest abyss of darkness; so many magistrates who persecuted the name of the Lord, liquefying in fiercer flames than they ever kindled against Christians; so many sage philosophers blushing in raging fire, with their scholars whom they persuaded to despise God, and to disbelieve the resurrection; and so many poets shuddering before the tribunal, not of Rhadamanthus, not of Minos, but of the disbelieved Christ! Then shall we hear the tragedians more tuneful in the expression of their own sufferings; then shall we see the dancers more sprightly, amidst the flames; the charioteer all red-hot in his burning car; and the wrestlers hurled, not upon the accustomed list, but upon a plain of fire.” (De Spectaculis C. 30.) Tertullian, AD 220.
“For if ye believe that the soul is originated and is made immortal by God, according to the opinion of Plato, we ought not to refuse that God is able to raise the body which is composed of the same elements, and make it immortal. To those who have done well shall be assigned righteously eternal bliss, and to the lovers of iniquity shall be given eternal punishment. And this fire which is unquenchable and without end, awaits those latter, and a certain fiery worm which dies not, and which does not waste the body, but continues bursting forth from the body with unending pain. No sleep will give them rest; no night will soothe them; no death will deliver them from punishment; no voice of interceding friends will profit them.” Hippolytus, AD 238.
“Whereas some have dared to assert concerning the nature of the reasonable soul that it is mortal; we, with the approbation of the Sacred Council, do condemn and reprobate all who assert that the intellectual soul is mortal, seeing that the soul is not only truly and of itself and essentially the form of the human body, as it is expressed in the Canon of Pope Clement Fifth, and likewise Immortal; and we strictly inhibit all from dogmatizing otherwise; and we do decree that all who adhere to the like erroneous assertions shall be shunned and punished as heretics.” Pope Leo X.
The Koran abounds in such “orthodox” sentiments as these:
“The unbelievers shall be companions of hell-fire forever.”
“Those who disbelieve we will surely cast to be broiled in hellfire; so often as their skins shall be burned, we will give them other skins in exchange, that they may taste the sharper torment.”
“They shall be dragged on their faces into hell, and it shall be said unto them ‘Taste ye that torment of hell-fire which ye rejected as a falsehood.”
“They shall be taken by the fore-locks and the feet and flung into hell, where they shall drink scalding water.” “The true believers, lying on couches, shall look down upon the infidels in hell and laugh them to scorn.” Mohammed.
“The bodies of men after death return to dust and see corruption; but their souls (which neither die, nor sleep), having an immortal subsistence, immediately return to God who gave them. The souls of the righteous, then being made perfect in holiness, are received into the highest heavens, where they behold the face of God in light and glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies; and the souls of the wicked are cast into hell, where they remain in torment and utter darkness reserved to the judgment of the great day.” Presbyterian Confession of Faith.
“Those wicked men who died many years ago, their souls went to hell, and there they are still; those who went to hell in former ages of the world have been in hell ever since, all the while suffering torment. They have nothing else to spend their time in there, but to suffer torment; they are kept in being for no other purpose.” Sermons Volume 2, Jonathan Edwards.
Time that changes all, yet changes us in vain; The body, not the mind; nor can control
The immortal vigour or abate the soul.” Dryden.
“The soul, immortal substance to remain; Conscious of joy, and capable of pain.” Pope.
“For though the soul of man
Be got when he is made, it is born but then When man doth die; and body’s as the womb; As a midwife death directs us home.” Donne.
“Gird up thy mind to contemplation, trembling inhabitant of earth, Tenant of a hovel for a day— thou art heir of the universe forever;
For neither congealing of the grave, nor gulfing waters of the firmament, Nor expansive airs of heaven, nor dissipative fires of Gehenna,
Nor rust, nor rest, nor wear, nor waste, nor loss, nor chance, nor change.
Shall avail to quench or overwhelm the spark of soul within thee. Thou art an imperishable leaf on the ever-green bay-tree of existence, A word from Wisdom’s mouth that cannot be unspoken;
A ray of Love’s own light, a drop in Mercy’s sea;
A creature marvellous and fearful, begotten by the fiat of Omnipotence.
I, that speak in weakness, and ye that hear in charity,
Shall not cease to live and feel, though flesh must see corruption,
For the prison-gates of matter shall be broken, and the shackled soul go free, Free for good or ill, to satisfy its appetite forever;
Forever — happy fate, to ripen into perfection— forever. Look to thy soul, O man! for none can be surety for his brother.
Behold, for heaven — or for hell; thou canst not escape from Immortality!” Proverbial Philosophy. Tupper.
“Infants themselves, as they bring their condemnation into the world with them, are rendered obnoxious to punishment by their own sinfulness, and not by the sinfulness of another. But though they have not yet produced the fruits of their iniquity, yet they have the seed of it within them; even their whole nature is, as it were, a seed of sin, and therefore cannot but be odious and abominable to God.” Institutes II, 1, 8. John Calvin.
“Man has a body and a soul. The body dies. The soul never dies. The souls of the good will be happy in heaven. The souls of the wicked will be miserable in hell. Scripture Lessons. American Tract Society.
“Oh! yet we trust that somehow good
Will be the final goal of ill.
To pangs of nature, sins of will.
Defects of doubt, and taints of blood;
That nothing walks with aimless feet;
That not one life shall be destroyed,
Or cast as rubbish to the void,
When God hath made the pile complete;
Behold we know not any thing;
I can but trust that good shall fall
At last— far off — at last, to all
And every winter change to spring.
The wish that of the living whole
No life may fail beyond the grave,
Derives it not from what we have
The likes God within the soul?”
In Memoriam. Tennyson”.
’’The Immortality of the soul is a fundamental article of the Christian System.” Dictionary Edition I848. Noah
Webster.
“The soul is immortal — Now this is a foundation truth, upon the removal of which, religion falls to the ground.” Sermon, Matthew 10:28. Robert South.
“There need not be any hesitation in reverently declaring that God cannot annihilate a moral agent.” Ecce
Deus,p. 219.
“I have a firm conviction that our soul is an existence of indestructible nature, whose working is from eternity to eternity.” Goethe.
“Second Death. Death and Hell are to be cast into the lake that burns with fire and brimstone; that is, the bodies of the wicked, once mortal or dead, and their souls united together shall be shut up in Tophet, where all the former torments of both shall be summed up with inconceivable increase, after which, no effect of the Divine curse shall remain anywhere but in that pit of endless misery.” Brown’s Dictionary of the Bible, edited by James Smith.
“The damned shall be packed like brick in a kiln, and be so bound that they cannot move a limb, nor even the eyelid; and while thus fixed, the Almighty shall blow the fires of hell through them forever.” Isaac Ambrose.
“God has revealed it to be His will to punish some of mankind FOREVER. You know not but you are one of them. Whether you will be saved or damned depends entirely in His will. And supposing He sees it most for His glory and the general good, that you should be damned, it is certainly His will that you should be damned. On this supposition then, you ought to be willing to be damned, for not to be willing to be damned in this case is opposing God’s will!” Volume 3, page 145, Works of Samuel Hopkins d.d.
“With regard to men, all are not created on equal terms; but some are fore-ordained to eternal life, others to eternal destruction. And accordingly, as each man has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestined to life or death.” Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 3, c. 21, section 5. John Calvin.
“Is it intolerable to burn part of thy body by holding in the fire? What then will it be to suffer ten thousand times more FOKEVER in hell?” Saints Rest. R. Baxter.
“In boiling waves of vengeance must I lie.
Oh! Could I curse that dreadful God and die!
Infinite years in torment shall I spend,
And never, never, never at an end?
Ah! must I live in torturing despair
As many years as atoms in the air?
When these are spent, as many thousands more
As grains of sand that crowd the ebbing shore?
When these are gone, as many yet behind
As leaves of forest shaken with the wind?
When these are done, as many to ensue
As stems of grass on hills and dales that grew?
When these run out, as many on the march
As starry lamps that gild the spangled arch?
When these expire, as many millions more
As moments in the millions past before?
When all these doleful years are spent in pain.
And multiplied by myriads again.
Till numbers drown the thought, could I suppose
That then ray wretched years were at a close,
This would afford some ease; but ah!
I shiver To think upon the dreadful sound— forever!
The burning gulf where I blaspheming lie
Is time no more, but vast eternity.
Bound to the bottom of the burning main,
Gnawing my chains, I wish for death in vain. Just doom!
Since I that bear the Eternal load
Contemned the death of an Eternal God.” Gospel Sonnets. Ralph Erskine.
“Sinners shall suffer the most grievous torments, both in soul and body, and without Intermission forevermore. These torments are beyond expression, and our most fearful thoughts cannot equal the horror of them.” Body of Divinity, Boston.
“Suppose that we saw with our eyes for twenty or thirty years together, a great furnace of fire of the quantity of the whole earth, and saw there Cain, and all the damned as lumps of red fire, and they boiling and leaping for pain in a dungeons of Everlasting brimstone — and the black and terrible devils, with long and sharp-toothed whips of scorpions lashing out scourges on them, and if we saw our neighbours— yes our own dear children — swimming and sinking in that black lake, and heard the yelling, and crying of our young ones — if we saw this, we should not dare to blaspheme the majesty of God.” Trial and Faith. Samuel Rutherford.
“Only conceive the poor wretch in the flames. See how his tongue hangs from between his blistered lips! How it excoriates and burns the roof of his mouth, as if it were a fire-brand! Behold him crying for a drop of water. I will not picture the scene, suffice it for me to say that the hell of hells will be to thee, poor sinner, the thought that it is to be Forever. Thou wilt look up thereon the throne of God — and on it shall be written Forever. When the damned jingle the burning irons of their torments, they shall say Forever. We are sometimes accused, my brethren, of using language too harsh, too ghastly, too alarming, with regard to the world to come. But if we could speak thunderbolts, and our every look were a lightning flash, and our eyes dropped blood instead of tears, no tones, words, gestures or similitude of dread could exaggerate the awful condition of a soul which has refused the Gospel, and is delivered over to justice.” Spurgeon.
“Forever harassed with a dreadful tempest, they shall feel themselves torn asunder by an angry God, and transfixed and penetrated by mortal stings, terrified by the thunderbolts of God. and broken by the weight of His hand, so that to sink into any gulf would be more tolerable than to stand for a moment in these terrors.” John Calvin.
“As the souls of heretics are hereafter to be eternally burning in hell, there can be nothing more proper than for me to imitate the Divine vengeance by burning them on earth.” Queen Mary as quoted by Bishop Burnet.
“The bodies of the damned will be salted with fire, so tempered and prepared as to burn the more fiercely, and yet never consume.” John Whitaker.
“The world will probably be converted into a great lake or liquid globe of fire, — a vast ocean of fire, in which the wicked shall be overwhelmed, which will always be in tempest in which they shall be tost to and fro. having no rest day or night, vast waves or billows of fire continually rolling over their heads, of which they shall forever be full of quick sense within and without: their heads, their eyes, their tongues, their hands, their feet, their loins and their vitals shall forever be full of a glowing, melting fire, fierce enough to melt the very rocks and elements; and also they shall eternally be full of the most quick and lively sense to feel the torments; not for one minute, nor for one day, nor for one age, nor for two ago, nor for a hundred years, nor for ten thousands of millions of ages, one after another, but forever and ever, without any end at all, and never, never to be delivered.” Sermon Volume 7, page 166, Jonathan Edwards.
“There is within us an immortal spirit. We die to those around us, indeed, when the bodily frame, which alone is the instrument of communication with them, ceases to be the instrument, by the absence of the mind which it obeyed. But though the body smoulders into earth, that spirit, which is of pure origin, returns to its purer Source.” Lectures on the Philosophy of the human mind. Thomas Brown.
Young in his description of the achievements of man on earth, exclaims — “Look down on earth. What sees thou? Immortals, have been here Could less than souls immortal this have done?” Night Thoughts. Night Sixth. Young-.
“And lastly. Eternal death fills both body and soul with most intense pain, and the highest torment and anguish which can be received within a created, finite capacity. All the woes, grief, and terrors which humanity can labour under, shall then, as it were, unite and really seize upon the soul at once. — Surely a bed of flames is but an uneasy thing for a man to roll himself upon to all eternity! The suffering which shall attend this estate, no tongue can express, no heart can conceive. Pain shall possess the body; horror, agony and despair shall rack the mind; so that the whole man shall be made the receptacle and scene of misery, the tragic scene for vengeance to act its utmost upon, and to show how far a creature is capable of being tormented, without the loss of His being! the continuance of which, under these circumstances, is but a miserable privilege, and would gladly be exchanged for annihilation. For every lash which God then gives the sinner shall be with a scorpion; every pain which he inflicts shall be more eager than appetite, more cruel than revenge; every faculty, both of soul and body, shall have its distinct, proper, and peculiar torment applied to it, and be distinctly struck there, where it has the quickest, the tender, the sharpest sense of every painful impression.” Sermon on the Wages of Sin. Robert South.
“If a man were condemned to lie still, or to lie in bed in one posture, without turning, for seven years together, would he not buy it off with the loss of all his estate? If a man were put upon the rack for every day for three months together (suppose him able to live so long), what would he not do to be quit of his torture? Would any man curse the king to his face were he sure to have both his hands burned off, and to be tormented with torments three years together? Would any man in his wits accept of a hundred pounds a year, for forty years, if he were sure to be tormented in the Are for the next hundred years together, without intermission? Think then what a thousand years may signify; ten ages; the ages of two empires. But this account, I must tell you is infinitely short. — A thousand years is a long time to be in torment; we find a fever of one and twenty days to be like an age in length; but when the duration of an intolerable misery forever in the height, and forever in beginning, and ten thousand years have spent no part of its term, but it makes a perpetual efflux, and is like the centre of a circle which ever transmits lines to the circumference; this is a consideration so sad, that the horror of it, and the reflection upon its abode and duration, make a great part of the hell; for hell could not be hell without the despair of accursed souls ; for any hope were a refreshment and a drop of water, which would help to allay those flames, which as they burn intolerably, so they must burn forever.” Sermon on the Foolish Exchange. Jeremy Taylor.
“Think now, O sinner, what shall be thy reward when thou shalt meet thy Judge? How shall the adulterer satisfy lust when he lies on a bed of flames? The swearer shall have enough of wounds and blood when the devil shall torture his body and rack his soul in hell. The drunkard shall have plenty of his cups when scalding lead shall be poured down his throat, _and his breath draw flames of lire instead of air Oh! What a bed is this! no feathers, but fire; no friends but furies; no ease but fetters; no daylight but darkness; no clocks to pass the time away, but endless eternity; fire eternal always burning, and never dying. Oh! who can endure everlasting flame? It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up forever and ever. The wicked shall he crowded, together like bricks in a fiery furnace. What woes and lamentations shall be uttered when devils and reprobates and, all the damned crew shall be driven into hell never to return! Down they go, howling, shrieking, and gnashing their teeth. What wailing, weeping, roaring, yelling, fining both heaven, earth and hell!” Sermon on the Judgment. Ebenezer Erskine.
“I believe that Jesus Christ taught eternal torment. I do not accept it on his authority. — When the stiffened body goes down to the tomb, sad, silent, remorseless — I feel there is no death for the man. That clod which yonder dust shall cover, is not my brother. The dust goes to its place, man to his own. It is then, I feel immortality. I look through the grave into heaven. I ask no miracle, no proof, no reasoning for me. I ask no risen dust to teach me Immortality. I am conscious of Eternal Life!” Theodore Parker.
“Death is not an end, but a transition crisis, all the forms of decay are but the marks of regeneration — the secret alembics of vitality.” Chapin.
“All great men find eternity affirmed in the very promise of their faculties.” Emerson.
“The day of our decease will be that of our coming of age; and with our latest breath we shall become free of the universe. And in some region of infinity, and among its splendours this earth will be looked back on like a lowly home, and this life of ours be remembered like a short apprenticeship to duty.” MOUNTFORD.
“A man cannot doubt but that there is a God; and that according as he demeans himself toward Him, He will make him happy or miserable forever.” Tillotson.
“Without a belief in personal immortality, religion surely is like an arch resting on one pillar, like a bridge ending in an abyss.” Max Muller.
“The stars shall fade away; the sun himself Grows dim with age, and Nature sinks in years; But thou shalt flourish in immortal youth, Unhurt amidst the war of elements, The wreck of matter, and the crash of worlds,” Cato. Addison.
“One short sleep past, we wake eternally; And death shall be no more; death thou shalt die.” Donne.
“Ah, the souls of those that die Are but sunbeams lifted higher.” Longfellow.
“The soul of man alone, that particle divine. Escapes the wreck of worlds, when all things fail.” SOMERVILLE. “If then all souls, both good and bad, do teach With general voice that souls can never die, it is not man’s
flattering gloss, but Nature’s speech, Which like God’s Oracles can never lie.” Sir J. Davies,
“The soul on earth is an immortal guest.
Compelled to starve at an unreal feast;
A spark, which upward tends by Nature’s force;
A stream diverted from its parent source;
A drop dissevered from the boundless sea;
A moment parted from eternity;
A pilgrim panting for the rest to come;
An exile anxious for his native home.”
Hannah Moore.
“The more we sink into the infirmities of age, the nearer we are to immortal youth. All people are young in the other world. That state is an eternal spring, ever fresh and ever flourishing. Now to pass from midnight into noon on the sudden; to be decrepit one minute, and all spirit and activity the next, must be a desirable change. To call this dying is an abuse of language.” Jeremy Collier.
“Not all the subtleties of metaphysics can make me doubt a moment of the Immortality of Soul, and of a beneficent Providence. I feel it, I believe it. I desire it. I hope it, and will defend it to my latest breath.” Rosseau.
“I am fully convinced that the soul is indestructible, and that its activity will continue through eternity. It is like the sun, which to our eye, seems to set in night, but it has in reality gone to diffuse its light elsewhere.” Goethe.
“Is death the last sleep? No, it is the last final awakening.” Walter Scott. “It is not I who die, when I die; but my sin and misery.” Gotthold.
“What is human is Immortal.” Bulwer Lytton.
“It is an unspeakably terrible thing for any one to be lost. Even to those who suffer least, it is not only the loss of all, and a horrible lake of ever-burning fire; but there are horrible objects filling every sense, and horrible engines and instruments of torture. Nor is this all. Unmortified appetites, hungry as death, insatiable as the grave, are so many springs of excruciating and ever increasing agonies, so many hot and stifling winds, tossing the swooning soul on waves of fire. And there will be terrible companions; and every one utterly selfish, malignant, fierce and devilish. There will be terrible sights and sounds. Fathers and sons, pastors and people, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, with swollen veins and bloodshot eyes, straining toward each other’s throats and hearts. Upon such an assembly, God, who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, cannot look but with utter detestation. His face shall be red in His anger. His eyes shall not pity, nor shall His soul spare for their crying. The day of vengeance is in His heart. It is what His heart is set upon. He will delight in it. He will tread that rebel crew in His anger, and trample them in His fury, and will stain His raiment with their blood. The cup of the wine of His fierce wrath shall contain no mixture of mercy. All this, and more and worse do the Scriptures declare; and that preacher who hesitates to proclaim it has forsworn his soul, and is a traitor to his trust. And all this shall be forever. It shall never, never end.
The wicked go away into everlasting torment. If after enduring it all for twice ten thousand times ten thousand years, they might have a deliverance, or, at least, some abatement, it were less terrible. But this may never, never be. There is a great gulf fixed, and they cannot pass from thence. Or if after suffering all this as many years as there are sand grains in the globe, they might then be delivered, there would be some hope. Or, if you multiply this sum, too infinite to be expressed by figures, and too limitless to be comprehended by angels — by the number of atoms that compose the universe, and there might be deliverance when they had passed those abysmal gulfs of duration, then there would be some hope. But no I When all is suffered, and all is past, still all beyond is Eternity.” Sermon by Reverend William Davidson.
“When thou dies, thy soul will be tormented alone; that will be a hell for it; but at the day of judgment thy body will join thy soul, and then thou wilt have twin hells, thy soul sweating drops of blood, and thy body suffused with agony. In fire exactly like that which we have on earth, thy body will lie, asbestos-like, forever unconsumed, all thy veins roads for the feet of pain to travel on, every nerve a string on which the devil shall forever play his diabolical tune of Hell’s Unutterable Lament.” Sermon, Resurrection of the Dead, Spurgeon.
“His soul is in hell, O ye children of men I While ye thus speak, his soul is in the beginning of those torments in which his body will soon have part, and which will never die.” Sermon, Neglect of Divine Calls. J. Henry Newman.
“Hell — burning high
And guarded evermore by Justice turned
To Wrath, that hears unmoved, the endless groans
Of those wasting within; and sees unmoved
The endless tear of vain repentance fall.” Course of Time, Book 10, Pollock.
“The evil portion shall be continual without intermission of evil, no days of rest, no nights of sleep, no ease from labour, no periods of the stroke, nor taking off the hand, no intervals between blow and blow; but a continued stroke, which neither shortens the life, nor introduces a brawny patience, or the toleration of an ox, but is the same in every instant, and great as the first stroke of lightning; the smart is as great forever as at the first change, from the rest of the grave to the flames of that horrible burning. And yet this is not the worst of it; for as it is continual during its abode, so its abode is forever; it is continual and eternal.” Sermon, 2 Corinthians 5:10, Jeremy Taylor.
“Their cursing are their hymns, howling their tunes, and blasphemies their ditties.” Christopher Love. “Immortality I This is the crowning jrift of the human soul, the most distinguishing glory of its nature. It imparts
to it a value which no language can express, no figures compute. The spark of intelligence which you bear about in your bosom, which kindles in that eye, glows in that countenance, and by those lips gives utterance to its thoughts and emotions, is to survive the waste of time, — its mysterious lights will blaze on high when suns and stars shall have ceased to shine, — it will look down from its throne of immortality upon the tomb of worlds.” Christian Doctrine. Hubbard Winslow.
“Birth into this life was the death of the embryo life that preceded it, and the death of this, will be the birth into some new mode of being.” Reverend Dr. Hedge.
“Death gives us sleep, eternal youth and Immortality.” RITCHER.
“There is no finite life except unto death; no death, except unto higher life.” Bunsen. “Death supplies the oil for the inextinguishable lamp of life.” Coleridge.
“There is no death; what seems so is transition; This life of mortal breath
Is but a suburb of the life Elysian, Whose portal we call Death.” Longfellow.
“The soul immortal as its sire, shall never die.” Montgomery.
“I feel my Immortality over sweep all pains, all tears, all time, all fears — and peal like the eternal thunders of the deep into my ears the truth — Thou lives forever.” Byron.
“We do not believe immortality because we have proved it; but we forever try to prove it, because we believe it.” James Martineau.
“I have been pastor of the same Church thirty-five years. During all this period I have said to my Church that according to the teachings of Christ, revealed in the Four Gospels:
1. There are two conditions of existence in another life.
2. One of them is a conscious state of unutterable joy; and this state is endless.
3. The other condition is a state of unutterable suffering; and this state is endless.
4. There is as much reason to doubt the state of unutterable and endless joy as there is to doubt the state of unutterable and endless suffering.
5. The design of Christ in the work of redemption is to recover those who are fearfully exposed to a state of unutterable and endless suffering, and to secure to them a state of unutterable joy.
6. The state of unutterable and endless joy in the untried future will be entirely the result of a certain manner of living on earth.
7. The state of unutterable and endless suffering in the untried future will be entirely the result of a certain manner of living on earth.
8. The present life is of God the only state of probation, and the destiny of each person is then forever fixed of him.
Now, have I during my ministry of thirty-five years uttered the same doctrines which Christ uttered or have I all this period been bewildered in a doctrinal muddle? If all this while I have been teaching erroneous doctrines, I certainly would thank some person, greatly enlightened by the Holy Spirit into the Mysteries of Godliness to reveal to me my mistake.” Christian Mirror, Portland, Maine, May 3, 1884. D. Garland, Congregational Minister.
“The common conception of death is a great illusion. Indeed it ought not to require any very profound religious faith, but a nimble effort of good sense rather, to teach a believer in immortality that death is not what it seems to be. The tyrant always wears a mask. The inherited notion of it, which has come down to us through ages of horror, and which still lives in some of our funereal usages, is a hideous fiction. We speak but a truism in saying that death never throttles the real man. It is one of the commonplaces which still are immense in meaning that that which thinks and feels and loves and hopes and joys death has no more to do with than it has with God. Look at an Egyptian mummy: is that a man? Yet it is all that death has to boast of. Why is it not more real to us that, to the thought of God, no man ever dies? To His mind there is no death-bed, no dying struggle, no glazing eye, no grave.
These, as we think of them, are but illusions of human sense. The real man, once alive, lives on forever. That thing which we weep over and enrobe tenderly for the burial, and follow reverently to the grave, and there, with prayer and dirge, cover from our eyes, is not the man — the real being loved and lost. He is still what he was the last time we parted with him, and bade him goodbye. He has only passed out of our sight for a little. Dying is a transition to an improved state of being. All nature teaches this. Decay is but the process to new and better life.
— The Congregationalist, July 31, 1884. “The Christian Idea of Death.” Professor Austin Phelps, d.d., Andover.
[The language of the article throughout asserts, not merely the immortality of Christians as their peculiar inheritance, but universal Immortality, without regard to character, and very strongly favours, and, indeed, seems to teach, universal salvation.] J. H. P.
HUMAN IMMORTALITY
THE TRADITIONAL BELIEF STATED
BY ONE OF ITS MOST ESTIMABLE AND ABLE DEFENDERS, IN A FRIENDLY LETTER TO THE AUTHOR OF THE UNSPEAKABLE GIFT
WITH THE AUTHOR’S REPLY.
President’s Room, College,
August 14th, 1884.
My Dear Mr. Pettingell:
The book came duly to hand, and I have used some of my vacation leisure to give it a full and careful reading. Its style seems to me quite admirable, clear, strong and often beautiful. The treatment of the theme shows the fruit of long and devoted study, in one line, bending everything to the support of a peculiar doctrine, and it makes out quite a plausible case: yet it does not seem to me sound reasoning. You speak of the bias of prejudice in favour of long cherished opinions. As I read, I think I see the bias of a fondly cherished hobby.
I cannot undertake to review the book or to go into the discussion of the question. Enough to say now that we are agreed in regarding Eternal Life as the gift of God through Jesus Christ. But what is Eternal Life? As I read my Bible, it is simply the restoration of a soul lost, already dead in sin through the subjection of the spiritual and immortal part of our nature to the material, sensual and mortal part. Human consciousness and the Bible everywhere recognize the distinction between the physical and spiritual man, and assume as a fact that the soul inbreathed as an emanation from the eternal and infinite Spirit can never die. The great question of our probation here turns upon restoring the Spirit to its due ascendency over the conduct of the life here. The Eternal Life with them who are Christ’s is begun here, in the quickening of all gracious spiritual affections, and our appeal to men is to open their souls to the Life-giving influences of the Gospel, and the terrors of the world to come are brought in to enforce that appeal.
Your view does not, to my mind, relieve at all the dark, mysterious problem of evil and suffering in a world created and administered by a benevolent God. The mystery I cannot fathom. The Gospel shows the heart of God set for its relief and this is its glory. May we both know, now and hereafter, the fullness of its power.
Most sincerely yours,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, August 20, 1884.
Reverend Dr. President of College.
My Dear Christian Brother: I thank you for your favour of the 14th instance, and highly appreciate the kind spirit which characterizes it. I am thankful that you have taken the trouble to give my book “a full and careful reading,” especially as it is not in harmony with your own views of truth. What you say of its style as “quite admirable, clear, strong and of ten beautiful,” and of my treatment of the theme as showing “the fruit of long and devoted study in one line,” etc., I am quite willing to accept as sincerely said, and as an evidence of your good judgment, which I have never had occasion to doubt; for this seems to be the unanimous opinion of others, as I am happy to know, who have written me in regard to it. I could only wish you had also agreed with them in considering the argument as not merely “very plausible,” but as actually sound and conclusive. But this was more than I had dared to hope. For I can readily see how difficult, yea almost impossible it is for any man of your religious training from infancy, and of your habits of thought, and of your high standing in the religious and literary world, and especially, at your time of life, to admit or even to perceive the full force of any argument, however clear and strong it may be, that is levelled against his own “long cherished opinions” and life-long teaching.
The “bias” that comes from early religious education, thoroughly established mental processes, and public committal as a theological teacher, to say nothing of the insidious power of the great Deceiver against which the Scriptures so often warn us, is altogether too strong for poor human nature to resist and overcome without Divine aid. I verily believe as one of my correspondents writes that nothing but the power of God’s Holy Spirit can avail, to break the spell which Satan has wrought upon the minds of men, and to open their eyes to the truth in respect to the mortal nature of sinful man, and the necessity of a second birth from above, and a resurrection from the dead through Jesus Christ, in order to Eternal Life. The popular philosophy of both the heathen and the Christian world, the pride of man, and the traditions of the so-called Christian Church, from the Third Century till now are more directly opposed to the teaching of God’s Word on this point, than to any other doctrine of the Scriptures. But there is no one doctrine more positively, emphatically, clearly and uniformly taught throughout the whole Bible, and especially by Christ and His immediate followers, than this one cardinal truth, that death, actual death and destruction is the final end of sin, and that Eternal Life is given only through Jesus Christ by a new, supernatural birth and a resurrection from the dead.
I will not deny that I am under a “bias” toward this doctrine, but you must allow that it is in spite of the influence of early religious training, professional education, habits of thought, and of opinions once fondly cherished, and the public advocacy of them. It is a new “bias” that has come from a diligent, patient, prayerful study of God’s Word under the guidance of His gracious Spirit, as I trust, with a single desire to know what it really teaches on this question, and with a determination to accept of it however contrary it may be found to be to the popular philosophy of the schools, or the traditions of a corrupt church, or my early prejudices or the suggestions of selfish interest. If it be a “hobby fondly cherished,” it is such a hobby as the Apostle Paul confessed to when he said, “I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and nim Crucified,” Christ the only hope of Eternal Life for dying men.
Of course, you could not, as you say, go into any formal discussion of this question in your brief and friendly note; but I could very much wish that you, or some one of the many Christian scholars who hold with you, could be persuaded to take the trouble to discuss it, and to give us your reasons for rejecting the oft repeated declarations of Scripture, that death is the penalty of sin, and that Eternal Life is given only through Jesus Christ the Saviour, and for your acceptance of the opposite philosophy of the heathen world, which denies all this, and asserts that immortality is the natural and inalienable inheritance of all men, whether sinful or holy, and that all the children of Adam are destined to an Eternal Life of blessedness or of misery. For I have never yet seen any argument to establish this doctrine, apart from the authority of this Anti-Christian philosophy and the traditions of a sophisticated Church that had the merit of being even “plausible.”
Still I thank you for so kindly giving me, in brief, your view of the case. You cannot but agree with me, you say, “in regarding Eternal Life as the gift of God through Jesus Christ.”
Of course you must, for this cardinal truth is too conspicuously displayed everywhere on the surface of the Scriptures to admit of any direct denial by any one who pretends to receive them as the Word of God. But you do not agree with me in believing that “Eternal Life” means Eternal Life; for this would completely upset your philosophy as regards the deathless nature of man; and so you accept of a new, ethical, so-called religious sense, which this philosophy has taught you to put upon these plain crucial words, which acknowledges them to the ear but denies them to the understanding. And this you have agreed to call without any authority whatever, either from the Great Teacher himself or from the common classical usage of His day, the Biblical-sense of these words.
“What is Eternal Life?” you ask. In truth, what is it but Eternal Life? A life without end, the life which Christ claims as His own peculiar life, and which He promises to all who become united to God through Himself; a new life, inaugurated by the Holy Spirit, the zoe aionios, the endless life, in contra-distinction from the psuch life that is perishable and hastening to its end; an immortal life of blessedness and joy in His everlasting kingdom. Why should our Lord and His inspired disciples make such repeated and constant use of this most emphatic expression “Eternal Life” if nothing more were meant than a change of character, or condition, or circumstance in a life which is eternal in itself whatever its character, condition or circumstance? Why should you or any other Christian man consent to eliminate from this most clear and definite expression, Eternal Life of Scripture, its main vital element and accept of nothing but the shell, as the sum of this precious, glorious promise of your Saviour? What authority have you but that of the great Deceiver himself and of the heathen philosopher who came so early into the Christian Church to corrupt its simplicity, and the tradition of the Church so corrupted, for robbing Christ of His chief crown of glory as the Prince of Life and the Giver of Eternal Life to His peculiar people by redemption, and for placing it upon your own head as a child of Adam and upon the heads of all his sinful posterity?
“Beware,” says the Apostle Paul, referring as I believe to this very matter, “lest any man spoil (make spoil of) you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world and not after Christ.”
“I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve, through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.”
Were you born to an estate that had been mortgaged to its fullest value and beyond, or to one that had been utterly squandered by your own folly, and were your house and home about to be sold over your head; and were some kind friend, at his own expense, to pay all your indebtedness and redeem it for you; and beside all this, were he to rebuild and refurnish the old homestead in greater beauty and permanence than before, and freely give it all back to you, it would be but a poor and meagre acknowledgment of your obligations to thank him only for the improvements he had made on the property, but as for the homestead itself, to insist that it rightfully belonged to you by natural inheritance and had never been forfeited. Yet this is all the meed of honour you would ascribe to that infinite Friend, who, by the sacrifice of Himself, has redeemed your life from destruction and now offers you in its stead a new, better, purer, more blessed life, a deathless life like His own, as a gift of free grace. You cheerfully, gratefully acknowledge your obligations for the improvements He has made in your life and its surroundings; but as for the life itself, it had never been forfeited; it was your own by the indefeasible right of inheritance!
That cunning, crafty old enemy of God and man would fain have us believe that we are not in any true sense whatever redeemed from death by the blood of Christ; that no atoning Saviour was needed; but only a holy example and that we save ourselves or rather make ourselves eternally blessed by walking in His footsteps. And this is all the indebtedness which many who call themselves Christians are willing to acknowledge. But failing in this, he would reduce our sense of obligation to its minimum, or substitute for the real Gospel “another Gospel which is not another,” which construes His declarations, “I am the Resurrection and the Life,” “I give unto them Eternal Life,” as meaning, not what they express, but only that He saves men from eternal sin and misery, a great salvation indeed, but not the great salvation of the Gospel. By this adroit change he prepares the way for the scepticism and infidelity that follow close in the track of such an emasculated Gospel.
For thinking men will not believe, they ought not to believe, that a just and holy God will perpetuate the lives of the unsaved, in a state of hopeless, helpless sin and wretchedness without end. Revolting in horror from the infinite cruelty which the advocates of this pseudo gospel charge upon their Heavenly Father and assert is threatened in the Scriptures, they will either question the sincerity and trustworthiness of His Word, or else believing that the Scriptures really teach what its professed expounders declare, they will reject both the Bible and the God of the Bible as unworthy of their confidence and love; or else they will endeavour to relieve their burdened hearts and encourage their waning faith by some fanciful scheme of a post mortem probation, or of purgatorial atonement that will recover all sinners at last from so dreadful a doom. In any case, “the Word of God is made of none effect through their tradition,” and the glorious Gospel of the blessed God which is “the wisdom of God and the power of God to every one that believeth,” becomes as “an idle tale” with little or no power to awaken either the fears or the hopes of perishing men.
I could agree with you in what you say of “the restoration of a lost soul, already dead in [through] sin,” if you really meant what the words express; for the Scriptures describe sinners as “lost” and judicially “dead” through sin, and as hastening down to actual death and destruction. But by “death” you no more mean Dead than by “life” you mean actual Life. The philosophy of the deathless nature of man that required you to change the meaning of the one term, requires the same of its correlative. You can give no more reason or authority for the change in the one case than in the other. The exigencies of your false position require you to use these two simple, obvious terms, when predicated of man or the soul of man, which is the same thing in a sense quite different from what they have when predicated of anything else that has life. You mean by it a state of sin and alienation from God, for you go on to say that it is “the immortal part of our nature “and that “it can never die.”
Here, without seeming to be aware of it, you employ the words “dead” and “die” in two opposite senses, in reference to the very same thing. You say the soul is “dead” and then again “it can never die.” In the first instance you employ it in what you are pleased to regard as its religious or Biblical sense: in the latter, in its ordinary and natural sense. What then, let me ask you, do you understand by the Second death, the penal death that is to be inflicted upon the impenitent after the first death and their resurrection to judgment? What do the prophets and apostles mean when, warning sinners of this death, they say “why will ye die?” “If ye live after the flesh ye shall die.” “Sin when it is finished brings forth death,” etc. They cannot mean the first or the Adamic death, for no one can escape this. They cannot mean that state of sin and alienation from God which is the present state of all natural men which you call death, for they refer to something yet to come; and beside this, it is to be inflicted upon them hereafter as a penalty for sin, and God surely does not inflict sin and alienation upon men. It cannot mean, according to your view, actual death, for you say “the soul can never die.” Hence, in order to maintain an apparent agreement with the Scriptures, your scholastic theology has been obliged to invent still another meaning to this word death; and so there are three so-called Biblical or religious senses in which we must understand it.
Thus, “(1) Death signifies the separation of the soul from the body: This is temporal death. (2) A separation of soul and body from God’s favour in this life, which is the state of all un-renewed persons who are without the light of knowledge and the quickening power of grace: This is Spiritual death. (3) The perpetual separation of the whole man from God’s heavenly presence and glory, to be tormented forever with the devil and his angels: This is the Second or Eternal death.” (Cruden’s Concordance.) Here we have differentiated for us three distinct meanings of the Scriptural word “death” not one of which includes its actual meaning, to enable us to circumvent the plain, positive teaching of Scripture, “The soul that sins it shall die.” No wonder the common people of the present day have come to feel their need of notes, commentaries and expositions of learned theologians to tell them what even the plainest language of Scripture means, and what it does not mean, in any given case. So the Jews in the time of Christ, depending more upon the Talmudic Targums, the explanations and explications of their Scriptures prepared for them by their Rabbis and learned doctors, whose minds had already been corrupted by this same Platonic philosophy, than upon the plain, literal sense of the Word, were persuaded to reject the Saviour as their only hope of Eternal Life, and to claim it as their natural inheritance. But our Lord said to them as He does to the present generation of deluded religionists, “Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have Eternal Life (assured to you) but they are they that testify of me,” of me as its only true Source, and “ye will not come unto me that ye might have Life.” “This people honours me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; In vain do they worship me, teaching for their doctrines the precepts of men.”
You say that “Human consciousness and the Bible assume as a fact that the soul can never die.” Here you employ the word “die” in still another a fourth sense its only true and natural sense and now I can understand what you mean; but I cannot agree with you. By “human consciousness” you intended to say no doubt or should have said, human desire or human hope; for I need not tell an acute dialectician like yourself that consciousness does not know anything about the future. It cannot tell us either what is yet to be, or what is not to be. But I agree with you in holding that there is a natural sentiment in man implanted by God for wise purposes that makes him shrink at the thought of extinction and long for the perpetuity of life. But it is not because this perpetuity is already assured to him, but is an evidence rather to the contrary. But it is an evidence of God’s gracious purposes concerning man, of His willingness to give him the immortality he desires if he can only be fitted to possess and enjoy it, that it may be attained if he only knew how to secure it. It is this that makes the Gospel a message of “good tidings” to men who are perishing through sin. It tells them how they may escape from its power and its penalty which is death, and attain to the Eternal Life which they desire. But when you tell sinners that their immortality is already assured, and that they are going down not to certain death and destruction, but to an Eternal Life of wretchedness and woe inconceivable, you may bring in your factitious, human-contrived “terrors of the world to come to enforce your appeal,” they will quite readily accept your assurance of immortality, for this agrees with their desires and hopes, and the suggestions of Satan who was a liar from the beginning, but as for “ the terrors of the world to come,” you have made them too revolting, too fiendish, too incredible to be believed in by intelligent, thinking men who have any true conception of a just God, and they will reject both the appeal and the Gospel you are trying to enforce.
Righteous men grieve over the wide-spreading indifferentism, scepticism and infidelity of the present day and are anxiously inquiring after the cause, as well they may. But the cause is not far to seek For, says the prophet of the Lord, “With lies ye have made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hands of the wicked that he should not return from his wicked way by promising him life.”
“Human consciousness and the Bible,” you say, “assume that the soul can never die.” How dare you say this when the Bible from beginning to end asserts just the contrary doctrine, if you would only allow it to speak for itself! How do you know the Bible assumes any such doctrine? Who authorizes you to say so? Surely not Jehovah himself; for He said in the beginning, “Thou shalt surely die,” thou not thy body but thou thyself which must mean the conscious sinning man himself, if it mean anything: Not Moses, for he said to the sinning Israelites, “Ye shall utterly perish”: Not Job, for he says, “The candle of the wicked shall be put out”: Not David, for he says, “ For yet a little while and the wicked shall not be”; Not Solomon, for he says, “ He that being often reproved, hardens his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy .” Not one of the prophets, for they all agree in saying, “The soul that sins, it shall die”; “The day cometh that shall burn them up, that it shall leave neither root nor branch”; “They shall be as though they had not been”; etc., etc.: Not John Baptist, for he says the wicked are as the chaff which “shall be burned up with unquenchable fire.”
Not Christ Himself, for He says, “ I give unto them Eternal Life “; “If ye believe not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins”: Not Peter, for he says that the wicked, “As natural brute beasts shall perish in their own corruption”: Not Paul, for he says, “ Their end is destruction ‘ Not James, for ho says, “ Sin, when it is finished, brings forth death: Not John, for he says, “He that believeth not God hath made him a liar, because he believeth not the record that God gave of His Son: and this is the record, that God hath given to us Eternal Life, and this life is in His Son. He that hath the Son hath the Life, and he that hath not the Son hath not the Life.” Nowhere in all these Divine Oracles can you find any such record, but in the recorded words of the great Deceiver. He boldly declares, “Ye shall not surely die.” The heathen philosophers took up this saying and called it the dictate of reason, and the so-called Church of Christ in the days of her waning purity adopted it into her creed and endeavoured to construe the Scriptures into agreement with it, and it has been handed down through ages of darkness and corruption till now, as one of the fundamental truths of God’s Word that “the soul can never die.”
It is too bad, too bad that the appointed heralds of the Gospel should take their message from such a source, and ascribe it to the Divine Master Himself, saying, “Thus saith the Lord” “the soul can never die,” when it is not the Lord, but the Great Adversary, who says so. “How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? Yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart.” “Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that use their tongues, and say, He saith.” “He that hath a dream” and this is nothing but a dream, a delusion “let him tell a dream and tell it as a dream, and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully.” “Son of Man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore hear the word at his mouth and give them warning from me. When I say unto the wicked, Thou shall surely die, and thou gives them not warning, nor speaks to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life [not to save his soul from eternal misery but his Life], the same wicked man shall die [not is dead but shall die not be miserable forever but] shall die in his iniquity. But his blood will I require at thine hand.” Beware lest you incur this fearful malediction upon false teachers. I know you think you are uttering the truth and are doing God service when you teach this specious, delusive, popular philosophy. But it is only because you have been so thoroughly educated into it from your infancy that it has become a part of your mental furniture.
I know the difficulty of breaking loose from such bonds. But no intelligent man at the present day who is capable of studying God’s Word and of thinking for himself is excusable for clinging any longer to this fiction of the deceiver, this assumption of a heathen philosophy, this tradition of a corrupt Church, which is doing more to perplex the minds of sincere believers, to obscure the glory of Christ, to hinder the progress of the Gospel, and to asperse the character of our Heavenly Father, and to aid and abet sceptics, infidels and opposers of every sort, in their opposition to the Bible, which is supposed to teach it, and to God the Author of the Bible, than all other errors combined. It is full time that our religious teachers, who have the interests of Christ’s kingdom really at heart, as I know that you have, were willing to search the Scriptures on this vital question, and to take their instructions from the Master Himself.
I notice that you fail to make any real distinction between soul and spirit. You use these words as almost, if not quite synonymous. This is true of all who belong to your school generally. Our popular dictionaries define soul and spirit in nearly the same terms. But “as I read my Bible,” they are quite distinct and are never used interchangeably.
I am sorry not to be able to return the compliment you pay me of “showing the fruit of long and devoted study in one line,” etc. Your scholarship in other lines is indeed conspicuous. But if you had given a larger share of your attention not to the teachings of the Scriptures in accordance with the popular systems of philosophy and metaphysics, but to the Scriptures themselves, in the original languages on this question, you would certainly have agreed with me in perceiving that the terms nephesh and ruach, in the Hebrew signifying soul and spirit, and their synonyms psuche and pneuma in the Greek are quite distinct from each other, and are no more to be confounded or to be taken for each other than the effect is for the cause. It was not the soul that was “inbreathed,” as you say, “into man,” but the spirit, and as a consequence or the effect of this inbreathing man “became a living soul”: and when this life-giving spirit is taken away, man becomes “a dead soul.” So say the Scriptures. “Thou sends forth thy Spirit (ruach) I they are created; thou takes away their breath (the same word, ruach); they die and return to the dust.” Psalm 104.
This word nephesh (Heb.) or psuche (Greek), signifying soul, is very capriciously rendered in our common English version of the Scriptures. It is very often translated “life,” and less frequently into other terms. But however translated it always stands for that which is perishable and transitory. It is never spoken of as permanent and indestructible; no adjective signifying permanence is ever joined with it. Another word, zoe, is employed to designate the Life that is everlasting, and the adjective aionios is coupled with it, and this in scores of instances.
But the psuche life, the soul-life is never in one single instance characterized as aionios or eternal. The same is true of nephesh in the Hebrew Scriptures, but as Life and immortality are more clearly brought to light in the Gospel, we direct our special attention to the Greek words. The psuche life is the natural life of man; but the zoe life is the life that is given in the new birth. It is the Divine Life that is given from above, and is the peculiar life of God Himself and of His people. It is inparted to them by a special act of His grace. I do not say that this word zoe may not be used in a lower sense; indeed it is so used sometimes, though rarely in the Scriptures, but I do say that whenever the higher life, which is the gift of God through Jesus Christ is spoken of, the life that is declared in so many instances to be Eternal, the word psuche is never used, but the word zoe always. Hence these two kinds of life are constantly brought to our notice in the Scriptures, the psuche or soul-life, which we all receive in our first or natural birth, and which is always and everywhere declared to be perishable and transient, and the zoe life that we receive in our second or super-natural birth, which is always and everywhere declared to be imperishable and eternal. This would be apparent to the commonest reader were it not for the fact that the old translators have dealt so capriciously with this word pnuche sometimes rendering it “soul” and sometimes “life,” and then making no distinction between the psuche life and the zoe life. But a Greek scholar like yourself, and a teacher of theology cannot be excused for ignoring or confounding this vital distinction.
For example: the Scriptures say “Take no thought for your life.” “He that loves his life shall lose it.” “The good shepherd gives his life for the sheep.” “Neither count I my life dear unto myself,” etc. In all these and a multitude of other cases the word psuche is used, and it is the natural life or the Boul-life that is referred to.
Again they say, “What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul, or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee.” “He that converts a sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death.” Here, too, precisely the same word psuche is used in the original, and the reference is to the natural or soul-life.
But again we read, “Strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leads to life, and few there be that find it.” “I am the resurrection and the life.” “Ye will not come unto me that ye might have life.” “He that believeth not the Son shall not see life.” “Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that hears my word and believeth on Him that sent me, hath everlasting life and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death unto life.” Here it is the higher life an entirely different kind of life, that is spoken of; it is not the psuche life, but the zoe life that is meant, and the word zoe and not psuche is used. I might cite one hundred and fifty passages of similar import, and in more than sixty of these instances the adjective aionios, eternal or everlasting, is coupled with it.
This capricious, vacillating, rendering of the word psuche as sometimes “soul” and sometimes “life,” and the rendering of this other word zoe as “life” also, with nothing to distinguish these two sorts of life from each other, as they are distinguished in the Latin by the words anima and vita, and in other languages, has tended greatly to contuse the unlettered English reader, and to perpetuate this false notion that the psuchical and spiritual lives of men are alike indestructible and eternal. The old translators, no doubt, believed this themselves, and they have done much, alas, in this and in other ways, to fasten it upon the Scriptures. Our revisers have, indeed, corrected some of these grosser renderings, and done something, for which we are duly thankful, but not what they might have done, nor ought to have done, and probably would have done had it not been for their ultra conservatism, to bring out clearly the true doctrine of the Scriptures on this question.
But a Greek scholar and a master in Israel, like yourself, has no good excuse for overlooking these radical distinctions much less for ignoring them when noticed.
It will not do to say, as some do, that this phrase aionios zoe is an ethical expression meaning simply eternal happiness; for while the term zoe is always used when a life of eternal happiness is spoken of, yet it may be, and sometimes is, used in the Scriptures to designate the lower life, a life without any regard to its character and conditions, and needs a qualifying adjective to characterize it, and it is often found in such connections that it would make nonsense to translate it merely as an ethical word meaning purity or happiness. Christ is called the “Prince of Life,” “The Way, the Truth and the Life”; “In Him was Life and the Life was the Light of men”; “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, ye have no Life in you”; “Being reconciled we shall be saved by His Life”; “Even so, we also should walk in newness of Life,” etc. In all these passages, and in numerous others, the word zoe is used, and it would be folly to understand it as meaning simply purity or happiness.
Still further it is used antithetically with thanatos, death, and this very often in the Scriptures. You can hardly have failed to observe that the apostle Paul, whenever he speaks of the aionios zoe, the Life Everlasting, almost invariably puts it in contrast with thanatos, death. The contrast is not death and happiness, but Death and Life as Life Eternal. A life of purity and blessedness, it is true; for no other life is fit to be perpetuated or can endure forever.
Here let me call your special attention to the fact that neither the word aionios nor any other word signifying eternal is ever joined with thanatos in the Scriptures. The phrase “eternal death,” which is so common in the religious literature of the present day, and which our theologians so constantly put in opposition with the eternal life of the Scriptures, is entirely unknown to the Word of God; for the good reason that death is a finality of itself, and not a state of existence like life. Had not the whole mortal race of Adam been redeemed from the Adamic death, by Christ, this death would have been the final end of all men, but because of this redemption, there is a second death for all who do not accept of the salvation to Eternal Life which He offers from which there is no recovery.
This is the death which is everywhere put in opposition with the Life Everlasting of the Gospel. Now this phrase, “eternal death,” has been invented by the philosophers of your school to match the Scriptural phrase “Eternal Life,” to help out your theory that both the death and the life of the Scriptures are states of existence; the one a state of unending misery, and the other a state of unending happiness. And this is the reason why you would have both of these words taken in an ethical and unreal sense. But you have no authority for this in the Word of God. Dr. Bartlett has given this as the title of his well-known book, “Life and Death Eternal.” But the phrase is as misleading and anti-scriptural as is his doctrine and his argument. If the death of the Scriptures were a state of existence like the life, with this difference only, that the one is a state of Eternal misery, and the other of Eternal blessedness, no reason whatever can be given why the adjective aionios, signifying eternal, should not be joined to it as well as to life; but as it is not a state of being, but the final end of being, it would be mere tautology to apply this epithet to it. Let me ask your special attention to this usage of Scripture, for to me it is quite conclusive of my position, that there is no life of any kind, no existence whatever to the unsaved beyond the Second death.
I am sorry that you should have to say as you do, “Your view does not to my mind relieve at all the dark, mysterious problem of evil and suffering in a world created and administered by a benevolent God “; for it does relieve it greatly to my mind, and this is the uniform experience as I know, of large numbers who have embraced it. I think you cannot have duly considered it. Not a few even of those who are not yet prepared to give up the so-called “orthodox” doctrine of unending sin and misery, have confessed to me that my view would greatly relieve their minds. I have before me now, a letter, just received from one of the leading ministers of our church, who after speaking very kindly of my book, as you have done, says: “It has disturbed me more than I care to be, because the past has a very strong hold upon me, and rooted beliefs, if they die at all, die slowly Your book furnishes the means of a great relief, if I can but accept its interpretation of God’s Word. The philosophy of man is vain. God’s Word stands sure.”
No wonder you are compelled to confess that this problem of evil and suffering, as you conceive of it, is a “mystery” you “cannot fathom.” Educated in the same theological school as yourself and taught to believe that many, many, how many, it is impossible to tell, of our fellow creatures will be doomed to an existence of hopeless, unutterable misery and torment to which there will come no relief or mitigation, or end whatever: that we are all exposed to this doom by the sin of our first parents, and that a large portion of the race come into being under such circumstances as to forbid even the hope that they will escape this awful doom indeed that no one does escape but through the special grace of God which is accorded not to all but to the elect only: it did seem to me a mysterious, dreadful doctrine, and so it must to all intelligent minds, if allowed to dwell upon it at all. You know how such Christian men as Albert Barnes, John Foster and others, with whose writings you are familiar, struggled with this problem and how they confessed that they could not reconcile it with their conception of a God who is infinite in wisdom, goodness, love and power, that He should impose so dreadful a doom upon any of His creatures, that their philosophy could not throw one ray of light on this dark, dark problem of eternal evil. Nor can you nor any other man conceive of one plausible reason why the miserable, hopeless, forfeited existence of any of the creatures to whom God has given life, should be perpetuated in helpless and unending wretchedness, that does not impeach either His goodness or His power, or both. And yet you hold fast to the Scriptures as the Word of God, and you continue to love and trust Him notwithstanding the fearful aspersion of cruelty your theology throws upon His character; and you would persuade others to do this, but with such scant success that your Christian heart is pained. You cannot but know that this dogma to which you still cling, and which has not yet been able to overturn your faith, has driven multitudes into scepticism and infidelity, or into the equally pernicious and destructive error of Universalism, and is one of the chief obstacles to the reception of the Gospel of Christ by the heathen, who insist that their gods, though perhaps less powerful, are not so atrociously cruel as yours.
I cannot but think that if you could come to see as I do, that this dogma of eternal sin and misery is no part of the teaching of God’s Word, but is the deduction of a false philosophy and the fruit of Satan’s cunning his very masterpiece, to set the hearts of men against their Creator and to undermine their faith in His Word, and to weaken the power of the. Gospel: that evil, so far from being an integral part of God’s system, is but incidental and transitory, a mere episode, which had its beginning and will have its ending when it shall have subserved the purpose for which it was permitted to enter; that Christ was not only “manifested to destroy the works of the devil,” but that He will destroy them, and what are they but sin and suffering, and death? that “the heart of God is” not merely “set for the relief,” as you say, of this burden of evil under which “the whole creation groans and travails in pain until now,” but that He is fully able to accomplish that on which His heart is set, and determined to do it.
That the victory of His Son over Satan and all his hosts shall be complete; and no such partial victory as shall permit them to retain possession of one part of His otherwise glorious universe, however small it may be, where they can prolong their worthless, miserable lives in sin and suffering, cursing Him and defying His wrath, while He torments them forever; but that if the creatures of His power will not submit to His beneficent rule, nor be won by His mercy and grace, nor consent to live in harmony with the multitude of the holy, happy subjects of His Universal Kingdom, they shall not live at all, they will be utterly and forever destroyed with “an everlasting destruction,” that in the end of the world, “He shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire,” where they shall be utterly consumed like the tares in the time of harvest! Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.” “And there shall be no more sin, nor sorrow, nor death, for the former things have passed away.” If I say, you could come to my view on this question, I am sure that your Christian heart would find, as many others have found, a great relief from the burden that is now on it, and a great cloud would be rolled away from the face of your Heavenly Father, and the glorious Gospel of the blessed God would be invested with a tenfold greater beauty and power, and you would be able to offer it to your dying fellow-men, and urge it upon their acceptance with such a confidence and an assurance of its excellence as you have never yet felt.
I join with you most heartily in the prayer that “we both may now and hereafter know the fullness of its power,” and I pray also that we may so know it as to be able boldly and successfully to present it to our fellow-men as their only hope of life and immortality beyond the grave.
Most sincerely yours, J. H. Pettingell.
COMMENDATORY NOTICES.
That the first edition (of 1,000) of the Unspeakable Gift has been exhausted and a second called for within two months from the time of its first appearance may be taken as an evidence of the favour it is receiving from the public. But we subjoin as further evidence a few of the many notices that have been received.
From Reverend Edward White, London.
“I have been sitting under one of my oaks, consecrated already by the company of many worthies, reading you all the morning. What a gun shell! and how ingeniously packed with truth and gunpowder. It is the result of coming last into the field with a manual, but it is the best. If they will not hear this, neither would they be persuaded if one rose from the dead. Indeed I think our divines are in a parallel position with the Scribes and Pharisees who lived before and at the first advent.
‘Their eyes they have closed.’ But I begin to think a tone of stern rebuke alone will wake them up. It is truly wonderful how they not only shut their eyes but glue them down. Your work is most admirably done. The style is very pure and forcible. As for the chapter of contrasted parallels at the end, it is splendid. I wish it were republished in England.”
From Reverend Geo. R. Kramer.
“Such works as Hudson’s ‘Debt and Grace,’ Constable’s ‘Duration and Nature of Future Punishment,’ and J. H. Pettingell’s ‘Unspeakable Gift,’ the last named recently published by I. C. Wellcome of Yarmouth, Me., would, if received by the church, in proportion to their merits, produce what we might term, to borrow a word which expresses the revival of art, a renaissance of true theology.
“That man is essentially immortal is neither the utterance of Reason nor Revelation, but that those who are qualified for immortality will receive it is the suggestion of Reason and the promise of Revelation. All this is ably presented by Mr. Pettingell in this work. Mr. Pettingell’s book is a scholarly work, and his style is forcible. It is argumentation, yet not only so, but rhetorically energetic and incisive, and this because ho deeply feels his theme.
“This book is the work of an educated man, who, accepting the word of God as a little child, ‘has been redeemed from the vain corruptions received by tradition of his fathers.’ “
From the Christian at Work.
“Whether agreeing or disagreeing with the author’s teaching that none but the righteous will g;\in immortality, and that all others must utterly perish, this recent book will be found intensely interesting.”
From Reverend W. Leask, d.d., London, England. (In the “Rainbow?’),
“Mr. Pettingell has done well in the fidelity of his testimony to the central truth of Scriptures, Eternal Life only in Christ. He sees this as the sublime meaning of redemption, and he also sees the abounding theological confusion caused by blindness to this fact. Conscious of the responsibility, which rests upon him, he has laboured much and long, and this his last work, though not his least, is marked by a fullness of thought, and clearness of expression which the intelligent reader will know how to appreciate.”
Herald and Presbyter, Cincinnati.
“The doctrine of this work is that immortality is the gift of God through Jesus Christ, and is the portion only of believers; while the wicked, though raised at the judgment from a state of unconsciousness, will, after the judgment, be literally destroyed. The author is manifestly regarded as an authority among those of his faith in this country, and appears to have examined the question with much care, in which he displays a large amount of literary and biblical scholarship. In all other respects he holds the general system of doctrine common to evangelical Christians. He presses his views with great earnestness and undoubted sincerity. Whether his views
are accepted or not, he will not fail to command the respect of the reader.”
The Evangelical Messenger, Cleveland, quotes the notice of the Herald and Presbyter, and says:
“We adopt the above words of an orthodox cotemporary, whose views on the subject of the work are identical with those of the Evangelical Association.”
From the Philadelphia Methodist.
“The numerous publications of this author have won him a reputation as a writer, and this new work is upon a theme that requires scholarship and a disciplined mind to handle successfully. It treads a pathway which ho has already passed over in considering conditional immortality, in which he distinctively shows that eternal life is the gift of God through Jesus Christ; that none but the righteous will gain immortality; that all others must utterly perish. The author shows conclusively that It was God’s original purpose to give immortality to man, but having fallen by sin he can only be restored through Christ. We want more of the power of this ‘unspeakable gift’ to overcome sin and secure holiness.”
From the Christian Standard, Pittsburg.
“The aim of the work is to convince the reader that the unsaved will be blotted out in the future, and that a continued conscious existence, will be given only to those who are saved. He is a pleasant writer, and shows no mean ability in arranging his arguments in defence of his positions. Indeed, we know of no book in advocacy of the same views that makes a more plausible showing of that side of the question.”
From The Interior, Chicago.
“This book is an earnest, courteous, and fairly creditable endeavour to prove: that immortality does not come from Adam by natural birth, and is not, consequently, the natural endowment of every man, but that it is a supernatural endowment derived from Christ, and only by a new spiritual birth and a resurrection from the dead. The result is the doctrine that the death threatened in the Bible is not the three-fold death ordinarily accepted; nor is it any kind of life. It is destruction.”
From the Central Baptist, St Louis.
“The design of the author is to show that eternal life is the gift of God to believers, through Christ, and that none but the righteous will attain unto immortality, while all others will utterly perish. The author is a man of extensive scholarship, and argues his points forcibly and earnestly, so that the book is a good defence of his views, whatever may be the opinions of the reader.”
From the Church Union.
“Mr. Pettingell’s new book is considered one of the best books of a very excellent author.”
From the Illustrated Weekly.
“Mr. P. argues with great earnestness, evidently believing that he is upholding the cardinal truth of the gospel.”
From the Christian Statesman, Milwaukee.
“If we rightly understand this author, it is that immortality is not inherent in man, but is the gift of our Lord Jesus Christ. Whether or not we should assent to all the minutiae into which this thought might lead we cannot say, but as a practical fact, nothing is plainer to us than that it is true. There is no immortality, eternal life, without Christ. It is a duty to read such books. This book has a supplement containing a vast amount of authorities on the subject.”
Methodist Recorder, Philadelphia.
“The author of this volume is a thoughtful, scholarly and reverent writer, and the author of quite a number of volumes. His position is that eternal life is the gift of God through Jesus Christ. He holds that it was God’s original purpose to give immortality to man, and that he might have been exempt from death had he never sinned, and that it is still his purpose to immortalize him but not in sin and misery but only by a restoration to holiness. While those who believe in Christ shall become immortal, those who reject him, he holds, will lose this boon, and perish forever cease to be. The author presents his view with considerable clearness and force.”
Zion’s Herald, Boston.
“The writer is one of the ablest defenders of the doctrine of conditional, as distinguished from natural, immortality. He believes this (the immortal life) to be purely the gift of Christ, and when it is not bestowed, as not sought for in life, the second death ends an existence which is not followed by a resurrection. An immense amount of literature bearing upon the theme is gathered in this volume. The conviction and earnestness of the author as to the truth he utters are apparent on every page.”
Portland Transcript.
“That the ‘wages of sin is death’ has not for ages had a wide belief in the Christian church, as a literal fact. The constant recurrence throughout the Scriptures of the threat of death to all who do not accept the terms of life offered by this, is almost universally held to mean something quite different from the annihilation of the wicked. And yet it seems quite clear that in the early Christian church, the belief was common if not universal, that there was no immortality except for those who believed in Christ. We have before us a work by J. H. Pettingell, entitled The Unspeakable Gift, in which the argument against the natural immortality of man is set forth with great vigour and with copious reference to scriptural and other authorities. Those who wish to see how much can be said by an evangelical writer in regard to the indebtedness of our race to the Saviour for the gift of immortality, should carefully study this book.”
From Dr. A. W. Taylor.
“The book, ‘Unspeakable Gift’ is the best of anything I have ever read on the subject. It ought to be read by every minister and Bible student in the land, I am thankful it is published.”
Episcopal Methodist, Baltimore.
“While we dissent from the author’s conclusions, we admire his candour and devout spirit.”
From Prof. Slater of the Judson University, Arkansas.
“The Unspeakable Gift, fresh from the pen of our loved Bro. Pettingell, I have just enjoyed the privilege of perusing. I am thankful that so worthy a volume has been given to the people of this country, upon a theme so generally neglected and perverted. First of all it is a highly interesting and readable book. It abuses no one. It is earnest and Christian in tone. It presents Bible truth in its beauty and harmony. I know of no book that I would sooner put in the hands of an honest sceptic for winning him back to the Bible than this. May they be circulated widely.”
Pacific Mission Advocate.
“Another interesting and instructive book has just come to our table. It is entitled, ‘The Unspeakable Gift,’ written by J. H. Pettingell, a.m., late Chaplain at Antwerp, Belgium.
“The author’s name is ample assurance of its value. It is just the book to loan to all the ministers and Bible students in your town. Buy it, circulate it.”
Religious Herald.
“The author holds that the New Birth, the Resurrection from the dead, and the Life Everlasting, are not the orderly steps in any natural progress, but they are truths beyond the reach of scientific discovery. There is no law of nature that can explain, or approve or disapprove them. They are specially and divinely revealed to our faith, and are to be received because they are revealed, and as they are revealed, if at all. He holds that the idea of the future, for the purpose of rewards and punishments is quite different from that of an endless existence hereafter. That the idea of a second life does not exclude that of a second death and final extinction of being. That the Word of God evidently points to a future, even for the wicked; but it is a future that is terminated by death, from which there is no recall.
“The author of the introduction, chairman of the London Association of Congregational ministers, zealously maintains the same opinions and claims that he could fill pages with the record of the many centres where the doctrine of Life only in Christ has rooted itself.”
From an Eminent Congregational Minister.
“I regard it as a very effective presentation of Conditional Immortality and shall be disappointed if you do not hear more from it than from its predecessors, considerable as has been their success. In clearness and strength of statement, in cogency of reasoning and clear cut rejoinder, in systematized arrangement and condensation of treatment and matter the work has real power that must make itself felt. It has disturbed me more than I care to be, because the past has a very strong hold upon me, and rooted beliefs, if they die at all, die slowly. I cannot accept the eschatology of the ‘Old School,’ nor do I see the ‘Eternal Hope’ as brightly as Farrar in his fervent pages. Your book furnishes the means of a great relief if I can but accept its interpretation of God’s Word. The philosophy of man is vain, God’s Word stands fast.
“The beauty and tenderness of your Preface breathes of the still waters and the green pastures of the Psalmist. “May God lead and keep you in such forever. It is a subordinate, but important matter the make-up of the book. I congratulate you upon its attractive appearance.”