A Demonstration Of The
In Answer To Mr. J. N. Darby And Others.
By Henry Smith Warleigh,
Rector Of Ashchurch, Tewkesbury.
Author of
"Ezekiel's Temple,"
"Garment of Praise,"
"Mental, Moral, and Industrial Training,"
"Portrait of Antichrist,"
"Early British Church,"
"The 144,000 of Revelation 7 shown to be the Ministers of Christ,"
"Words of Counsel,"
"Baptismal Regeneration Examined,"
"England's Future Safety,"
"The Distresses of the Poor Disclosed,”
ELLIOT STOCK, 62, PATERNOSTER ROW.
LONDON: 1871
THE subjoined pamphlet was written at the request of a lady, who is fully alive to the great importance of correcting, by all possible means, the widespread error of belief in eternal suffering. Some years ago we might have said the almost universal belief, but lately the subject has been much handled, both by its supporters and its opposers; and among the laity at least (who in these matters are, perhaps, more inclined to take liberal views than the clergy as a body) there is, we believe, a fast spreading conviction that' the doctrine of eternal suffering which they have been. taught to believe is not found in Scripture, nor founded, on it. The difficulty in dealing with the opposers of those who believe in the non-eternity of suffering, consists in many of them avoiding the subject altogether, even when pressed upon them; and this must arise either from total indifference to the future, or else, perhaps, to the fact that they know their footing to be so uncertain and unsteady as to make it unsafe for them to risk a tussle, while many more profess be open to conviction, but come with such prejudiced ideas, and so determined to believe in nothing new, that their case is at least as hopeless as the others. All liberal-minded thinkers must agree that the author has, indeed, demonstrated his point, and all we ask for the book is a fair candid reading and investigation of its subject. Of critics and reviewers we would specially ask honest candor, and inasmuch as they have great power, may they use proportionate fairness. Many adopt the reviewer's opinion of a book before judging for themselves, and we have not un-frequently been surprised at finding ourselves much misled when reading a book we have seen reviewed, and we are sometimes inclined to think, what is, per-haps, often the case, that the number of books quite exceeds the reviewer's power to master them all. That they and all will, where the matter at issue is so important, give it their best attention, is the earnest hope of her who writes this preface.
A DEMONSTRATION OF THE EXTINCTION OF EVIL PERSONS AND OF EVIL THINGS.
MR. DARBY'S book, in defence of endless evil, and of endless pain for the wicked, will have weight with those who wish to believe in the popularly received doctrine on these points; especially with those who receive his teaching as little less than oracular; but it cannot have weight with any who prefer the simple Word of God, literally understood, to the tradition of the elders, and the rationalism of man, the only' grounds on which these doctrines can be made to rest. Mr. Darby, as well as thousands of others, does not see the wide difference between the natural, intrinsic meaning of a text and one which long but erroneous custom. has engrafted upon it—between taking a meaning out of a text, and bringing a meaning to it. Few are aware how habitually the Bible is distorted to make it suit foregone conclusions and to square with pre-arranged systems of theology. The inductive method was once used in philosophy, and as long as our savans collected, not partial, but ample facts, and when they disallowed any theory not fully warranted by these facts, they were kept from fancifulness, and the mortification of having perpetually to contradict themselves and each other. But this, the only sure method of investigating truth, has never in any appreciable degree been introduced into theology. The founders and leaders of the various religious sects, from Romanism down to Plymouth Brethren, have had their several views and interests to support and subserve; but as they would not ensure success by appealing, like Mahomet, to the sword, they have invoked the authority of the Bible; and if it were not sad and sinful, it would be amusing to see with what front they ignore one half of that inspired Book, and with what ingenuity they "wrest " the other half to their own side; counting, apparently, much upon the lack of knowledge of those whom, intentionally or unintentionally, they lead astray. There are few comparatively who see that corner-stone of Romanism, the supremacy of the Pope, in the words "Thou art Peter, etc.," or who see transubstantiation in the words "This is My body." We properly say that these meanings are brought to these texts, and not taken out of them; and that no one would ever have taken refuge in them, for such purposes, if he had not had a preconcerted system to support, and pre-arranged interests to advance. And we as properly say that endless evils and endless torments cannot be, and never were, taken from the texts usually advanced; but that they were engrafted upon them, and then said to be identical with them. Let every one who is accustomed to reflect upon his own mental history, ask, whether he has not often said within himself, " Yes, the text says so and so; but that cannot be true, because we have been taught to believe the opposite."
And thus, while we flatter ourselves that we believe the Bible, we are, in reality, making it void by our traditions. And we further ask persons to recollect, how often they have heard a text announced, when it has been the whole burden of the sermon, to prove, by either considerations, or exceptions, or differences, or the authority of expositors, or by them all, that the text means what, in its literal honest construction, it does not mean. Not dwelling just now upon the guilt of such false teachers, how amazing it is, that we can be so misled as to call the belief of such teaching by any name except rationalism. How deep is the delusion to call it faith. And how great is that blindness which leads preachers to rail at the- rationalism of others, while they themselves are among the most dangerous examples of it.
Mr. Darby and his followers, and thousands of others, may not suspect it, but they are tied and bound with the. chains of traditionalism and rationalism on the points before us; and they are employed in tying and binding hundreds of thousands of others. The teachers, with few exceptions, of all denominations, are thus tied, and the only church which, in her standards, has repudiated the dogma of endless miseries for the wicked is the. Church of England. It is to her glory that she has expunged the doctrine from her Articles; and, by her, supreme court, she has formally declared that she disowns it; and it is high time that some one, regardless of his interests and the esteem of his fellows, should, boldly proclaim, that those of her ministers who preach, it, have no legal standing within her pale, nor any right to eat her bread; and when it is known that their doctrine has no standing in the Bible, we may indulge a hope that they will impartially review their opinions upon the sole ground of inspiration, and reform their teaching accordingly.
A few hopeful signs are showing themselves. Large numbers of persons are earnestly searching into the subject, especially among the laity, and are daily searching the Scriptures to see which class of opinions ,is in accordance with its inspired teaching; and not a few of them declare that they are obliged to abandon the doctrine of endless misery. And though some of the clergy, and other ministers of the Gospel, will persecute a brother who differs from them, yet numbers of 'them will no longer defend their former mode of thinking, and their preaching is now more characterised by the attractions of the Cross, than by the denunciation of endless woes; and some of them have testified to their increased success in the salvation of souls. With respect to many they firmly believe with us; but they lack the boldness openly to declare their change of views, chiefly on account of the loss, persecution, and inconvenience which would ensue, and which they have beheld in several instances. Then again, a still more hopeful sign, if possible, is, that though some periodicals will still sometimes ignore, and sometimes misrepresent the books and pamphlets with which they are intrusted, yet it is known to some of us, that many of what are called the religious and evangelical periodicals receive our doctrine, though they dare not declare it. The time, however, is fast coming, when preachers will not be afraid of their pewholders, nor editors of their subscribers; and then vast numbers, among the most pious and deep thinkers, will be seen on the side of the truth we advocate. When we can get persons to think at all, with impartiality and earnestness, they soon begin to incline to us. But, as in former days, many by persecution and by stifling inquiry, commit themselves, and these often become too stubborn to repent. Meanwhile, our course is plain. As our God is pleased to open to us doors of usefulness or of utterance, we must, by the press, from the pulpit, in the lecture room, and in private intercourse, continue to propagate the truth committed to our charge. I willingly, therefore, comply with your request to review and answer Mr. Darby's book. Whilst doing this, however, I shall not restrict myself to it; but endeavour to meet all scruples and difficulties.
The attempt, however, to discuss this question, showing as it does a disbelief in the popular doctrine, begets an amazing hostility of feeling. Gentlemen forget their courteousness, ladies their gentleness, and Christians their meekness. Many of them rail at us, call us by opprobrious names, and cast us out as evil; forgetting for the time how little there is in this conduct of the spirit of Christ; and how much of the old man. Others, who shrink from going these lengths, will not inquire into the question, pleading, as an excuse, that it is too awful and mysterious to investigate; and that it is hidden from us; as if, indeed, we ever attempted to do more than inquire, with reverence and prayer, what it has pleased our heavenly Father to tell us in His revealed Word about this subject. Such persons, however, would do well to inquire, whether a professed voluntary humility may not veil a sinful apathy in studying the Bible, by reading, marking, learning, and inwardly digesting it, and in their searching after God's truth. It may veil, also, much of that infallible self-satisfaction which leads poor human nature to think that it cannot be wrong, but far too correct to need the trouble of further thought:
It is against us, too, that we are yet the comparative few, and our opponents the many—very many; and they do not forget to make the most of this circumstance; and add to it, that we are "insignificant also." "Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed" it? Have any of the bishops, deans, or great divines received this doctrine? While we answer, yes; many more than our querists can know, we add, that we do not base our doctrine upon human authority, and that the propagation of every truth began with one person, and that, as at the Reformation, the revival of an old truth began with "the few." These "ones," and these parties of "the few," were once deemed insignificant, as they deemed themselves, and as we also deem ourselves; but heaven's truth, for the diffusion of which they were made to suffer, flourishes, and will flourish, simply because it is heaven's truth. We have as much faith in our cause as they, though we cannot bring as much power; but with this we are more than content, for with the greater clearness will it appear that "the excellency of the power is of God and not of us."
Mr. Darby and his co-believers in endless tortures complain, that the chief of our proofs are taken from the Old Testament. We deny this as a fact; but if it were so, we should aver, that proof from this source is as decisive as that from the New Testament—for both' were God-inspired, and there can be no inconsistency. between the two. He says also that the Old Testament relates to the dealings of God with men " in this life," and that the proofs we adduce " speak of judgment and destruction in this world only." As we go on we shall see how utterly incorrect this assertion is; for our proofs from the Old Testament of the destruction of the wicked will be observed to refer to the world to come.
Let us now proceed to consider the objections to our doctrine upon which the chief reliance is placed.
Mr. Darby's chief trust is placed upon the word aionios, usually translated eternal, everlasting; and as it is applied to the never-beginning and never-ending existence of God, and to the duration of the believer's glory, which all acknowledge to be endless, it is contended, with a force which is much relied on, that when the same word is applied to the punishment of the wicked, the pains which they will have to endure must be endless also. But this argument will fall to the ground, strong as it appears, when it is known to be founded on an imperfect definition of the word. Its lexical meaning is, the whole duration of a person or thing, whether it be the immeasurable duration of Jehovah, or the measurable duration of man, or the contracted duration of one of God's dispensations, as the Levitical. Whether, in any particular instance, it carries the idea of endlessness with it, depends upon the subject to which it is applied, or the word with which it is associated, or the circumstances to which it refers.
It does not necessarily include the idea of endlessness, but simple duration, whether with, or without end, according to the nature of the subject. The same observation may be applied to the cognate noun aion. It means a duration, short or long, according to the nature of the case. It can be applied to endlessness, but it does not necessarily convey this idea; and notwithstanding Mr. Darby makes these words his strong-hold, he is obliged to admit this, and how after the admission he can reason so inconsistently, it is hard to say. In pages 11 and 12 he writes:—"The word translated forever, does sometimes mean, when used in other ways, what is not eternal. It is used for the duration of anything in uninterrupted continuance, though the thing, in its nature, may not last forever; and hence for the whole of any particular period—as the whole of a man's life, sometimes the whole course of this evil world, the whole of a dispensation." Again, in the note at page 124,—" In Homer aion is used for a man's life often. It is used by Herodotus and the Attic poets as far as to say, anepneusen aion, he breathed out his life, when eternity was not known (?) It is used for the whole time a thing subsists—forever, as, I give something to a child forever." This is really a correct account of the words aion and aionios. In their own lexical proper meaning, they do not suggest any precise certain length of duration, but the whole duration of whatsoever or whomsoever it is applied to, whether it be the duration of God, or of a man, or of a dispensation. And yet, strange to say, even after this admission, which all scholars are compelled to make, Mr. D. persists in arguing as if the words necessarily and absolutely meant endless duration; and he continues, with no small confidence, to infer, that as they are applied to the duration of the future punishment of the wicked, therefore their miseries must necessarily be endless.
The strongest argument they can logically and fairly raise upon these words is this:—"aion and aionios, may mean endless-ness and endless; they are applied to the future miseries of the wicked, and therefore these miseries may be endless; but they do not necessarily mean endlessness and endless, and therefore, so far, the punishment of the wicked need not be considered as endless. Whether they are so or not must be examined on other grounds; the only idea they necessarily convey is that there shall be no cessation in the punishment, as long as it does last, whether long or short." The proof of the endless duration of God's and of the believer's future life does not depend upon these words. Both are endless; but the proof rests on other grounds, and the idea of their endlessness is begotten by other considerations. We know, from the nature of God, that He is without beginning and without end; aionios is capable of being applied to this infinite attribute, and we unhesitatingly so apply it. We know that the inheritance of the believer is the inheritance of God, and that he is a joint heir with Christ Jesus; and we properly apply the word here also. But if from the nature of the case, or from clear counter declarations of Holy Writ, the idea of endlessness would not apply, then there would be nothing in aionios and aion which would sustain it. Now this is the position of these words in their application to the future miseries of the wicked. As we shall see, there is clear and abundant proof in Scripture, that their pain will not be endless, and therefore these words, however often repeated, do not, in themselves, suggest the idea, seeing their true meaning is a whole period without suspension, whether long or short. Knowing all this, we cannot help wondering that persons do, with so much confidence, build upon these words such a tremendous dogma as the interminable agonies of any creature however wicked. Surely, there must be a great lack, either of the knowledge of the meaning of words, or of accuracy of thought.
We must not omit here to examine how this phase of the question stands with respect to the Old Testament. There, also, we often meet with the words eternal, everlasting, forever, forever and ever; and as they are applied to the final state of the wicked, it is argued, from the instances where they are found, that the pain of that state must be endless, as Daniel 12.2, where it is declared that, " Some shall awake to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." The words obtain and gad, thus translated and applied, are, as to meaning, in the same situation as aion and aionios. They denote the whole of a period, whether limited or unlimited. They are used in many hundreds of instances; but a Hebrew 'concordance would soon show to anyone that the limited use is of much more frequent occurrence than the unlimited. Their application to process of future punishment would make it possible for us to think that it would be endless, perhaps even probable, if there is nothing to the contrary; but if there is, then they do not bind us so to understand them. If, as we aver, the final punishment of the wicked is the second death, and if that death means the cessation of their life; if the words destroy, consume, perish, come to an end, etc., mean the same thing, which we also aver, then there is clear, absolute proof that their pains, or the process of their punishment, will not be endless; and as there is nothing in the words ohlam, gad, aion, and aionios, or in their usus loquendi, which necessarily suggests the idea of endlessness, but the very contrary, then the application of any, or all, of these four words to the future punishment of the wicked does not necessarily prove that it is endless. In order to make them carry conclusive weight in an argument, our opponents must prove, that their lexical meaning is necessarily endless and endlessness, and that this is the invariable usus loquendi of them; but this they can never do; and they who have given competent thought to the subject, must know it well. A plausible argument can be made of them to mislead the unwary, but no more. In reading the Scriptures, however, we have nothing to do but to find out their real (not assumed) meaning, and then with a child-like, obedient faith to believe it.
It will be desirable to give specimens of the use of these words in the limited sense. And first of ohlam, this being the one by far the more frequently used in the Old Testament:—Gen. 17.13, " My covenant [of circumcision] shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant." Ex. 12.14, " Ye shall keep the Passover a feast by an ordinance forever;" 21.6, " His master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall serve him forever;"—that is, the rest of the servant's days: read verses 5 and 6; 40.15, " For their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood, throughout their generations." 1 Sam. 1. 22, " I will not go up till the child be weaned, and then I will bring him, that he may appear before the Lord, and there abide forever." 2 Sam. 12.10, " The sword shall not forever depart from thy house." 1 Kings 8.13, " I will surely build thee a house to dwell in, a settled place forever."
1 Chron. 23.25, "The Lord God of Israel hath given rest unto His people, that they may dwell in Jerusalem forever." We might go through almost every book and select examples, but these are surely enough. Secondly of the word gad. This is comparatively seldom used, but here are a few specimens:--Job 19.23, 24, " Oh that my words were now written! Oh that they were printed in a book! That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock forever!" 20.4, " Know thou not this of old since man was placed upon the earth?" Hab. 3.6, "The everlasting mountains were scattered." Thirdly of aion, which is thirty-seven times used in the New Testament in the limited sense of world.; that is, age or dispensation:—Matt. 13.22, " And the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the Word." Mark 11.14, " No man eat fruit of thee henceforth forever." Luke 1.70, " His holy prophets: which have been since the world began." John 13.8, "Thou shalt not forever wash my feet."
1 Cor. 8.13, " I will eat no flesh while the world stands lest I make my brother to offend." Gal. 1.4, " That He might deliver us from this present evil world." Eph. 1. 21, " Not only in this world, but also in that which is to come." Col. 1.26, " The mystery which hath been hid from ages and generations." Lastly, of aionios, Rom. 16.25, "The revelation of the mystery which was kept secret since the world began." 2 Tim. 1. 9, "Given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." Tit. 1. 2, " Which God that cannot lie, promised before the world began." Philimon 1.16, " Onesimus departed for a season that thou shouldest receive Him forever—the rest of His life."
These quotations—and there might have been many more—will abundantly prove the assertion, that the words in question do not necessarily convey the idea of endlessness; indeed, they never do by themselves, and we cannot even associate the idea of endless duration with them, except in those cases where, from independent sources, we have already gained it; as when we say, the eternal, the everlasting God. We know that God is endless, both as regards the past and the future, and we properly apply to Him the adjective aionios; because it means the whole duration of any person or thing. But if because when applied to one of His attributes, it must necessarily stretch to infinity, we also attribute the same infinity to an age, or dispensation, to the length of a man's life, or to a part of it, or to the duration of future punishment, we argue both illexically and illogically, and try to make an error pass current by the use of sophistry.
But it has been often asked—Do the sacred languages supply any phrases, terms, or words, which are stronger than those we have been considering? and this is asked with an air, which implies that a negative answer only can be given. These are Mr. D.'s words: " In conclusion I say (as has been remarked by others) that if God had meant to convey the idea of eternal punishment, He could not have used expressions stronger than He has used; nor do any exist." What Mr. D. means by "eternal punishment " is endless pain. We believe in eternal punishment as well as he: it is Bible language, and that is enough for us; but we receive it in the natural sense, as in the proper place will be shown.
It is not, however, true that the sacred languages cannot supply other, and stronger expressions, than those on which so much stress is laid, to convey the idea of endless duration. If the revealing Spirit had wished, in an unmistakable way, to say that the future miseries of the wicked were to be endless, both the sacred languages supplied ample means fully to express the idea. He need not have restricted Himself to the dubious, and inapplicable words which we have been reviewing. Throughout His Book we see, that in proportion to the importance of the truth He reveals, is the clearness with which He expresses it. If it is true that the miseries of the wicked are inconceivably terrible in their nature and degree, and endless in their duration, it is too tremendously important to be revealed in any but the clearest, and most unmistakable language that could be found, or invented. But, confessedly, He has not done this. According to some of our opponents, He did not say a word of any kind on the matter till about five hundred years before the Christian era; leaving the whole of "His offspring" ignorant of an infinitely important subject; in which, as alleged, they were infinitely interested, and which He only could teach them; and thus leaving them too for three thousand five hundred years. Believe this improbability, this impossibility, who will. The Bible teaches the opposite. There is no such thing as endless sufferings for any one, and therefore the Spirit of truth could not reveal it. If it had been true, there was not lacking fitting language to express it, and this language we should have found in the Bible applied to this point; but it never is so applied.
In examining how this point stands with respect to the Old Testament, let us read Ps. 102.27, " But thou art the same, and thy years shall have no end." Here, in clear language, is expressed the endless living existence of God; and if, after the resurrection of the wicked, their living existence is to he, as, is affirmed by our opponents, equal to that of God—if it must be endless, then it might have been expressed in the same way. The word employed by the Spirit is, tahmanz, the meaning of which is to make an end, to finish, to consume, to fail; and it is found here in combination with the negative particle, loh, not; and as the future form of the verb is used, the two words are properly rendered, "Shall have no end." But now, let us look at Ps. 104.35, "Let the sinners be consumed out of the earth, and let the wicked be no more." Here we find the same verb, tahmam, and precisely the same form of it: and the verse would have been more correctly translated had it been thus: " The sinners shall be consumed out of the earth, and the wicked shall be no more; " for it is no design of the Spirit to imply that it is the wish of God that the wicked should be consumed, and be no more, as the English version would indicate; on the contrary, it is a prophetic warning to bring the wicked to repentance. Here, however, tahinam is without the negative loh, not; and thus, while the other text says the years of God shall not end, this text says, the wicked shall end, or be consumed, and that so completely and finally that they shall be no more. If they are to live after the infliction of "the second death," it would have been quite as easy to put in the " not," and make it " shall not end," as "shall end." But then this would not have been the truth, and of course the Spirit avoided it. Now, however, let no one say that to express endlessness the Spirit was shut up to ohlam and gad in the Old Testament.
This conclusion will be the more apparent, if we further contrast the two passages with the connection. Verse 26 of Psalm cii. says, that the earth shall perish, as well as the heavens; that they all shall wax old like a garment, and that they shall be changed. But here is a contrast, "Thou art the same, and thy years shall not end." But the contrast is extended in verse 28, "The children of thy servants shall continue, and their seed shall be established before Thee." God and His people shall continue without end. Now, turn we again to Psalm civ. In verse 33 the Psalmist celebrates his own happy state, a state which he owed entirely to God's grace; and to Him he gives the praise. "I will sing unto the Lord as long as I live, I will sing praises to my God while I have my being." The Psalmist was a true child of God, and he had in him the life of Christ. He knew this, and he adds, " My meditation of Him shall be sweet. I will be glad in the Lord." Now again comes the contrast, " The sinners shall have an end from the earth, and the wicked shall be no more." This is the very opposite to the gracious state he contemplates for himself, through the mercy of his God, and he therefore ends with the grateful words, "Bless thou the Lord, O my soul. Praise ye the Lord." The prospects opened in these texts both to the righteous and to the wicked, stretch into the next world, and it is declared that the glory of the righteous shall not end, but that the wicked and their miseries shall end.
But besides this example there are numerous other verbs which are rendered to end, to bring to an end, to come to an end; and any of them might have been used with a negative to express the endlessness of the future life of the wicked, and the endlessness of their misery, if such had been the truth.
Again, there are nouns signifying an end, which with a negative, might have been used had there been occasion to signify the endlessness of the wicked and of their suffering. Let us take a single example of the use of kehts, and end. Isaiah 9.17, "Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end." If it had been true, why should not the wicked be warned in clear unmistakable language that of their miseries "there shall be no end?" There is this language to be found in the Bible, and it might have been used in reference to the future prospect of the wicked. Nay, as we have seen, and shall still further see, it is expressly said, that they shall themselves come to an end, and be no more; and how, then, can their sufferings be endless? Let it be remembered then, that the Old Testament is not deficient in suitable unmistakable language, if it had wished to reveal endless miseries.
The case with respect to the New Testament is, if possible, still stronger. There is in Greek the word akatalutos, which, in Heb. 7.16, is properly rendered " endless." If future miseries are endless, this adjective might have so described them; and its etymology would have rendered it peculiarly suitable for the purpose. There is atcrantos, too, correctly rendered "endless," in 1 Tim. 1. 4, and this also, from its etymology, would have been equally suitable to apply to the sufferings of the lost, were it true they were endless. Akata-taustos, also, is in every way suitable. In 2 Pet. 2.14 it is translated, "cannot cease." If these three words—which, be it remarked, are found in the New Testament —are not sufficient, another Greek adjective may be mentioned—endeleckes, continual, unceasing, constant; for as the Spirit of God used the Greek language to express His mind and thoughts, He might have selected this as well as others. Now, if the revealing Spirit had wished to teach the modern doctrine of endless pain, such as that held by our opponents, why did He not select one or all of these words, which would have expressed the idea in precise, unmistakable language?
Why did He confine Himself to what is dubious? The only reverential, consistent answer is, the doctrine is not true, and that He never intended to teach it. The point just now, however, is that our opponents confidently aver that in Hebrew there is no stronger expressions than ohlam and gad; and in Greek, than aion and aionios. We have seen that the fact is perfectly the reverse, and may we affectionately and earnestly beg all teachers of the Bible to make no more such an unfounded assertion in the support of an error.
In the next place, Mr. D. and the rest of our opponents, endeavor to overturn the argument which is derived from the sentence of the second death in the lake of fire, which we say will bring the wicked to naught, to utter and final extinction. To neutralize this position, they persist in attributing to us a definition of death which we never make; and for our word "extinction," they substitute "annihilation." These unfair tactics afford them an argument which they would not otherwise gain, and give them a show of triumph over us. They profess to answer our argument, but instead of doing this, they substitute, by an unworthy legerdemain, a definition of their own, which they can easily overturn; and then they speak and act as if they had overturned ours. We have had before to point out this extremely unfair and unchristian course, when defending, in a pamphlet, Mr. Minton, from the Record; and now we have to do the same thing with respect to Mr. D. and others. We say that death is ceasing to live.
They argue as if we said that death was ceasing to exist. We say that the wicked shall be brought to extinction. They treat us as if we said that the wicked shall be brought to annihilation. With respect to the first they argue thus:—If death means ceasing to exist, then the wicked cannot be in a separate state, nor can they be in existence in the great day to be judged, or to be punished. But the case of Dives shows that a lost one shall be in this separate state; and the Bible declares that, after death, comes the judgment. From this they infer that death cannot mean, ceasing to exist; but a state of living existence in misery and woe. Nay, continue some, if death is ceasing to exist, Christ Himself could not have been raised; for if death brought Him to nothing, what was there left to be raised? Then, too, with respect to the true believer they add, he really dies, but if death means ceasing to exist, there can be no believer to enter upon the glory prepared for him. They thus reduce, what purports to be our argument, to an absurdity and then retire from the, battle with shouts of victory and flying colors.
In trying to disentangle this skein of sophistry, let one or two things be considered. We affirm that death is the opposite of life, that it is ceasing to live; but we affirm also that man is a compound being; and that one part of him may be dead, while another is alive. He has more kinds of lives than one. He has animal, and mental, and—if he be really born from above—spiritual life; and the source of these lives is the spirit that dwells in him. He may be destitute of spiritual life, and yet his body and mind may be alive; and his body may be dead, but his mind may be alive; and, if he be a true believer, he retains also his spiritual life in full vigor. This is fully recognized in the Bible: "Let the dead bury their dead." Matt. 8. 22. Let the spiritually dead bury their bodily dead. "You hath He quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins." Eph. 2. 1. The Ephesians, before they became Christians, had bodily and mental life, but at the time of becoming so, they were quickened to spiritual life. "But she that lives in pleasure is dead while she lives." 1 Tim. 5.6. She lives bodily and mentally, but she is dead spiritually. Now, what is there in this teaching, which can truly and fairly be made the foundation of all the absurdities with which we are charged? Our opponents make us say, that when one part of man is dead, every part of him is necessarily dead also. It is a mistake, perhaps a misrepresentation. We teach that when, by the death of the body, "the dust returns to the earth as it was, the spirit returns to God who gave it." Ex. 12.7. But, in accordance with the Bible, we teach also, that there shall be a resurrection of the unjust, as well as of the just: and that at the judgment seat of Christ they will be justly sentenced to the "second death." This death will be of the whole man, and not of part of him, as at the first death. Moreover, it will be an endless death. The first was but temporal, because there was the certain prospect of a resurrection; when the spirit, which had been reserved in Hades, should again take possession of the body. But after the second, there will be no prospect of resurrection, nothing but endless extinction; by which the wicked become as though they had never been.
This is the death which was the threatened penalty of sin. "In the day thou eats thereof thou shalt surely die." "The soul that sins it shall die." "The wages of sin is death"—the final irreversible death of the whole man. None will attempt to show that the penalty was restricted to part of man; that part of man was to suffer or to die, and part was not to suffer or to die. Our opponents will hold, with us, that whatever death means, it will affect the whole man. As soon as man became the violator of law he was subject to this dreadful penalty, and it would have been at once executed had it not been for the pre-arranged scheme of grace and mercy, without which the Godhead could not be fully known; nor consequently could the complete happiness of God's obedient intelligent creatures be accomplished. The threat, however, did not remain wholly unexecuted. Man at once died in his spiritual part. As St. Paul expresses it, "he was alienated from the life of God"—the God-like holy life. As a consequence of the interference of grace, his bodily life, and mental vigor, were spared, so that there might be in him and in his posterity, a theatre for the exhibition of grace; and also human fallen creatures, upon whom it might be exercised; and who indeed could be the only suitable objects on which it could at all be expended.
The advantage they gain in argument, by misrepresenting us, that we hold the annihilation of the wicked, is this. Everyone knows that not anything is ever annihilated. Great changes take place in the position, form, and chemical composition of matter; but annihilation never; and when persons are told that we hold the annihilation of the wicked, who have in their composition both matter and spirit, we are considered as too senseless and ignorant to be regarded. It is, however, the extinction of the wicked in which we believe; and this makes all the difference in argument. Annihilation is the destruction of the particles of which a thing is composed; extinction is the destruction of the parts of a thing; so that it ceases to be what it was: and when we apply this word to a human being, we mean, that the parts of his wondrous organism are separated and destroyed; and that he is an organized, living man no longer; though the particles, of which the parts were composed, still exist. The Scriptures teach that this extinction of the wicked will take place by the " second death " in the " lake of fire; " and that this will be their terrible punishment.
But here Mr. D. and other opponents have another resort — they attempt to show that when the Bible applies the word death, even the second death, to man, it uses it in a totally different sense than when it is applied to any other living being. In man's case, they say, death must mean living in misery; and the reason they give for thus daring to change the lexical meaning of a word, and to make it mean the opposite of what it does mean, is, that man cannot die; he must live on endlessly; and as the wicked are not fit for glory, therefore they must live in misery. They thus attempt to prove one error by another; their proof error being nothing better than the tradition of the elders, which makes the Word of God of none effect. They also reason in a circle; for when they want to establish
error number one, they bring as proof error number two; and when they wish to establish error number two, they then bring as proof error number one. It is not true that the wicked cannot die. God declares, by Ezekiel, that they shall die, and He severely rebukes the false prophet who says they shall not die. In chapter 18, He assures them that He has no pleasure in the death of him that dies; and He tells them what course of conduct will fit men for life, and what course must bring them to death. He appeals, also, in touching language to that powerful instinct which we all feel, the love of life. " Why will ye die?" Now, the death here spoken of cannot be the death of the body only, the first death, for it is a death which God does not wish to inflict, and one which man can, through mercy, avoid; but He does wish to inflict the mere death of the body; and no man can avoid this. It is the second death that He does not wish to inflict, and this man may avoid. Moreover, this death is put as the opposite of life. If a wicked man will take a prescribed course of conduct, "he shall save his soul alive," "he shall surely live, he shall not die." "For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dies, saith the Lord God; wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye." Unless persons had a preconcerted scheme to support, they would not read these words in any but their lexical natural sense. They are sufficient to satisfy any unsophisticated person, that wicked men can die, and die forever. God is as able to take away life as He was able to give it; though no one else is able. Jesus Himself tells us both these points Matt. 10.28: "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both body and soul in hell." And this is in exact accordance with the prophet: "The soul that sinned, it shall die." The foundation, then, upon which our friends daringly change the meaning of words, does not exist. The wicked can die the second death; and if they turn not they will so die. This method of taking words in a non-natural, non-lexical sense, is at the bottom of all the errors which have corrupted Christianity. Life does not mean happiness; and death does not mean, misery. We are quite aware that no man can be happy unless he has a living existence; and that it must be a miserable thing to die the second death; but this is a totally different thing from saying that the word life means happiness, and the word death means living in misery. Death and life are as much opposites as are darkness and light; and where the one is, the other cannot be. If the whole man is dead, he cannot be alive in any sense or degree.
We have sufficient confirmation that this is the correct idea of death from those terms found in numerous passages of the Bible, which declare that the wicked shall be destroyed, consumed, perish, come to an end, shall not be, etc., etc. Let us first confine ourselves to the New Testament. Destroy, perish, or consume is the correct rendering of the Greek verbs apollumi, katargeo, and kataluo. To quote from the pamphlet already referred to, " the meaning of destroy is to bring to an end that to which it is applied, whatever it may be, whether a man, or a quality, or a form, or a state, or any other thing. One thing it does not mean, and we beg it to be particularly observed: it does not mean putting an end to existence; though it does mean putting an end to life, when it is applied to a living being. It has much the same force as death; only death is rather the effect; and to destroy, or destruction, indicates the cause or process of that effect. A few examples will best show our meaning. We destroy a house when we separate the stones, timber, and other things of which it is compacted. We destroy it as a house. A tree is destroyed when it is cut down, even though its branches may not be sawn asunder. It is destroyed as a tree, and it becomes dead wood. A good character is destroyed by bad conduct; and in such a case a man is destroyed as a character. The beautiful form of the vase is destroyed, when it is broken to pieces, even though every particle and piece may be lying on the ground. A person's income is destroyed when he has dissipated his estate; even though the income may be enjoyed by the new owner. In all these cases, and many more could be adduced, an end is put to whatever the word is applied to; but in no case is there an end of existence or annihilation. When in the great assize the sentence of death is passed upon the then resuscitated sinner, he will be destroyed as a living man; his life will be brought to an end. He will live no longer, and the process by which this is brought about is called in Scripture, destruction. This brings the unconverted man to an end as man. It is the total and final extinction of his life, though not the annihilation of the particles of which he was composed. What, however, we have said of death, with respect to man, may be said also of destruction. He has a compound nature.
The spiritual part of man may be destroyed, and his body and mind be alive. This is the natural state of all mankind. They have no holy life of God in them. They have "destroyed themselves." They are lost (same root as destroy), and so much so, that they have not the least help in themselves. It is also possible for a man's body to be destroyed, or perish, and yet his spirit to survive. But neither of these is the destruction of the man, only a part of him; and that of the whole man, body and soul, will take place in the last day in hell.
Again to quote: " Let us take a few examples from the usus loquandi of katargeo, also rendered to destroy; but sometimes abolish, bring to naught, make void, etc. etc.—' That the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.' Rom. 6.6. To bring to naught the things which are: 1 Cor. 1. 28. Meats for the belly, and the belly for the meats; but God shall destroy both it and them: vi. 13. The princes of this world that come to naught; 2. 6. Prophecies, they shall fail, knowledge it shall vanish away; 13.8. I put away childish things; " ver. 11. There are many more to the same effect, and throughout the whole the idea of something being brought to an end is conspicuous; and there is nothing in them to perplex a plain man of a childlike, learning, spirit. When the body of sin is destroyed, is it meant that it lives still? When the princes of this world come to naught, are they princes still? When meats are destroyed, are they meats still? When prophecies and knowledge fail and vanish away, do they still remain in vigor? When Paul became a man and put away childish things, did he retain them still? Persons who have not time to think closely, or who will not give themselves trouble to think, may be puzzled by the sophistry of words; but there is nothing difficult, nothing recondite, in the idea conveyed in these passage. Meats cease to be meats, when destroyed; worldly princes, to be princes when destroyed; and so after the destruction of wicked men, they shall be men no longer. Apply all this to the future punishment of the wicked. They are sentenced to be destroyed. In other words to "have their part in the lake which burned with fire and brimstone, which is the second death," Rev. 21.8. Now the question occurs, are both the lexical meaning, and usus loquandi, of the word to be applied here, or is this to be an exception, the sole exception? Popular theology says, "Yes, this is an exception; the wicked must have an endless conscious existence.
They cannot have it in glory; they must have it in misery." We pronounce an emphatic and indignant No! and we protest, with all our little strength, against handling the Word of God deceitfully any longer. Let the two main words in the controversy be viewed together—death and destruction. The first was found to mean the cessation or extinction of life. A real living man is adjudged to. the second death. We say this means the final extinction of life, which, in this application of it, means the extinction of man, as man. Then there is the other word, destruction; which we have seen, in the case of man, to mean, the putting an end to that life which he had before he was destroyed. Each of these words, taken in its literal meaning and usus loquandi, is sufficient to prove our point; but the two combined make the argument a demonstration. This is the position we take, and we are convinced that no one can fairly overturn it, if he keep to the literal meaning and usus loquandi of words, and to the grammatical construction of sentences.
There are many words in the original of the Old Testament rendered by the same English words, and all of them mean, to bring a thing or person to an end, and thus, what has been said of those in the New Testament, will correctly apply to these. Nor can we by any means allow Mr. Darby's baseless assertion that the Old Testament has reference to judgments in this world only. These are his words, page 18, "The Old Testament, from which the vast majority of alleged proofs of the destruction of the wicked are drawn, speaks of judgment and destruction in this world only." Again, page 133, " The greater part of their proofs are from the Old Testament, and the moment you know that the mass of their texts refer to temporal judgments on earth, all that part of the fabric comes down. Then they dodge to words of the New Testament." Surely Mr. Darby has forgotten one or two precious Bible truths; that Jesus will personally reign upon this earth; that He will then "gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them that do iniquity; " and that He will ultimately make this earth the sphere of endless glory with His saints. The wicked will then have been rooted out of the earth; the tares will have been burnt; and if they are destroyed out of the earth, they shall be no more anywhere. Neither the gracious rewards of the just, nor the fully earned wages of the unjust, are unconnected with this earth. It is sad and sorrowful to see how far good men will go out of " the old paths," to support a preconceived favorite system.
But let us read with reverence and prayer, some of the many passages of Scripture bearing upon this serious subject. They will surely be profitable for doctrine and will produce conviction.
Psalm 37, "For evil doers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the Lord shall inherit the earth. For yet a little while and the wicked shall not be; yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be. But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume, into smoke they shall consume away. But the transgressors shall be destroyed together: the end of the wicked is, they shall be cut off at the last; but the salvation of the righteous is of the Lord." (The whole psalm should be read.)
Prov. 20.27, " The spirit (neshamah) of man is the candle of the Lord." Let us see then what shall be done to this Spirit of Man, this candle, or lamp of the Lord." (The Hebrew word is the same.)
Prov. 13.9, "The light of the righteous rejoiced, but the lamp of the wicked shall be put out.”
Prov. 20.20, "Whosoever cursed his father or his mother, his lamp shall be put out in obscure darkness; "
Prov. 24.20, "For there shall be no reward to the evil man; the candle of the wicked shall be put out."
Isaiah 1.27-30, "Zion shall be redeemed with judgment, and her converts with righteousness; but the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the Lord shall be ashamed. For they shall be as an oak whose leaf fades, and as a garden that hath no water. And the strong shall be as tow, and the maker of it as a spark, and they shall both burn together, and none shall quench them."
Matt. 3.12, " He will gather the wheat into His garner; but the chaff He will burn up with unquenchable fire."
Matt. 10.23, " Fear Him who is able to destroy both body and soul in hell; "
Matt. 13.30, " Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles and burn them; but gather the wheat into My barn."
Matt. 13.50, "And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."
Luke 17.30, "Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it."
John 12.25, "He that loveth his life, shall lose it; and he that hates his life in this world, shall keep it unto life eternal."
Rom. 2.12, "They that have sinned without law, shall also perish without law."
Phil. 3.19, "Whose end is destruction."
2 Thess. 1.9, "Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord."
Heb. 10.27, "A certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries."
Heb. 12.29, "For our God is a consuming fire."
2 Peter 2. 12, " But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, shall utterly perish in their own corruption."
Rev. 21.8, "Shall have their part in the lake that burned with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."
Let this great variety of expressions be candidly and fully weighed. We can say with respect to them, what we have seen could not be said with respect to aionios. Stronger language cannot be found in any tongue, nor words more clearly expressive of the utter extinction of the wicked. They shall be "cut off, consumed like the fat of lambs, burnt up, destroyed, perish, shall not be, and their spirit quenched or put out as fire is put out, and then come to an end." We put no strain on the texts. We give them no non-natural meaning. They speak for themselves. If they do not teach the ultimate extinction of the wicked, how misleading they are, especially, as we have already seen, it would have been the easiest possible thing to say that the wicked should endlessly live in misery, if that had been the truth; but no, such a thing is not even whispered, and the texts we have read declare the contrary,—that they shall come to an end.
Now what is our duty as Christians but just to believe what God tells us in His Book, whether we have before believed or not? We are guilty of amazing presumption, if we believe or teach that He does not mean what His words naturally, and lexically, do mean; for that we have received the philosophical heathen dogma, that man cannot die, that he must necessarily live as long as God Himself lives. What is this but rationalism, and the very corruption and false philosophy against which St. Paul so solemnly warns us? And we are equally guilty if we plead that we have been taught the contrary to this natural meaning, by our great men and learned divines. What is this but making the tradition of Christian elders the standard of our faith, just as the Rabbis, Scribes, and Pharisees made the tradition of the Jewish elders the standard of theirs? And when any who, with humble prayer, seek their faith from the Word of God alone, and who read, mark, learn and inwardly digest that, try to point this out, the teachers of popular Christianity stop their ears, and call us infidels and heretics. But the cloud of dust which they cast at us, judicially blinds their own eyes. Will they suffer us to intreat them to pursue a different course?
But there is another class of texts which contrasts the final state of the righteous with that of the wicked. These should not be omitted; for they show that the one state is the very opposite of the other. We have already had some of these contrasts; as that the wheat is to be preserved, but the chaff burnt up. Here are a few more specimens.
Rom. 6.23, "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord;"
Rom. 8.6, "For to be carnally minded is death, but to the spiritually-minded is life and peace;"
Rom. 8.13, "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; "
1 John 5.11, 12, "This is the record; that God hath given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He that hath the Son hath life; but he that hath not the Son of God hath not life."
The best course for us to pursue, now, will be to consider the particular texts upon which our opponents greatly rely, and then point out and examine the master error which has so much corrupted Christianity, and led to such grievous distortion of Holy Scripture.
The first to take our attention shall be Matt. 25.46: "And these shall go away for eternal punishment, but the righteous for life eternal." The same word, eternal, is applied to the punishment of the wicked, which is applied to the life of the righteous; and as this latter will be endless, therefore the former must be endless also; and if the misery of the wicked comes to an end, then the happiness of the righteous comes to an end also. If, however, we take the lexical meaning of the word aionios, and its entire usus loquendi in the New Testament, the argument is of little or no force. We have seen that its meaning is duration, whether limited or unlimited; according to the nature of the subject to which it is applied. The lexical meaning would allow us correctly to paraphrase the verse in this way:—"These shall go away into eternal punishment, which shall last as long as the period of duration assigned to it; and the righteous into eternal life, which shall last as long as the period of duration assigned to it." What force there is in the argument really lies in the usus loquendi thus:—The word is much oftener used in the unlimited application than in its limited, and therefore it is as much more likely to be applied to punishment in the unlimited, as this is used more frequently than the limited; that is, this text makes the pain of the wicked to be probably as endless, as the joy of the righteous; but not certainly so. We cannot but think that in issues so tremendous, our Great Teacher would not have left us in uncertainty. Nor, indeed, has He done so, when rightly understood; but we have made these observations to show that even in the point of view of our opponents, the text does not prove that punishment must necessarily be as long as life.
This, however, is not the ground on which we meet our friends on this text. They argue from it as if the word were punishing, instead of punishment; that is, as if the punishment were a process endlessly going on, and the pain of it endlessly inflicted. Now this is not, and cannot be, the true natural meaning; and our opponents themselves do not explain analagous texts in a similar way.
We will explain what we mean by examples. In Heb. 6.2, we have the phrase, "eternal judgment;" and no one thinks that this expresses an eternal process of judging; as if the act of judgment would endlessly go on; but a judgment, the process of which is limited, but the effects of which are inevitable, irremediable, and endless. In chapter 5.9, we find the phrase "eternal salvation," and here again no one thinks of affixing to it the idea of an eternal process of saving; but a salvation, the working out of which was effected within a limited time; but the effects of which are endless. Again, there are the words " eternal redemption " in chapter 9.12; and all understand a process accomplished in time, but the results of which will last through endless ages. Once more; in chapter 13.20, is the expression "eternal covenant," where no one reads, eternal covenanting, or endless act always going on; but a covenant which requires a short time to make, but the results of which never end. Here are four expressions exactly of the same grammatical construction as "eternal punishment," in all of which our opponents themselves never see an endless process, but an endless result. In a fifth case, however, they will have it to be an eternal or endless process; and that the act of punishing will be as constantly and endlessly inflicted as there shall be an angry God to inflict it. Now it is as clear and certain as noonday that they cannot extract the meaning from the words themselves. It is one brought to them, and then fancied to be taken out of them, and such a mangling of Scripture would surely never have been resorted to but for an educational prejudice, originating in the tradition of Christian elders.
The natural view which we take of this passage is further confirmed by the word rendered punishment. This is kolasis, the literal meaning of which is the act of pruning, or cutting off, as of a branch from a tree, then a separation; and, of course, when it is separation from God, in consequence of sin, it is punishment. It teaches, however, the very opposite of an endless process of cutting off, without ever being actually severed. It indicates an act short in its process of operation, but followed with endless consequences to the branch which is cut off. "If a man abide not in Me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned," John 15.6. It is as certain, then, as any exposition of Scripture can be, that eternal punishment does not denote an endless state of suffering, but a suffering terribly sharp, limited in its duration, and followed by irreversible consequences; and it is eternal punishment, though not eternal punishing. We take the word, eternal or everlasting here, in its unlimited application, and believe it to be of as long duration as are the never-ending joys of the righteous. If our friends do not receive the natural and literal exposition here given, let them with reasons and criticisms, drawn from the Bible, set about refuting it. If it is erroneous, it can be overthrown, and they ought to be able to do it. If not, let them own their error, and confess the truth.
But now another alleged difficult text presents itself. In Matt. 3.12, it is declared that "the chaff He will burn up with unquenchable fire;" and it is explained to mean that the fire will be always and endlessly flaming, and that the wicked will be endlessly burning in it, but never burnt up. We deny altogether, that this is the plain, literal meaning of the text. Nowhere, and in no language does unquenchable fire mean endlessly flaming fire, but fire that has gained such a mastery as to render it impossible to be put out, till that which feeds the flames be utterly consumed; and we again add, that no other meaning would ever have been put upon it, but for a pre-arranged system of philosophical theology, which, in order to gain currency, had to seek an ally in the Bible; and then to put upon various passages, and to give to many words, an unheard of and non-natural meaning. It met with much opposition at the time, but it was introduced by the great and influential, and very soon Greek philosophy became fashionable, and the very source of thought became corrupted. The human system of theology formed by the union of philosophy with the Scriptures, has remained in the Church ever since; and so trained have been our modes of thought under its teaching, that, almost unconsciously, we put truth fur error, and error for truth. It is one of the greatest difficulties to clear our ideas and conceptions from the meshes in which they have been so long entangled. The perplexity arising from this is the greater, inasmuch as our literature, our poetry, our very hymns, are all involved, and held fast as in a net, while—to make the difficulty greater still—they, who try to correct the misconceptions, and bring back theological modes of thought to the Bible, and to the primitive standard, are counted as ignorant heretics, whose aims are to introduce skepticism and rationalism instead of faith. The Reformation did a mighty work towards clearing our ideas, and Luther wished to extend it to the corrupted doctrine concerning the ultimate state of the wicked; but one man could not do everything; and what he and his fellow reformers left unfinished, their followers have not completed. Hence our present ecclesiastical and doctrinal complications. The Church of England did a great work in purging her Articles from the dogma of endless torments, but her ministers have contrived to neutralize her efforts, by their un-scriptural teaching, and yet they eat her bread.
To see the meaning, in the Bible, of the phrase "unquenchable fire," let us read a few passages as specimens. 2 Kings 22, "Therefore My wrath shall be kindled against this place, and shall not be quenched." The place referred to is Jerusalem with its temple; and the idea is utter destruction; from which none could rescue it; not that the fiery wrath which devoured it should be endlessly burning. Is. 34.9, 10, "The land (of Idumea) thereof shall become burning pitch; it shall not be quenched night nor day." Here again the idea is not of endless burnings, but of entire inevitable destruction; which none could turn away. Jer. 7.20, "Mine anger and My fury shall be poured out upon this place; upon man, and upon beast, and upon the trees of the field, and upon the fruit of the ground; and it shall burn, and shall not be quenched." What thinking person would attach the idea of an endless flaming fire? 17.27, "But if ye will not harken unto Me, to hallow the Sabbath-day, and not to bear a burden, even entering in at the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath-day; then will I kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched." The judgments here threatened were executed; but who ever imagines, that gates and palaces are subject to an endless burning? Solomon remarks, Prov. 26.20, " Where no wood is there the fire goes out;" so that we may say, that when there was nothing more to burn in the gates and palaces of Jerusalem, the unquenchable fire went out; but—and here is the point of the passage—they were utterly ruined. Ezek. 20.47, 48, " Say to the forest of the south, Hear the Word of the Lord; Thus saith the Lord, I will kindle a fire in thee, and it shall devour every green tree in thee, and every dry tree. The flaming flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from the south to the north shall be burned therein. And all flesh shall see, that I, the Lord, have kindled it: it shall not be quenched."
Let these passages be impartially considered, and further, that there is not a single passage in the whole Bible of an opposite tendency, and who will undertake to say that the Scriptural idea of unquenchable fire is an endlessly burning flame; as if that which was cast into it was ever being devoured, but never burnt up? The true idea is, that whatever was subjected to it should not be rescued from the flames, but should be utterly and endlessly destroyed. It is not an endless process, but an endless result.
One would think that the text we are examining would of itself be sufficient to point this out. It speaks of chaff being subjected to the fire. What is the action of fire upon chaff? Is it that it is preserved in the fire? Is it that it is endlessly burning and never burnt up? It is really too absurd to be entertained for a moment. Why then do otherwise sensible persons say, that the meaning is, that the wicked shall ever be burning in hellfire, but never burnt up, endlessly living and writhing in flames. They who hold this must hold also that the revealing Spirit has used a strangely inapt figure to teach us His mind, if this is His idea. Here is chaff cast into the fire; it is burnt up, so that it is chaff no longer; and our opponents say, that represents wicked men, who shall be thrown into hell-fire, where they shall not be burnt up like chaff, but where, as living, conscious, sensitive men, they shall live, and be ever burning, and yet never burnt. It is this wretched handling of the Bible which has brought it into disrepute among unbelievers at home, and among civilized educated heathens abroad; and yet we pretend to lament the little success the Gospel meets with. It is time that the eyes of the public should be opened, and that ignorance and hypocrisy should be unmasked. To speak flattering pleasant words would be unfaithfulness to God and His truth, and we will not use them while His Word is so abused and distorted. Matt. 3.12, then teaches that the wicked shall become like burnt-up chaff; and it thus stands in harmony with all the rest of the holy oracles.
But now the three times repeated verse in Mark 9 presents itself. "Where their worm dies not, and the fire is not quenched." The word "never" in verses 43, 45—"never shall be quenched" — might appear very strong; but in the Greek it is simply "unquenchable fire," as in other places, and therefore of the same strength. We have already shown the natural and Bible meaning of unquenchable fire, and the expression, "where their worm dies not," remains for consideration. Our friends tell us the meaning is, that the wicked will be endlessly tormented, just as the never-dying worm endlessly feeds upon a dead carcass. We deny, however, that this is a right interpretation. Whatever is meant by unquenchable fire must be meant also be the worm which dies not; for they are put in the same category, and they cannot contradict one another. We have proved that unquenchable fire does not and cannot mean a fire endlessly burning; but a fire that cannot be put out, because of the mastery it has gained. And the aspect in which the worm is set forth is not that it endlessly lives, and endlessly gnaws, but that it surely and inevitably devours the carcass, as long as there is anything to be devoured, and then the worm itself must die for want of nourishment.
As unquenchable fire means a fire that will not go out till it has devoured all the fuel, so the non-dying worm does not die whilst it has the means of life—not until the carcass is devoured. We do not put forth this merely as a meaning which the figure may bear, though if it were only this, it would suffice; but we give it as the real meaning of the figure. To suppose otherwise would be not only bringing the verse into conflict with itself, and with the whole Bible, but it would be implying that our blessed Lord used a singularly unfit figure to illustrate His meaning, if, as our friends affirm, He intended to teach the endlessness of torment. Look at the figures Ile was pleased to employ: they are all true to nature, appropriate in their application, and definite in their meaning. But look at this as interpreted by our opponents.
"There is a dead carcass; that represents the living and endlessly tormented sinner. There is the worm, whose life is a span; that represents the ever-living God, who is the punisher of the wicked. Look at the gnawing of the worm; that represents God's endless act of tormenting." Where is the appropriateness of the figure thus employed? To put it into plain words, seems enough to cause it to be rejected. Take, however, the figure in its natural meaning, as representing the certain, the inevitable destruction of the wicked, and it is both appropriate and forcible. As certainly as the carcass is devoured by worms, so certainly, and entirely, shall the wicked be devoured and come to an end.
This figure was more telling to the Jews, whom our Lord addressed, than it can be to us; for they had the illustration before their eyes; and knew exactly the idea conveyed. Just outside their city walls, towards the south, was a deep, narrow gorge, which they called Ge Hinnom, afterwards contracted to Gehenna. Into this valley was afterwards thrown the dead carcass of animals, and sometimes of criminals, which, in corrupting, bred worms, which fed upon the putrid flesh. When these dead bodies became offensive to the smell, and dangerous to health, fires were lighted to consume the whole mass, and reduce it to ashes; and some say that almost perpetual fires " night and day " were kept up for this purpose. It thus became the visible emblem to the Jews of the invisible place of torment; to which also they applied the name Gehenna. How impressive then must have been the threefold warning which Jesus gave to His disciples. In that dreadful gorge they saw the carcass, first fed on by worms, and afterwards wholly consumed by fierce fires; and our Lord in this way taught them, that if any remained in sin by an offending hand, or foot, or eye, they too must be similarly consumed in the lake of fire, which is the second death. Far was it from Him to wish to convey the thought that men would remain in life in that fiery lake; as also it was far from their thoughts that this would be the case; for they knew that the bodies consigned to these flames were utterly brought to an end, and reduced to ashes. How educated persons could engraft the popular view upon these words of Jesus, would be a marvel, did we not know the strength of trained prejudices; and even this would not adequately account for it, if we were not also aware that but few think at all on the subject; but, without question, hold on to the traditional theology, begun in the nursery, and deepened in the schools. Again, we add that we claim for the view here opened a complete accordance with the figure employed in the verses under consideration, and a perfect harmony with the whole of the Bible, particularly with Isa. 66.24, to which doubtless our Lord referred, and which cannot, with any fairness and truth, be pressed to the support of endless torments.
If any should ask why Isaiah and Jesus should employ a figure so loathsome as a putrid carcass, fed on by disgusting worms, the reason is obvious. It was to meet that yearning inquiry made by everyone: "What will be our feelings in heaven when we find our friends are not there? Can we then be happy?" Now, if they were in endless, unutterable inconceivable torture, we hold that no benevolent mind could be happy while any human beings, not friends only, were suffering such tortures. In proportion to his benevolence would be his incapacity to be happy in view of such sufferings, and in hearing of the alleged loud blasphemies which will be there endlessly uttered. Very different, however, will be our feelings when we know the fact, as we shall know then, whether we believe it now or not, that our wicked friends who incapacitated themselves for enjoyment in glory are no longer in living existence. This fact will then be as great a relief to us, so to speak, as it is now to know that a putrid body is consumed. In our perfected state our affections will be attached to character and likeness to God, and not to mere earthly relationship in the flesh. It is in Christ only that we can be one, and we shall then know no man after the flesh. Thus our happiness will not be interfered with by any considerations arising from the state of the wicked. On the contrary, as Isaiah forcibly expresses it, these wicked ones will be an abhorring unto all flesh, however much lauded and esteemed in this world. In the teaching of the Son of God, He has left no yearnings of the human spirit un-ministered to.
Our friends think that Rev. 14.11 greatly favors their doctrine, where we read, "The smoke of their torment ascended up forever and ever, and they have no rest day nor night." But we contend that this text does not refer to the endless destiny of the wicked, but to temporal judgments in this world upon "Babylon, that great city which made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication," ver. 8. After full examination, this is the opinion at which Elliott has arrived, in his Horae Apocalyptica.; and on the subject of endless miseries, he goes with the popular opinion. The context, and the design of the whole book, fall in with this view; but with no other. It is usual with the Bible to represent the downfall of kingdoms and states, in similar language. We have already seen that Jerusalem, its gates and its palaces, were threatened to be destroyed, with unquenchable fire; from which, according to our view, it might be said, that the " smoke ascended up forever and ever." Had it been so added the destruction would have been more signal, but not more complete. Let us, however, take a new specimen where there can be no mistake. Isa. 34.9-10. The whole chapter should be read. " And the streams thereof should be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up forever; from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it forever and ever." It will be seen how similar this language is to that of St. John, only the prophet's is far stronger than the apostle's; both as to intensity, and to the words which refer to duration. Yet verse 5 shews that the judgment denounced is upon Idumea, and upon its people; and verse 4. proves that it is not upon them in their individual aspect, but in their corporate aspect, as forming a kingdom. The terrible language denotes such utter destruction, that they should no more be a people and kingdom. We know that the land has been inhabited by other peoples, notwithstanding the words, "None shall pass through it forever and ever." It is manifest, too, that this total destruction of the Idumean kingdom was not an endless process; but an endless result. So in the case prophetically described by St. John, a city and state are to be destroyed; and so destroyed that it shall never be a kingdom any more.
This will be further evident when a few things are considered. Verse to tells us that the torment " shall be in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb." Do our friends suppose that the holy angels, and Jesus the Lamb, will be endlessly gazing upon the endlessly tormented wicked? To ask the question is to get a negative answer. But there is consistency, and a fitness of things, that when temporal judgments come upon the anti-Christian kingdom, it should be represented as done in the presence of the Lamb, and of His holy angels, who are the executioners of His just wrath. Besides this, when we read in chapter 18 of the overthrow of this same Babylon, we find that the merchants, ship-masters, sailors, etc., "who were made rich by her," still survive, to lament her; verses 18, 19, "And cried when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, What city is like unto this great city? And they cast dust upon their heads, and cried, Alas, alas, that great city wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea, by reason of her costliness; for in one hour is she made desolate." Let anyone read and study the whole of chaps. xiv. and xviii., and he will see it to be impossible to apply a single verse of them to the endless torments of the lost."
The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is another case in point. They were entirely overthrown by the rain from heaven of fire and brimstone; and so totally were they destroyed, that not a vestige remains. As this awful judgment occurs early in the sacred history, it is the one perpetually referred to by subsequent inspired writers as an instance of utter, and final, and ever-enduring judgment; not however meaning by this. that the cities were endlessly burning, or that the inhabitants were endlessly burning in them. Jude thus refers to it, verse 7, "Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, in like manner giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal (aieniou) fire." The "eternal" of Jude, is the "forever and ever" of John; and as the destruction is that of material cities, it is manifest that these phrases cannot denote an endlessly flaming fire; but an endless irreversible effect. It should be observed also, that the inhabitants are put in the same category as the cities; they are destroyed by the same fire, and with the same issue.
Perhaps it will be safe here to notice another verse in Isaiah, chapter 33.14, "Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? Who among us shall dwell in everlasting burnings?" That this text has been so often quoted by the friends of endless torments, can be accounted for only by the fact that they have a preconceived scheme to support; that they look about for Scripture language that may have a show of supporting it, and that then they are too eager to seize upon it, to allow them to examine the context. Or perhaps they have heard others quote it in that view; and so, without inquiry, have blindly adopted it. For let the whole chapter be read, and it will be seen that it is a prophecy of temporal judgments on Zion, inflicted by the Chaldeans or Romans, or perhaps both. And to the question, "Who shall dwell," etc. — who shall live through the judgment? The answer is, None; for says verse 12, "The people shall be as the burnings of lime; as thorns cut up shall they be burned in the fire."
After what has been said, chapter 19.3 can be no difficulty; 10.10, however, should be examined, where we read the words, "Shall be tormented day and night, forever and ever." Our friends believe that here is a fortress which is impregnable. Here is torment, day and night, forever and ever. They think that endlessness must be indicated here. Not so, however. True criticism, and sound exegesis, will not allow an expression necessarily to mean endlessness, how often soever it may be repeated, when it means only duration, be it long or short, according to the nature of the subject. We have already met with the same language in Isaiah, and there we found it was impossible to attach to it the idea of endlessness; and there is no necessity that " ever and ever " in this passage should be so stretched. These words will necessarily admit this idea, only where attendant circumstances and considerations favor it, and when there is nothing in the Bible which forbids it. Now the Bible does forbid us to apply the unlimited idea to this text. In pointing this out, however, we fear we shall have to disturb prejudices more than ever we have yet done, but we have to inquire what the Bible says, and just abide by that. It must be observed that the verse, under examination, applies the torment to the "devil that deceived them." Now the devil is to be subjected to the same punishment as wicked human beings. We say not in degree, but nature. Rev. 21.8 tells us that all wicked men " shall be cast into, or rather have their part in, the lake which burned with fire and brimstone, which is the second death." Rev. 20.10 teaches the same concerning the devil. The everlasting fire to which the Christless shall be sent, is the fire prepared for the devil and his angels; and thus the passages which declare that wicked men shall become extinct, teach in effect that the devil himself shall also become extinct. The sort of punishment, and the place of punishment are the same, whether for wicked angels, or for wicked men.
There are, however, distinct passages, in which the all-powerful and just God has revealed His purpose concerning the end of the devil; and we may well rejoice and be glad in them. He has been the great disturber of the universe, but he also shall come to naught. Let us read, with a believing heart, Heb. 2.14, 15, " Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same; that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who, through fear of death, were all their lifetime subject to bondage." If our faith cannot believe this, it is certainly weak. "The devils, however, believe it and tremble." It was this that made them cry out (Luke 4.34), "Let us alone; what have we to do with Thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? Art thou come to destroy us?" (before the time; Matt. 8.29). "I know Thee who Thou art; the Holy One of God." However much he may deceive us, he is not deceived himself; he knows his doom, and has known it from the days of paradise, when sentence was passed upon him; Gen. iii. 15, " The seed of the woman shall bruise, or crush, thy head, and thou shalt bruise, or crush, his heel." To crush the heel is not to take life; it is only to retard progress, and this the devil has done to the work of Christ; but to crush the head is to take life. Crush the tail of a serpent, and you do not kill him; but crush his head, and you kill him instantly. Jesus is the seed of the woman, and He became incarnate on purpose to crush the serpent's head, and in order to destroy the devil.
As God is true, and as He uses words in their proper meaning, the time shall come when the devil shall be no more, and the originator of sin, evil, and death be entirely cut off. The zeal of the Lord of Hosts shall do this. We exult in the assured prospect. Alleluia! for the Lord God Omnipotent reigns! He is stronger than the enemy, and He will, in His own way and time, execute all His purpose. Thus saith the Lord, the serpent's head shall be crushed, the devil shall be destroyed. We implicitly believe His Word, and confidently expect its fulfilment. May He hasten it in His time.
As to the destruction of all evil things, we have prospects quite as glorious and certain. When the devil is destroyed, his works will remain no longer. Thus saith the Lord in 1 John 3.8:—"For this purpose was the Son of God manifested that He might destroy the works of the devil." Here is an announcement clear, positive, and absolute. The divine Son of God was manifested for a specific purpose, and that purpose is to destroy the works of the devil. Surely it cannot be Christian faith, but sinful unbelief, if we suppose that the omnipotent God would purposely send His Son to accomplish a definite work, and then that He could not, or would not, do it. If He could not, where is His omnipotence, and His superiority to the devil, a mere creature? If he would not, why, in announcing His purpose, should the "God of truth," "who cannot lie," say one thing and do the very opposite? Or if He entered upon the work and found it too much for Him, where again is not only His omnipotence, but His infinite foresight? In a word, if He can be foiled in accomplishing a declared " purpose," and for which such unwonted preparations were made in the incarnation, sufferings, and death of Christ, where is His Godhead? But no! "He is not a man that He should lie, nor the son of man that He should repent. Hath He said it, and shall He not do it? Hath He spoken, and shall He not make it good?" Num. 23.l9. Yes, verily! He hath said He will destroy the works of the devil, and His declared design shall certainly and infallibly be accomplished.
And let it be observed, that it is not part of the devil's works, but the whole. Whatever he has introduced shall be abolished: all physical suffering, tears, sorrow, and sighing; all ignorance, prejudice, and error; all sin, unfairness, and injustice; all ecclesiastical and civil abuses; all starvation and want; all things wrong, of whatever kind, sort, or degree; all that the yearning heart can desire, all that Christian lips pray for. " Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done upon earth as it is in heaven." Glorious prospect! A work this worthy of God to undertake, and which none but He can execute. Yet, strange to say, thousands of so-called Bible teachers obscure this glory and try to blot it out, as if there were something in it to be loathed as a serpent, avoided as a deadly poison, and detested as the devil himself. How deep the darkness, and how evil the heart of unbelief! "Lord increase our faith." Some years since I read a sermon on this same text, the object of which was to show, that God would not destroy all the works of the devil, only a part; and it turned out a very small part. Hell was a work of the devil, but this would not be destroyed, for he himself and all wicked men were endlessly to dwell there. Sin is another work of his; but this too would endlessly be committed by all the lost, and that with deeper dye, and in a far more blasphemous degree than ever. Wicked men were his work: he that sowed the tares is the devil; but they were endlessly to live in hell, and grow more and more wicked. Physical and mental suffering was also a work of the devil, but this would not be destroyed, for lost wicked men would endlessly endure it. Yet the author of this sermon professed to believe in the Bible, and was well paid to lead the people to the truth. When he left the place in which he then was, he preached a farewell sermon on the text, Acts 20.26, 27, "Wherefore 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." Could any deception be greater, any delusion deeper? Surely angels must have wept and demons rejoiced. How long, O Lord, shall Thine under shepherds thus pervert Thy Holy Word? Come to the rescue, O Lord our God, for our hope and our help are only in Thee Overturn error, and let Thy truth alone be taught and established!
Let us raise our hopes and increase our faith by reading a few bright soothing words of inspiration expressive of our Heavenly Father's determined council: "And I heard a great voice out of heaven, saying, Behold the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be with them and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes, and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain for the former things are passed away. And He that sat upon the throne, said, Behold! I make all things new. And He said unto me, Write; for these things are true and faithful. And He said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end." Rev. 21.3-6. What gracious words! Everyone is emphatic and full. Let our friends give them the attention they deserve, and then ask their faith, understanding, and conscience, whether this Divine prophecy can be fulfilled while, as they allege, any of mankind, few or many, shall be suffering what they call death, and ever uttering blasphemies for endless agonies and pains which are past all our conceptions. Shame on those persons who so flatly contradict the Bible, and attribute to Him who is emphatically the Holy One, the Good, and the Just, a character and line of conduct which they would not attribute to a Nero, and do not attribute to a Moloch.
But there are some miscellaneous objections made by Mr. Darby and his co-believers which must be met.
It is said that the doctrine of the extinction of evil persons and things, has a tendency to lessen the sense of the evil of sin, and our belief in the doctrine of the atonement. We utterly contradict such a statement. No proof is offered, nor can be offered; and the assertion is like saying, that we sow wheat and it grows weeds. We cannot write even such an essay as this without implying, that sin is the one evil of the universe, and that it cannot be got rid of, in the slightest degree, without the atonement of the God-man, Christ Jesus. The atonement we consider as the grand part of God's great grand scheme in the creation and preservation of the universe. Without it Jehovah could not be developed, nor the intelligent part of the universe be perfected. The atonement is, to the moral world, what the sun is to the physical world; and the more we see of the need of that atonement, the more do we see of the sinfulness of sin. We can meet such an unfounded assertion as the above, only by a profession of our faith.
But 'our doctrine is said to be dangerous in another way. "If I tell my people," said one not long ago, "that there are no endless sufferings for them, but that the wicked will come to an end, they won't care for my warnings and will never repent." What a vain begging of the question is this! The simple question is—what is God's truth? for that alone can be profitable to the conversion of sinners. Nor will he give His blessing to a lie on which side soever it may be. Endless pains have, with reiterated energy, been preached, almost universally, now for fifteen hundred years; and what good has been done? Look at so-called Christian England, where but few weeks pass, if indeed any, when sinners are not threatened with never-ending sufferings. Examine the parishes and congregations where this is most frequently done. Is it there that most of heaven's blessing appears? Where is the effect of their frequent denunciation of endless, ever-enduring torments? Look around and ask—where? It is nowhere.
How can a lie from beneath convert sinners? How can the ignoring of heaven's truth win souls? There are Scriptural terrors of the Lord. These are profitable; for they appeal to a powerful instinct, which God has implanted in our nature—the love of life and the dread of death, of extinction. With these we can "persuade men," but with the other we cannot. People do not believe it. They may profess it; but they do not really believe it. They know well, and rightly, that God worketh all things after the counsel of His own Will. They also know that He only can work in them to will and to do. They know further that, in point of fact, effectual grace is not given to the millions on millions who are lost; and they believe also that the essence of God is love—that is, they know that God can save these millions, but that, in point of fact, He does not; and when they are told by their teachers that He sends such to irremediable, intolerable, excruciating sufferings and torture, they do not believe it; they cannot believe it. The human mind is no more constructed to believe this, than it is constructed to believe that a straight line is curved. It can no more believe in endless sufferings than it can believe there is no God. We find many professing to believe both; but let both analyze their own minds, and they will find it is a superficial and groundless persuasion, and no belief. Nay; they who preach never-ending pain, do not themselves believe in it. They teach that a tree is known by its fruit, and that faith is not faith unless it produces appropriate effects. Let them then be judged by this rule.
Would they live such easy, apathetic, unconcerned lives, if they really believed that ninety-nine hundredths of their fellow-men were in danger of this endless excruciating torture? Would they spend so much upon the "Lust of the eye and the pride of life?" Would they deliver such sleepy, feeling-less, cold sermons, preaching as if their subject were of the least possible importance? Would they let their conversation at parties be so frivolous and trifling? Would any of their time be spent in games and amusements? Tell it to the winds. Tell us a square is a circle; but do not tell us, with the expectation of gaining credit, that these teachers, in and out of the Church, believe what they teach on this point. It would be a libel upon both their heart and head. No! they do not believe it. But then how long is this illusion to last? How long is this miserable farce to be played in the thousands of our pulpits, and among the millions of our Israel? Is the reign of indifference, obduracy, and infidelity, to be wondered at? Is it not the natural result of our practical hypocrisy? Can the God of purity, uprightness, and truth, look down from heaven and give His blessing? If we cannot reach the teachers, we will turn to the people, and exhort them to be no longer misled, but to examine for themselves. One, after doing this, exclaimed not long since: "We have been the blind led by the blind, and we shall both fall into the ditch." These teachers have no room to talk of the danger of our doctrine. Have they tried it? They have tried their own long enough, and with what ill-effect hosts of stern facts declare.
Let them put away their traditions of the elders, and the rationalism of the philosophers, and sit at the feet of Jesus, and hear only His Word, and then they will learn the way of the Lord more perfectly. But, in the few cases where persons are "moved" by the terrible pictures and the burning words descriptive of burning torments, the feeling produced is terror, mere terror, and in proportion to the intensity of it, is it short and evanescent, leaving no softening of heart, no bettering of the life. "Law and terrors do but harden;" and it is not until persons look upon Him whom they have pierced, that they are melted, and mourn. Let teachers appeal to the natural love of life, and dread of extinction, found in the conscience of all, by telling them that God has decreed that the hardened sinner shall die; then let them offer full present free life and salvation by Christ; and let them Lo this, speaking fresh from the heart, and they will soon see that there is no danger in the " old paths." There is a chord in man's heart that can be touched with these doctrines—deterring on the one side, and drawing on the other. And, moreover, they are God's own truths, to which He has promised success. "What is the chaff to the wheat, saith the Lord." Let them sow this wheat, God's own pure Word, and nothing else, and they will, through His Spirit, find an abundant harvest. But, if they go on sowing the enemy's tares, the state of the people will remain as it has been since primitive times; and then let Jer. 23 and Eze. 34 be a warning.
But now, to complete the examination of this question, it will be necessary to point out the foundation error upon which this vast scheme of endless torments has been built. This is the doctrine of the innate immortality of man. Our opponents hold that when he is once brought into being he must necessarily and absolutely live forever as long as God Himself shall live; and some have gone so far as to say, that even God cannot put him out of being, inasmuch as He cannot perform a contradiction. To oppose this doctrine, we are quite aware that we shall have to go against the pride of intellect, which is the accumulation of thousands of years, and to differ from men of the highest reputation. The dogma of the immortality of the soul, as it is phrased, is established as an undoubtable and undoubted truth; and it is thought as senseless and shocking to deny it, as to deny the existence of God. And yet, strange as it may seem, it can be proved by neither reason nor Scripture. Those who first introduced it, offered it only as conjecture; and it was not received as true till philosophizing Christian teachers gave it currency, by a non-natural interpretation of certain texts. After much opposition from those who held fast the simplicity of their faith in Christ, it was almost universally believed in.
Too soon was it perceived what advantage could be taken of it to keep the people in bondage and dependence upon the priesthood. The dogma of endless torments followed as a matter of course; for as the soul, as alleged, must live to endless ages, and as the vast majority of those who died were not holy, and fit for heaven, where were they to live but in hell, writhing in endless tortures? The contemplation of this became intolerable to the human mind, especially to the survivors of those who had died in their sins. Hence, the invention and introduction of purgatory, indulgences and masses, which have so vastly enriched the priesthood through their assumed power of praying souls out of torment, and of introducing them into glory. The deluded people were instructed to look upon the priesthood, especially upon the pope and bishops, as little gods, who held the eternal destiny of people in their hands; and at last the minds of the people became so degraded and so incapable of thinking for themselves, that they actually believed all this and much more of the same sort. As they loved their departed friends; parents and children, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, rushed to the priesthood; the rich with their untold riches and unnumbered acres, and the widow with her two mites; without which this holy priesthood, these loving fathers, would not stir a little finger to help the tortured soul out of misery. Of course these golden revenues were much prized, and the doctrine upon which all the profit was founded became stereotyped. If any questioned all this usurpation, they were consigned to the flames, without the option of a single mass to take them out. The Reformers saw all this, and their indignant spirits rose to the occasion. Luther himself denounced the dogma of the immortality of the soul and of endless torments. But "the spirit of error," the deceiver of the nations, contrived to get these dogmas introduced into the Reformed Church, into the standard articles of some branches, and into the teachings of almost all her ministers. Protestant clergymen do not, indeed, thus increase their income, though many of them assume the false power of the priesthood and ask for "offerings;" but it seems not a little gratifying to poor little human fallen nature, to stand aloft over the heads of the people, and, in the name of the Most High, as they allege, deal out threatening of endless wrath and misery among their must be silent hearers. And if anyone questions the truth of such teaching, it is almost like putting his hand into a wasp's nest. The teachers take alarm, and try to sting his character, to misrepresent his doctrines and neutralize his efforts; and thus Bible reading and inquiry are stopped, and consequently this giant Error keeps his goods in peace.
Our purpose now will be again to search the Bible to see what it teaches concerning this point of the alleged immortality of the soul. It will be seen that it does not teach the innate, intrinsic immortality of man; but that it does teach that he is capable of immortality, and shall certainly have it, if he be united to the immortal God, as the branch to the vine, and so made a " partaker of the divine nature." It further teaches, as we believe, and will show, that if a sinner be not thus united to God, and be not a new creature, he must become extinct, when God in judgment finally and forever withdraws His Spirit. The Scripture teaching on the pneumatology and psychology of man will clear up every difficulty.
It is hard to see with what view Mr. Darby wrote from pages 107 to 111, especially as he has shown much severity in page 1 towards some person who had made a show of learning, and who had dared to oppose him. The tendency of these pages certainly is to show, to
those who are ignorant of Hebrew and Rabbinism, how very senseless the Rabbis were. Then, as the Gnostics and the Manichaeans—ugly names to an English ear—according to Mr. Darby, followed them, as we follow these—according to the same oracle—the inference is that we are all of us a set of senseless heretics; and that he stands out as an instance of sense, learning and correctness. Mr. Darby, however, should remember, that neither the Rabbis, nor the Gnostics, nor the Manichaeans, are the rule of our faith; but the Bible simply and solely. We believe the Rabbis are capable of teaching a good many excellent truths to Mr. Darby; and it is not because the Rabbis believe anything that therefore it must necessarily be false. We would receive what they say, as we would receive what Mr. Darby himself says, just as far as it may be in accordance with the Bible, and no further. If all of us were better acquainted with the writings of the Rabbis, they would help us greatly to catch the turn of thought of the sacred writers, and to put us into their standpoint. As historians of the religious thought, and of the doctrines of their generation and nation, we consider their writings invaluable; but we would not make them a rule of faith on the one hand, nor a necessarily non-rule on the other.
We naturally turn first to the inspired account of the formation of man (Gen. 2.7): "And the Lord God formed man of the dust, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul."
First, we have here the formation of the organized frame, usually called the body. In the Hebrew it is, ha adam, the Adam; and it was the name which God Himself gave to the first of human kind, because He made him out of ha adanzah, the ground or dust. It should be observed that this name was given to the frame, or body alone, before it was animated, and therefore it is that St. Paul (1 Cor. 15.47), contrasting the first Adam with the second, writes, "The first man, is of the earth earthy; the second man, is the Lord from heaven." This frame was made in beauty, and marvelously and perfectly organized, in the image of Elohim, the Son of God. It was yet, however, but matter; in various combinations and appearances; and it had, in itself, no principle of life, nor any capability of originating life. Therefore we read,—
Secondly, that Jehovah put into it His own Spirit. "He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life." The word for which breath stands is Neshamah, which mean s the Spirit; and, in this meaning, its use in the Old Testament is restricted to the Spirit of God, and to the spirit of man. He is called the Spirit of lives; for the original is in the plural, and should be so translated; for this, the only "Author and Giver of life," imparts more kinds of life than one; or rather, there are different modifications or manifestations of it. "There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit." (1 Cor. 12.4.) When, therefore, the Spirit of lives was breathed into the earthy frame, He took with Him, and put into that frame, more lives than one.
There was intellectual life, which imparted those mental faculties to man in a limited degree, which the Spirit has in an unlimited degree. Then there was the life of holiness, which gave to man's intellect all holy and heavenly dispositions, called " the fruits of the Spirit," in Gal. 5.22. But further,—
Thirdly, the infusion of this spirit into the earthy inanimate frame, made it a living creature. It was a creature before, when it was so finely and beautifully molded; but it was not living. When, however, the earthy frame became the residence of a spirit thus breathed into it, a living creature was the result. The words in our version are, "man became a living soul." The Hebrew for living soul is, nephesh chayah, which in every other place is rendered as we have given it, " living creature." To understand clearly the idea conveyed by the words, it will be desirable to quote the instances where they occur. Gen. 1. 20, " Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life; nephesh chayah." Ver. 21, " And God created great whales, and every living creature that moves, which the waters brought fourth abundantly: " netheslichayah again. Ver. 24, " And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind." Ver. 30, "And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat."
In both these cases the Hebrew is again, nephesh chayah. But when we come to the same words, as applied to man, we meet a different rendering. Nephesh chayah there, is made to mean " a living soul," which, to an English scholar, suggests a very different idea from that suggested by a "living creature." Now it was in the Hebrew that the inspired mind of God was given; and it is the duty of the translator, honestly, and without bias, to render the original into exact corresponding English. If living soul is the true translation of nephesh chayah then it ought to have been so given when applied to the lower animal creation, even when it referred to creeping things; or, if "living creature" was correct, then it should have been so given in the case of man. Had the phrase been consistently rendered, the English reader would not have been liable to so much error on the point before us. Now, nephesh is the word selected by the Spirit to denote a creature that lives by breathing, and is able to exhibit its life by voluntary motion. It denotes animal life, whether it resides in the insect, or in man, or in any of the species between these extremes; and as far as the mere nephesh is concerned, man is not superior to other animals. He is vastly superior, but it is not on this account; and if nephesh in Hebrew, and psuche in Greek, be rightly translated soul, and if the nephesh in man be immortal its own nature, then the same nephesh which resides in creeping things and beasts of the earth, must be, in its own nature, immortal also. Or, if the nephesh in all the lower animals is not immortal, then the nephesh in man is not immortal. He may become immortal, and the true holy believer in Christ shall most certainly become so; but it is not because he has a nephesh, but in a very different way, and on a different account.
It will be observed that this nephesh is the outward, discernable, manifestation, or effect of the neshamah when he has taken up his residence in the earthy organized frame. It was not until the neshanzah was breathed into this frame by God that it — the frame—"became a living creature," and it is when the neshamah or " Spirit returns to God who gave it " that the frame or "body returns to the dust as it was." Eccl. 12.7. Evidently, therefore, the Spirit is the cause, and life in the frame, the effect; and they stand in the same relation to each other as does every cause and effect. It is evident also that we cannot, with accuracy of thought, or if we subordinate our thoughts to the Bible, give a separate independent existence to the nephesh or soul. It is the life of the body, caused by the spirit, breathed into it; and when the spirit is breathed out of it, then the nephesh, animal life, or soul comes to an end. The spirit, however, who caused that life, or soul, does not come to an end. As we have just seen, it returns to God who gave it, and the same inspired wise man further writes, Eccl. 3.21, that the "spirit (rooach) of man goes upward," while the spirit (rooach) of the beast goes downwards to the earth." There is much in this which will disturb the views in which we have been brought up. But the Bible is the rule of our faith in all revealed things; and we cannot go astray when we keep to it. It is, however, commonly the practice, in speaking on the psychology of man, to make the Bible bend to our notions, and not our notions to the Bible. Some appear to begin by supposing that the Bible gives little, or no teaching on this subject; and that it contains nothing clear, nothing conclusive on it. The very opposite is however the fact; it affords all the information we can desire. But, strange as it may seem, few are ready either to see it, or believe it, even among those who profess to believe its inspired teaching.
On this, as well as on some other points, they have received their opinions from the schools of philosophy; and it is far more attractive, and it tends more to promotion, to hold the opinions learnt there, and to use the phraseologies there employed, than to keep to simple Bible notions and expressions; till indeed these are adopted by the schools, and then it is who can magnify them most. This, however, though correct as to doctrine, is not faith in God's teaching; but in man's. It is really melancholy for the prospects of pure truth, when our constituted guides put forth the notion that the "indwelling Ego," or soul, has form, and some kind of "corporiety or material substance;" so that when it leaves the body and becomes unclothed, it is likely still to preserve " a distinct objective existence," and that hereafter this Ego, this subtle material soul "shall aggregate to itself certain elements from the surrounding environments," and thus make for itself another body similar to its present body. This is put forth with an air of profundity; but is it worthy of a name better than rubbish? In one short verse, the teaching Spirit of the Most High has shown us more of the psychology and pneumatology of man, than can be found in all the papers and treatises of those who write on the subject, apart from the Bible. It teaches us that into the earthy frame, which God called ha Adam, He breathed His Spirit, and thus made man a living creature. This is the Bible's teaching when we let it speak for itself.
Let us pursue our plan of reading some passages where nephesh is found, so as to see its usus loquendi. The English word in Italics will represent it. We have already had five instances where we found it applied to animal life in all its grades from creeping things up to man.
Gen. 2. 19, " Whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.”
Gen. 9.4, " But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.”
Gen. 9.9, 10, "I establish My covenant with you, and with your seed after you; and with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you." Instances of like kind could be produced to almost any amount, all of which would show that nephesh, which in Greek is psuche and in English soul, is applied to all animals.
Gen. 36.6, "All the persons of his house."
Gen. 37.21, "Let us not kill him" (literally kill his soul).
Gen. 46.18, "These she bare unto Jacob, even sixteen souls."
Numerous other passages might be adduced to show that nephesh is used as we should use person, and indeed it is often so rendered.
Lev. 11.44, "Neither shall ye defile yourselves."
Est. 4.13, "Think not with thyself that thou shalt escape."
Est. 9.31, "As they had decreed for themselves."
Num. 23.10, "Let me die the death of the righteous" (literally, let my soul die.)
Job 36.14, "They die in youth." ("Their soul dies," in the margin.) In all these cases and there are several others nephesh is used for the personal pronouns.
Lev. 19.23, "Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead."
Lev. 24.17, "He that killed a man,"—literally, "he that killed the soul or life of a man."
Lev. 24.18, "He that killed a beast,"---literally, "he that killed the soul or life of a beast."
Lev. 21.1, "There shall none (of the priests) be defiled for the dead." Ver. 11, "Neither shall he go into any dead body."
Num. 9.6, "And there were certain men, who were defiled by the dead body of a man, that they could not keep the Passover." Ver. 10, "If any of you be unclean by reason of a dead body." There are several other passages where nephesh is used for a dead body, but these are sufficient.
Now here we have various applications of nephesh, none of which are contradictory, but all growing out of the first instance. 'We have creature, life, person, and dead body, or dead person. Let anyone take as extensive a survey as he likes of the writings and sermons, and expositions of modern divines, and then say whether they would have written these texts. Do they use the word soul as the inspiring Spirit uses nephesh, or soul, in these texts? If popular theology is right, the Spirit should never have inspired these passages. Would modern divines, in consistency with modern theology, say?—Let us not kill Joseph's immortal soul? or, Let my immortal soul die the death of the righteous? or, You shall not defile yourselves with a dead immortal soul? Nothing can be more certain, that the Spirit who inspired Moses knew not the dogma of the immortality of the soul. Not long ago, one of our literati said, that the Hebrew writers had to learn the immortality of the soul from Plato. True, if they ever learnt it at all; for certainly they did not learn it from the Spirit of God.
Having said so much on the use of nephesh or soul, in the Old Testament, there will be the less occasion to enlarge on the use of psuche, the Greek representation of nephesh, in the New. Psuche occurs a hundred and five times in the New Testament. Three times it is unfitly rendered mind, twice heart, meaning, " as if for your life;" three times for the personal pronouns; forty times it is translated life, and fifty-seven times soul. In these last cases it would have been better translated life, except in a few cases where it is evidently used instead of what we mean by person. In two places where it is rendered souls, the reference is to the lower animals: Rev. 8.9, "And third part of the creatures which were in the sea and had life (literally souls) died;" 16.3, "And every living soul died in the sea."
It is clear, then, that the Spirit uses psuche in the New Testament exactly as He uses nephesh in the Old Testament, except that He does not anywhere apply psuche to a dead body. The conclusion is obvious and certain, that the Spirit of God does not teach the immortality of the soul in the New Testament. Indeed, the teachers of the popular dogma do not suppose that nephesh, psuche, soul, suggest any idea of immortality. When they quote texts on this point, they rely on those passages which are alleged to teach that the wicked will be endlessly tormented, and then they infer that the soul is immortal; for that, otherwise, the wicked could not endlessly live to be endlessly tormented: that is, they attempt to prove one error by assuming that another error is true. If, then, we are content to take our psychology from the Sacred Scriptures, we shall believe that the soul is not immortal, but that it is animal life, and must end when the Spirit is breathed out and returns to God.
We add that it is as contrary to common-sense and reason, as it is to Scripture. Immortality is infinite duration; and this, or any other infinite quality, requires an infinite being to sustain it. A creature can have no infinite quality of any kind. We see the utter absurdity, not to say blasphemy, of any man arrogating to himself the Divine attribute of infallibility. But it is no more absurd, nor less blasphemous, to arrogate to oneself the Divine attribute of immortality. And if Protestants do not perceive this, the hindrance to it is just the same as that which hinders Romanists from perceiving their error; for certainly the one is not more monstrous than the other. But prejudice has neither eyes nor ears. A creature, from the very necessities of his nature, can live only moment by moment, and must be sustained and kept in being by his Maker. To say of such a one that he must necessarily live on and on to endless ages, argues great confusion of thought. That he is immortal, like God, is a contradiction, or as if we were to say, a finite infinite man; a square round figure. According to the inspired teaching of Isaiah 57.15, 16, it is the quality of the immortal Jehovah to live an eternity at once; but man lives only a moment at once; and that which is not self-sustained, but is sustained by another, may come to an end at any moment. Who can say, " I AM," except Jehovah Himself, in whom we all live, and move, and have our being? He who made man what he is, and gave him his life and being, can prolong it ad infinitum if He pleases, and this He has promised to do in a certain way and on certain conditions. Man has not, and cannot possess intrinsic, innate immortality, and he can obtain it only by a vital faith in Christ, producing love and holiness; but if he remain in unbelief and sin, extinction or death must be his portion.
That God only is the possessor of immortality is, without doubt, taught in the Bible. The teaching of the Spirit by St. Paul is as explicit as words can make it, that "God only hath immortality." Our friends who contend for the innate immortality of the soul, could never have written that God alone possesses it. If they had guided the Apostle's hand in writing this text, they would have dictated the sense they endeavor now to put upon it; that He only is the author of immortality, and that He only originally possessed it; but that He is not the only one who has it now, for that all angels and men, and even devils have it, as well as He, and must have it as long as He, and in this respect be equal with Him. So awful and manifest a distortion of God's Word would never have been resorted to by them, but for a preconceived theological scheme. Our opponents have received Plato's heathen dogma of the innate immortality of the soul, and this necessitates them to twist every passage which is inconsistent with it, as if, forsooth, Plato's teaching was to be received in preference to the teaching of the Spirit of God; and that, therefore, the latter must yield to the former. We earnestly entreat all who wish to see the real truth to read the whole passage (1 Tim. 6.15, 16) for themselves, and judge whether it is possible, with any fairness, to get out of it the sense given by our opponents. We hesitate not to say it is impossible, if any dependence is to be placed upon words; and if there is not, then no one can be certain of any sentence he may read, whether in the Bible or in any other book. The passage says also, that God is "the only Potentate, the King of kings, and the Lord of lords." This part of it may be as easily got rid of as the other, by the same sophistry. He was originally the only Potentate, and King of kings (when, by-the-bye, there was no king but Himself, nor anyone to rule over, and, therefore, not a king at all): but now there are many other potentates, and many other king of kings; and now, in this respect also, there is no superiority in the infinite Jehovah to many others. If our opponents can maintain their exposition of the one part of the passage, they must receive the exposition of the other. But, truth to tell, they can do neither. The text absolutely declares, and as plainly as words can make it, that God ONLY hath immortality, and that He is the ONLY Potentate. Alas, what distortions does the Word of God suffer from the hands of the so-called orthodox, when they are set upon upholding the traditions of men.
But let us read another text or two bearing on the subject. John 6.5, 7, "As the living Father bath sent Me and I live by the Father; so he that eats me, even he, shall live by Me." Christ, as man, as much lived by the Father as He was sent by the Father; and when any man lives at all, he as much lives by Christ, as the man Christ does by the Father. It would appear then that in the mere manhood of Christ there was no innate immortality. Again, v. 26, 27, "For as the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself; and hath given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of man." It seems that it was, "because He was son of man," that He could have no authority to execute judgment, and that He could not have life in Himself, except it were given Him of the Father. What is this but saying, He had no innate life, no innate immortality? Both are a gift, not an intrinsic natural quality. Christ, as man, did not claim innate immortality, and what presumption in us to claim it! As men, are we greater than He, that we should arrogate to ourselves an innate quality by which we must be immortal? Vain man would be great, though he is born like a wild ass's colt. Job 11.12.
What then are the results of our examination of Bible psychology? We cannot be mistaken when we say that they are these:—
1. As far as the mere nephesh, psuche, or soul, is concerned, it pertains to all possessing animal life—it is animal life. 2. The soul is not, in its own nature, immortal, though, of course, God can keep it alive as long as He pleases. 3. This animal life, or soul, is capable of dying, and is spoken of as dead, and it is threatened with death,—"The soul that sins, it shall die." Let no one fear to believe what God reveals, and let him not prostitute the common rules of literary interpretation, and his common-sense, to the traditions of men.
The following results must follow:—It is unscriptural, as well as illogical, to hold that the soul is the seat of the intellect. Man has intellect, but it is not the soul, nor does it reside in the soul. It is, however, correct to say that the intellect cannot exhibit itself—we do not say exercise itself—except through the living man; but this is not what persons in general mean by the soul. Also it is not correct to say that the soul is the seat of religion, except in this sense: the nephesh, psuche, or soul, is life, animal life, and it is by this life alone that man can show what he is, and what he can do; and, therefore, by this alone that he can show the power and practice of religion. But this is not what persons mean by the phrases they use in their prayers and teachings. They appear to make the soul some kind of personality; then they make religion to work upon the soul, and then the soul to work upon the life. There is not, however, the least warrant in the Bible thus to think and speak of the soul. It is equally incorrect to speak of death as the separation of soul and body, unless persons mean that at death life leaves the body. This is Scriptural, but it is far from what is usually meant. The language we complain of is perpetually found in modern theology, but it does not occur once in the Bible, nor anything that warrants it, though we do often meet with instances where the spirit is separated from the body. Moreover, lastly, it is Scripturally incorrect also, to confound the soul with the spirit, though this, too, is perpetually done. They are, however, as widely different as cause and effect, and the identification of the two has been a fruitful cause, not only of loose thinking, but of much erroneous theology.
This brings us to consider the subject of pneumatology concerning man. As we have gained from the Bible a definite idea of psychology, or the nature of the nephesh, psuche, or soul, we need not dwell so long, as we must otherwise have done, on this part of our subject.
The spirit in man is not to be considered as part of him in the same way and sense as we consider the body and soul parts of him. The body, or frame, was made out of materials previously created by God. He first gave existence to matter, and then He put it into that infinite variety of beautiful forms and tints which we see everywhere. The spirit in man was not created, nor was it made out of anything previously created, nor does it arise out of any subtle refinement of matter, or any combination of particles of matter. Matter, however modified, can have no life in itself. Its essential qualities, in respect to this, are inertness and immobility, and we are most glad to see that our savans now announce their belief on scientific and experimental grounds, that life only can produce life. Some of us have long since come to the same conclusion on meta-physical and Scriptural grounds, and it is not a little gratifying that the same point has been arrived at from different quarters. This harmony will increase until all will perceive that there is no difference between science and the Bible, when both are rightly understood, and correctly expounded. That life only can give life we consider not a proposition, but an axiom. The spirit of life in man was not made or originated for the first time, as was the case with the earthy frame, but it was infused by God, and from God. It was a portion of His own Spirit. The Lord God breathed into man's nostrils the Neshamah, or Spirit, of life; and, as a consequence, he became a living soul, or creature, or person. Now, as matter has no life, as it cannot originate life, we must look to some other source for it. And this is God Himself who has life in Himself, who is life, the never-beginning, the never-ending self-existing great "I AM."
Spirit is not like matter. This latter, as it can be recognized by us, is an aggregate of particles, more or less, taking some bulk, form, and figure. Not so the Spirit. It is essentially one without hulk, form, figure, or color. The only Spirit in existence is the Spirit of Jehovah, which fills all space, permeates everything, energizes all energies, is the cement of adhesion, the influence of attraction, the power of all motion, the executor of nature's laws, the sustainer of all created existences, and the life of all lives; the "all, and in all." This Spirit of Jehovah, who, in the unity of the Godhead is Jehovah Himself, imparts Himself to all His creatures according to their requirements. To man, His chief work, the highest of all creation, He imparts Himself in the greatest degree. Therefore man alone bears His image, has the marvelous faculty of speech, possesses the highest intellect and moral powers, and is capable of vast degrees of progress. His amazing powers arise from no bodily or material qualities, but from a spiritual source, and the Spirit in man is not part of man proper, but part of God. Looking at the portion which He imparts to each individual, we sometimes call it the spirit of man; still, with respect to its source, it is the Spirit of God; and the portion He bestows upon man is called both the "gifts"—favors, kindnesses; and "the manifestation"—visible acting, out beaming, of the Spirit. 1 Cor. 12.1. Frequently does St. Paul tell us that the body is the temple of the Holy Ghost.
In working all things according to the good pleasure of His own will, He produces three general "manifestations:"—1. There is the manifestation of animal life. We have seen that animation cannot arise from inert-ness, or life from non-life; it is a contradiction, an absurdity. We have seen also that the Spirit is the source of life. As the Nicene Creed says, " He is the Author and Giver of life;" and this "may be proved by most certain warrants of Scripture." He is, therefore, the source and maintainer of man's animal life. The body, thus possessed of animal life, is the seat of animal appetites and desires; and their temperate and subordinate enjoyment is attended with much advantage; but their rampant exercise is vice, and must be followed by the direst consequences. This is the lowest part of man's nature. 2. There is the manifestation of intellectual life. We call this mind, and include in it understanding, volition, conscience, memory, with the mental affections and passions. In many places God claims to be the Author of mind. The Spirit is called by Isaiah the Spirit of understanding, Isa. 11.2. In Job 37, He asks who is the imparter of wisdom and understanding, and He does this in the way which shows that He is the One. The whole of Scripture, however, is summed up in the teaching of St. John 1. 1-9. The whole passage should be studied; but, for brevity, two verses only are selected: " All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men." There is an inspired epitome of Gen. 1. and part of 2. The Word, who was God, was the One who breathed this spirit into man, and made him alive.
But the same One who was the life, was also the light of men. He imparted man's mind. Here is a wonderful manifestation of God's Spirit, and not less so because it is to almost every person. In the operations of mind in man, we see the out-beaming of the Spirit; and when we fully comprehend St. Paul's inspired philosophy,—"For in Him we live, and move, and have our being," we shall clearly see that He is the Author of all inventions and improvements in arts, sciences, and poetry. " There is a spirit in man, and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth him understanding." Job. 32.8. Mental life, then, comes from the Spirit, and this is the higher life of man; and if there were no "spirit of error" (1 John 4.6) in existence, man's intellect would perceive the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. 3. There is also the manifestation of spiritual life. This is the holiness which diffused itself throughout the whole of man's body, with all its propensities and desires, and throughout all his mental operations; and as it was at the beginning, so it will be in the end, with every true believer in Christ. He will be holy, as God is holy. This is the highest life in man. These are the three parts of man—the body, the spirit, and the soul, or animal life—without which neither the capabilities of the body, nor the operations of the spirit could exhibit themselves; and therefore it is that soul is so often put for person. It is when all these parts of man are in due exercise, each taking its proper place, and performing its appropriate functions, that man is entire and complete; and this was what was prayed for, by the Apostle, for the Thessalonians (1 Thess. 5.23), "I pray God your whole spirit, and soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."
This view of the three-fold nature of man will disturb the feelings of many, but there is nothing in it contrary to Scripture and reason; but everything favored by both. It makes God the origin of life, and man the chief recipient and exhibitor of it. He has a body of exquisite proportions and beauty, and of noble, erect, lofty bearing; he has a mind of yet unknown capabilities to acquire the knowledge of God and of His works, himself included, and also to contain, in full measure, the holiness of the " Divine nature." All that is earthy of him is from the dust, and all that is life in him, whether animal, mental, or spiritual, is of the Spirit of Jehovah. This, we believe, is the teaching of the Bible, and we have no fear that it can be overthrown. From this view will result a few things worthy of special observation.
I. In the marvelous process of reproduction, man can beget only the material part of himself, only "his own image and likeness." He cannot beget the mental, still less the spiritual part of himself. Nay, he cannot beget the animal life. His children will possess animal and mental life, and, perhaps, spiritual life, too; but he is not the begetter, the imparter of either the one or the other. This statement will, no doubt, appear incredible and baseless, but it is not incredible in itself, but only because it is not the received opinion. Still it is most consonant with reason and Scripture. If, as the Bible teaches, it is true that all that was life in the first man was by infusion from the Spirit, then all that is life in his children must necessarily be from the same source. Matter, by whatever molecular action, cannot beget spirit, and the Spirit has no occasion to create spirit. He can impart it from Himself, the infinite fountain of it; and He can do this without diminishing His own infinity. "Like begets its like," and by the laws of nature, the material man, by a material act, begets the material part of his progeny, and God has reserved to Himself to bestow the immaterial part of man. To say that this is beyond our ken, and that we cannot take cognizance of this by experiment, and then to infer that it is impossible for us in any way to learn anything about it, is not wise. There is another source of knowledge, and of certain knowledge, too, besides that which results from our own observation and experiments. Of course this is not a subject that can be investigated by experiments. But as it is part of the knowledge of ourselves, and needful for us, is it surprising that the great Father should instruct us, who are His offspring? Now He has done this in His book, and it is no proof of our wisdom, or advancement in science when it is not studied. Let us, however, turn to its sacred pages for information on this point.
Twice does Moses designate the Almighty as " the God of the spirits of all flesh." Num. 16.22, 27.16. Isaiah thus writes (42.5), " Thus saith God the Lord, He that created the heavens, and stretched them out; He that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; He that giveth breath (neshamah, spirit) unto the people upon it, and spirit (rooach, also spirit) to them that walk therein." This language is remarkable. It intimates that to give the neshamah to the people, is as much a Divine act as to create the heavens, and to spread forth the earth; and also that while He created the heavens, etc., in times past, once for all, He did not give the spirit once for all, and then leave it, by a law, to multiply itself; but He " giveth " the spirit continually, habitually; it is His usual course, the act of giving His Spirit is repeated perpetually, as occasion requires. Let this passage be compared with Zech. 12. "Saith the Lord, which stretches forth the heavens, and lays the foundation of the earth, and formed the spirit of man within him." Here again God asserts, that He it is that forms the spirit of man; and the present tense of the verb again shows that He is forming it perpetually; Is. 57.16, "I will not contend forever, neither will I be always wroth: for the spirit (rooach) should fail before me and the souls" (not souls, but spirits, plural of neshamah in Heb.) "which I have made." In this passage He claims to be the Maker of spirits. This, surely, is evidence enough, but if any should think not, St. Paul will fix the point (Heb. 12.9), "We have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of spirits, and live?" There are many fathers of flesh or the body; each child has his own proper father; but there is only one Father of spirits. Earthly fathers are the begetters of the flesh or body only; the heavenly Father, the one begetter of our spirits; and the former are not more truly and really our fathers than is the latter, "Our Father which art in heaven."
We think, then, that our proposition is proved beyond a doubt, that man reproduces the body only, and that, in each case, God infuses the spirit; and surely this is as consonant with common-sense and reason, as with the Bible.
We shall, however, be met with alleged difficulties. It will be said, Does not this view come into contact with our doctrine of the sinfulness of man and of the fall? As a general answer we say, that if any view is clearly established by the Bible, literally and grammatically construed, it cannot be overthrown by a traditional method of stating a doctrine, which may be connected with that view. If the clear statements of Scripture come into opposition with any form of our traditions, the latter must give way to the former, not the former to the latter, as is too often the case. Man is undoubtedly a fallen creature, and is naturally sinful, and it will turn out that his sinfulness consists partly in being deprived of a large amount of what is right, and partly that a large amount of what is wrong has been infused into him. But on this subject it will be necessary to change, in some degree, our standpoint. We will state what we believe to be the teaching of the Bible concerning the fall and sinfulness of man's nature. When man disobeyed the test-law of God, "the spirit of holiness" was driven from him, and there remained to him his intellect and his animal life, with its propensities and desires. As his intellect was capable of being guided by "the Spirit of truth," so, on that very account, it was capable of being guided by "the spirit of error." Both spirits were in existence, and had then, as they have now, access to the human mind. The spirit of error did enter, and found lodgment there. It blinded the understanding, warped the judgment, perverted the will, estranged the affections from God and goodness, and exercised the mental passions on inappropriate objects. The intellect thus deprived of the spirit of holiness," and filled with " the spirit of error," could not, and did not choose, to keep in due regulation and subordination the animal propensities, and they became rampant, and domineered over the whole man. Thus man became sinful, and was in himself morally helpless and hopeless. The process of degeneration, sometimes called the law of degeneration, began; for as man was capable of progression, so, necessarily, he was capable of retrogression. He can, if he will be so foolish, walk backwards, but it is attended with much inconvenience and discomfort; for he was not constructed for the backward motion, only for the forward. Through the rampant exercise of the bodily propensities, bodily diseases are superinduced, and these have a pernicious effect upon the mind, which, as it dwells in the body, must work through its materialities, called the senses. Bad blood, especially, is sent to the brain, the primary organ through which the spirit operates, and it becomes enfeebled, diseased, and unfit to be the instrument of vigorous, developed, intellectual operations. The mind, in turn, acts upon the body, and they both act and react, and the individual gets worse and worse, unless restraining grace works, or the all-powerful Spirit of holiness comes and converts the sinner from the error of his ways. It is in accordance with this account that the Scripture so frequently speaks of sinful human nature as " the flesh," and " the body of sin," and the outcoming of this nature as " the works of the flesh," of which a long black list is given in Gal. 5.19-21.
Now, as is the fallen father, such is the fallen child. He is conceived in sin. And when he is quickened, and afterwards born, he is destitute of the Spirit of holiness, and possesses no more of life than is indicated by his bodily activities and propensities, and his mental vigor, the former prevailing above the latter. lie is what St. Paul calls the natural or psuchikos man, who receives not the things of the Spirit of God; and this, in contrast to the spiritual or pnumatikos man, who does. The one receives the Spirit for spiritual, saving purposes; the other does not so receive Him. Nor should it be forgotten that the individual thus conceived, and thus born, is always open to the invisible influence of "the spirit of error," and to the visible influence of evil example, and thus it comes to pass that there is not one good, no, not one.
Still, it will be said that our view represents God as putting His Spirit into a body for purposes of animal and intellectual life, where He knows it will get mixed up with sin, and therefore be sinful. "How can these things be?" Again we say, is the premise true? Is our view founded upon clear warrant of Scripture? If so,—and we think it cannot he questioned,—then we are not to be moved by an inference, especially as it may turn out that the inference is not logically drawn. Let one fact, too frequently ignored, perhaps not observed, be considered, that nowhere in the Bible is the spirit of man spoken of as lost. The body and the soul, or life, are so spoken of; but the spirit never. This is very significant. If the spirit were lost, like the body and life, surely there would have been some intimation of it somewhere in the Bible; but there is none. Again, nowhere is it said that the spirit is redeemed, though we perpetually read of the redemption of the life or soul, and sometimes of that of the body. The omission is certainly striking. How is it to be accounted for? It cannot arise from neglect, for man's fallen state and his redemption is the specific subject of the Bible. But here is the most important part of it, according to popular notions, quite omitted. Not a word that tells us either that the spirit is lost, or that it is redeemed. The Divine Author of the Book is far too thoughtful, too wise, too unerring, to omit any point, still less an essential point of the very subject upon which He wrote. Yet it cannot be hidden that He must have done this, if the orthodox doctrine concerning the pneumatology of man is correct. But the fact is, the omission is intentional. All that formed man proper was lost, and was redeemed with the precious blood of Christ. But the spirit in man, which is a portion of the Spirit of God, was not part of man proper. It was a superadded gift of God, and was as much of grace as it is now, only then it was a gift to an unfallen creature as he came from the hands of his Maker; now it is a gift to a fallen creature, through the redemption of Jesus.
With respect, therefore, to the state of man by the fall, and his state by redemption, we must make a wide distinction between his body and soul, on the one side, and his spirit on the other. It by no means appears that "the Father of spirits" ever infused a portion of His Spirit into the earthy frame begotten by the earthly father, with any possible risk that it could be lost. Man may be deprived of it, as at the first death, when the spirit returns to God who gave it; and it may be, as it will be, sent back again at the time of the resurrection; and again the wicked man may be deprived of it finally at the second death, and again it may return to God who gave it; but it is not, and cannot be, lost.
If any ask what becomes of the spirit when it thus finally returns to God, I freely answer I cannot tell. I do not know a single specific passage upon the point. Ignorance, however, on an unrevealed point, does not invalidate our certainty of a revealed point. Let another question be asked: When anyone resists the strivings of the Spirit of God, and grieves Him till He is quenched altogether, where does that Spirit of God go? What becomes of Him? It was but a portion of the Spirit thus quenched and driven away; and what can be said of it but that it returns to God who gave it? We see no difficulty here, for there is none. Why should we in the other? Let an interrogatory illustration be adventured. After the pure and glorious rays of the sun have been in the morning shot forth from their source, and have pierced into the filthiest places of the earth without being contaminated, and even there doing some good—and when these rays, as pure as before, are withdrawn at night,—where do they go?—what becomes of them? I cannot tell whether they are carefully collected, every particle, and returned to the one great source, there to be absorbed, or whether something else quite as marvelous is done; but my ignorance of this point, and my inability to philosophize about it, does by no means lessen my certainty of the fact that the rays of the sun do fill the earth in the day, and are not in the earth at night. I am concerned with facts I do know, not with things I cannot know. With respect to the point before us, we know from the Bible that God is the One Source of Spirit; that He puts a portion into every man to profit withal, that, at the second death, as at the first, it returns to God who gave it. These are clearly ascertained truths, but are they the less so, because we cannot describe the rationale, how it is disposed of after it is finally taken from man? We know now nothing about this precise point; we shall know hereafter. We may form a conjecture that, like the rays of the sun, it goes back uncontaminated to its great Source—"like to like"—and perhaps we may be right, but we do not know it.
Still some minds will urge: Can we suppose that God would put His Spirit into a body to animate it, when He knew that it—the body—would become a " body of sin?" Why not? No difficulty appertains to the subject. If there is a difficulty, it is in our own minds, and of our own creation. Nor is it peculiar to our theory, if it exists at all. It belongs to the popular one also, while ours alone has the advantage of reducing the alleged difficulty to a minimum. When God made intelligent moral creatures, He knew their liability; and that absolutely to prevent the evil that might come, it would be necessary to keep back the good that was sure to come; and this could be done only by making no intelligent moral creatures at all. Only let Him, whose wisdom and power are without bounds, so pre-arrange His scheme, that if the evil should come, it should at last be driven away again, and the good only remain; and that while evil did remain, it should contribute to mature and consolidate the good. Let all this be done, and where is the difficulty? Let such a scheme as this be promulgated, and what enlightened, benevolent mind, would not adore the Divine Inventor, and hail it as worthy of His love and wisdom, and power also, if in the end He make His scheme successful? It could not be expected, of course, that it would please " the spirit of error," the spirit of wickedness. Now this scheme is the very one that He has revealed in His Book as clear as the noon-day sun; and it is this which our theory recognizes, and which we believe. It is marvelous that enlightened minds do not see it, and that benevolent minds can oppose it. The spirit of error, however, has obscured the bright and beneficent scheme of God, by the thick black clouds which emanate from the cesspools of hell. It is, however, in course of being fulfilled, though it is retarded, as He said in Paradise it would be. But that Satan can contrive to make the ministers of God the instruments of obstruction, at the very time when they profess to advance it, this, surely, is the master-piece of his devices, and is the chief mystery of iniquity. Yet, so, alas, it is! And if anyone, in his humble little measure, tries to drive away these clouds of error, and let the Sun of Truth be seen in its own beauty and splendor, and scatter its own light, life and comfort, he is persecuted and set down as a heretic. O! what is to be done? How shall the delusion be exposed? How shall these captive servants of the Lord be liberated, when they rivet and hug the chains, and forge more to be put around others, who become as deluded as themselves? Who will come to the help of the Lord against the mighty? Who will join us, and devote himself to this work? How long, O Lord, how long shall Satan, thine enemy, triumph?
But how does our theory of pneumatology bear upon the question of endless torment? To see this fully, let the counter-theory be expressed. Our friends speak of the soul and spirit as if they were the same, using sometimes the one, sometimes the other; they give it a separate, independent existence, as if it were another person. Indeed, they call it " the other ego," the other I, myself. Painters have painted it as an infantine, airy face and little wings. Sculptors have chiseled it as a child with wings, standing airily on tiptoe. Poets have described it a light gossamer being, with wings fluttering about in butterfly fashion. Some of our profound philosophical theologians speculate upon it as if it were a person having subtle corporiety and the power, which it will by-and-by exert, to draw to itself a less subtle corporiety, which will be a body again. Our friends further say, that this Psyche, thus painted, sculptured, and poetized, cannot die; for that it is immortal in its own nature, and must endlessly live. Sad that they should leave the Word of God and seek after vain things which cannot profit. We are, whether we would or nut, re, minded of the text beginning, "professing themselves to be wise." To know anything about such a subject at all, a Divine revelation is absolutely necessary. The Bible is this, and we have heard what it says. It teaches that body and soul are man proper; that the body is the earthy frame, and that the soul is the exhibited life of the frame; that God superadds, in by far the most cases, an intellectual life, and to His people He imparts also a spiritual life, and that the body dies, and the life ends when God recalls His Spirit. "If He set His heart upon man; if He gather to Himself His spirit (rooach) and His breath (neshawah); all flesh shall perish together, and man shall return to his dust. If now thou hast understanding, hear this: harken to the voice of my words."—Job 34.14-16. In our theory, which is exactly this text, there is no necessity that man must be in endless living existence; there is nothing in his nature that requires this. God is under no necessity to make a finite into an infinite creature. There is no such alternative as,—because the wicked are not fit to live in glory, therefore they must live on in misery. Still less is there the necessity, which the counter-theory demands, that the God whose essence is
love, and to whom vengeance belongs, should be endlessly employed in tormenting the wicked, and listening with His saints to their groans and blasphemies. If the Bible revealed this, I would undoubtedly believe it; but it reveals the very opposite; and blessed and praised he God's Holy Name that in His plans of creation, redemption, and restoration, He has arranged things with such divine wisdom, beneficence, and grace.
But we are asked if it is not very degrading to man, to represent that his soul or life is the same as the life or soul of the beast? We think not. It may be humbling to his acquired pride, but nothing is degraded by being in the place where the great Creator has put it. On the contrary, it is its highest dignity to fill its own niche and fulfil the design of its Maker. How do we degrade man by looking at him in the niche ordained for him? But, " whether we pipe or harp," we are alike blamed. We are among those who maintain, that man is next to God in his original status and ultimate destiny; and in the absence of any argument or text in disproof, we were ridiculed and misrepresented for this, and put down as ignoramuses, and as exalting man too highly. And now (though the exaltation was a department of this theory), when we say that, as far as the soul or animal life of man is concerned, he is not superior to the lower animals, we are blamed for degrading him. But exalting or degrading, it is none of ours: we borrow from the Bible. " Man, though in honor, abided not; he is like the beasts that perish. Like sheep they are laid in the grave. Man that is in honor, and understands not, is like the beasts that perish " (Ps. 49.12, 14, 20). " 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 have all one breath (rooach), so that a man hath no pre-eminence over a beast: for all is vanity. All go to one place; all are of dust, and all turn to dust again" (Eccles. iii). We say nothing stronger than this. These passages are part of God's inspired Word, written for our learning. Why do our teachers ignore them; or, noticing, pervert them? Our scheme receives them as they are, without giving them a non-natural twist. Not so that of the counter one. But as an inclination sometimes shows itself to lower the authority of Solomon, let us hear St. Peter: "But these, as natural brute beasts made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption " (2 Pet. 2.12). It is convenient to our friends to overlook these texts; but there they are in the Bible, and they can never, with honesty, be made to square with their theory.
What is the difference then between the man and the brute? We have seen it is not in the soul. Nor is it that a dumb animal has nothing corresponding to what we call mind. Let anyone attentively observe their doings, and he will perceive a considerable amount of what we call reasoning and deduction in ourselves. Let him ride a restive horse, and he will have to contend with a most determined will. As to affection, everybody knows the attachment of dumb animals. Let him read Lord Brougham's volume, Conversations on Instinct, and he will see that the actions and doings of dumb animals are the results of God's immediate teaching. In fact, wherever there is life of any kind, or intelligence, there is the Great Spirit. The intelligence of dumb animals is from the Spirit. Solomon, as we have seen, does not hesitate to attribute to them the same spirit (rooach) as to man—"They have all one spirit." They have also what in us is conscience; for they clearly know when they have done what we have taught them is wrong. Nor can we mistake as to their memory. Are there then no differences? Yes, verily, many and great, and they deserve carefully to be considered.
In general we say that man is able to know, love, adore, serve and obey, the infinite Jehovah, his Creator. He can also hold communion with God, and there can be an interchange of communication between them. He can be made a fit companion, wonderful to say, for God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. He is capable of sharing God's immortality, and of partaking to the full, of God's own glory and happiness. This is told in few words, but it will take ages to develop; and this is a superiority so amazing as to be beyond our present conceptions, much more our description. Let a few particulars as specimens be noted.
The form of his physical frame, which our modern physiologists would bring under morphology. And here the ancients shall teach us: The beast goes on all fours and looks down to the earth, as intended for the earth and nothing higher; and therefore, the wise man in the same place where he identifies the spirit in both, expressly says that "the spirit of the beast goes downward." Man's frame is the very opposite. he has a noble, erect bearing, with his eyes and face towards heaven as if he were destined for that, as indeed he was. He is the anthropos of the Greeks; that is, the living creature that turns his countenance upwards. In this he was made in the image of Elohim, the second person in the Trinity, who, for creational purposes, took a material form, suited at once to His relationship with the Godhead, and to His connection with all He would create. In the glorious resurrection, the true believer's body shall be again "made like unto His glorious body;" and he "shall be like Him, for he shall see Him as He is." Phil. 3.21; 1 John 3.2. What an amazing superiority is here!
Then as to man's mind. Look at its all but infinite grasp. Or rather, a pamphlet will not let us look at it. Taught of God, what is there it is not capable of, in that vast range which we comprehend in arts, sciences, and inventions? Solomon has taught us the necessary lesson, about "all have one breath or spirit." This is, of course, true, for there is "but one Spirit," who is in all. But there is another truth just as surprising. Rooach is the general name in Hebrew for spirit; but neshamah is the select word, so to speak. This is the word used when we read that the Lord God breathed from Himself the spirit into man's nostrils; and it is never applied to the spirit of the beast; but it is reserved first for God, then for man, the one next to Himself. This is remarkable and worthy of deep reflection; and certainly distinguishes man above all. Perhaps it is intended to show that in spirit, man is more nearly related to the Divinity in heaven than he is to anything on earth.
Then as to the progress of which man is capable. Look at Sir Isaac Newton as he in infancy sprawls on the ground, with less manifested intelligence than the pet spaniel which sports with him; and think what he was when he left this scene for a brighter. What progress! Or think of the Admirable Crichton in the same two extremes. If the A B C acquired in this short life's school is so amazing, what will be our progress in the temple of science in the life to come, where there will be no hindrances and drawbacks, but all helps and facilities? It is amusing sometimes, and like an exhilarating draught, to hear the speculations and discussions concerning the time it will take, in the race of progress, for the ape to overtake the man. We would not hinder, or even discourage their enquiries and calculations: for even though they may not meet with any fact upon which to base a theory, nor any certain data for their calculations, yet science must be the gainer. Alchemy was the father of chemistry, with all its splendid results. We see at present no cause for jealousy in the progress the ape has made since historic times began. It lags a long way behind. When a lineal successor of an ape discovers by mathematical calculation the place of an undiscovered planet; when we find among its descendants a Milton, a Shakespeare, a Dante, a Goethe; when we find a Bacon, a Boyle, a Faraday, a Playfair, a Huxley, a Thompson, or a Darwin, or a Chantry, Lawrence, or anyone of the hosts of specimens of great men, we will then hold a Witenagemote, and consider whether they shall be classed with the genus homo, and they will doubtless get full justice. Such, however, are the capabilities of man's progress that, in our opinion, we shall be then as much in advance of the ape's progeny as we are now. It is likely that our guess will turn out true, that the ape will never overtake us at all; and that five thousand years hence the ape race will, exactly to a hair's breadth, be where they are now, and as they were five thousand years hack. But as to man, upward and onward will be his achievement; ever progressing towards the Infinite, and happier, and happier, if possible, at each step; but the imitated Model not yet reached by us. How gloriously is man distinguished!
His marvelous powers of expressing thought by language l What distinguishing peculiarity is this? Dumb animals! Articulate beings! What difference in the very sound. When the vast distance between the two has been measured, then perhaps we may estimate how superior a man is to a brute.
Need we say more? Or will anyone again accuse us of degrading man to the beast? The accusation, at any rate, cannot degrade us while we are in the company of the inspired David, and Solomon, and Peter.
It will now be convenient to summarize the argument. We found that the lexical meaning of ohlam, gad, aionios, and aion, as shown by their uses loquendi, was, the whole of a duration, whether limited or unlimited, and that the length in each case must be estimated by the nature of the subject to which it belonged. It was seen, too, that if anything forbade the unlimited application, there was nothing in the use and force of any of the words to oblige us so to take it. In other cases, they all may be so taken when independent circumstances lead to the unlimited application, as in those instances in which they are applied to the infinite Jehovah. Much was found absolutely and positively against the unlimited application to the future pain of the wicked, and which obliged us to resort to the limited. Death was found to mean, not a life in misery, but the cessation of life, whether physical, mental, or spiritual; and that the second death was the death of the whole man, or entire extinction of his living existence. This was to be the more relied on, inasmuch as it was seen that the Bible applied to this death the verbs to destroy, to consume, to perish, etc., etc., all of which, when applied to the wicked man, were seen to mean, to bring him to an end. The texts upon which our opponents rely were examined one by one, and found to yield no support, inasmuch as they gave to those texts a non-natural and unusual meaning; not taking the meaning out of them, but bringing the meaning to them, just as the Romanist brings the supremacy of the Pope to "Thou art Peter," and transubstantiation to " This is my body." When Bible psychology and pneumatology were examined, they repudiated the innate immortality of the soul, which was founded on the alleged endless torments of the wicked; and the certain conclusions from the whole discussion is, that the Bible repudiates the dogmas of endless evil and of endless torments, and that they are supported only by the tradition of the elders and the rationalism of man's philosophy.
And now we beg to ask our opponents not to misrepresent our doctrine and our arguments, nor to call us bad names; but to do one of two things: either to grapple with our texts and arguments, and overthrow them on Scriptural grounds; or, if they cannot do this, then to receive the truth and teach it to others. This is the only consistent, straightforward, English, Christian course. We charge, not individuals, but the general body of Bible teachers, with bearing false witness against the revealed character of God, with hindering the salvation of man, with obstructing the kingdom of Christ, and with advancing the kingdom of the wicked one. They may have done all this in ignorance; but this need exist no longer. We lay before them a demonstration of God's truth and a vindication of His character. We do this whether they will hear or whether they will forbear. They are answerable if they shut their eyes and stop their ears. If they will impartially examine and honestly refute this humble offering for their good,—or failing this, will believe what the Bible reveals,—to God be the praise. But if they pursue their old courses, we arraign them at the bar of humanity, and will leave them to answer at the bar of God. The infinite interests at stake require plain dealing. Giant error has never been subdued with a sword without point and edge, in a velvet sheath.
To our brethren of the laity we say, that we are aware that they less dread credulity than skepticism. Let them dread both. There is not a grain of either in this pamphlet. Everything said is founded upon the Word of God. Besides taking away the rubbish which has been thrown upon it, we have done little more than give it an opportunity of speaking for itself. Let no one hesitate to believe what it affirms, even though he may have to give up much of what he has always been taught as true. To believe the simple Bible, is the true faith. To add anything to it, or to make it square with man's tradition, is pharisaic and infidelity. Many fear that if they receive the doctrine here advocated, they would fall into a portion of infidelity; whereas, the truth is, they fall into it by rejecting this doctrine. Let them consider that our teaching is founded on the literal lexical grammatical interpretation of its revealed contents, without any of the usual squaring of texts. Our views show the Bible to be both in real and apparent harmony, and not requiring six folio-volumed commentaries, professedly to elucidate it, but really obscuring it. And what is it for which we contend, and to which so much opposition is given? Is it anything which can be thought discreditable to God? anything harmful to man? anything perilous to his interest? One would think so to hear the hubbub raised against us. But what do we teach? First, hear what our opponents teach.
They say that the good God, who has power and wisdom to prevent it all if He had liked, will torture millions upon millions of men in endless flames, producing more anguish and drawing forth more horrid blasphemies than tongue can tell or heart conceive; that to make them, His creatures, capable of this inconceivable agony, He will work a miracle, once for all, when He casts them, into the lake of fire; or work it every hour, so as to keep the fire from consuming them; and that He will do this, thus horribly and endlessly, for sins committed in this short life. When less than this was said of Moloch we execrated him, and all thought it right to do so. But it seems the wrong was that he did it. The good God may do it. When that mistaken zealot held the finger of a helpless struggling child in the candle to give her, as he said, a taste of what the fire of hell was, and a whole- some cry of indignation arose from every corner of the land, some said that the cry was a spark from heaven exhibited on earth, for such an act was sheer cruelty. Our opponents, however, may represent that the benevolent, beneficent God will inflict millions of times more suffering than this, but not a man must move his tongue, but receive it in silent faith; for what is deemed cruelty in a fallen creature, is holy justice in the holy loving God. This is the orthodox faith—so called. But, now, What do we teach? What is our heresy—so called? We say that by the just wrath of God all wicked persons shall be exterminated, and through the triumphs of the cross all evil things shall be rooted out and brought to naught, so that throughout the boundless dominions of Jehovah there shall be nothing but holiness, goodness, happiness, joy, and rejoicing. What is there in this so horrible that it must not be listened to, but be treated like a subtle, deadly poison? What is there in this unworthy of our God to accomplish, or of an enlightened, benevolent mind devoutly to wish for? To see the commotion against it, one would think it to be the very fumes of the bottomless pit let out to be a curse. To see the maneuvering in places of public resort to avoid -the advocates of it, and how persons stand aghast when they come upon them unexpectedly, one would suppose they were the pests of society, and would make one smile if it were not sad and sorrowful. "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."
Further, what a priori pleasure or propriety can there be in showing so much eagerness to make out the certainty of all this suffering and agony? It looks as if our opponents wished it to be established, and what most they wish they easily believe. They do not go much out of the way to save the millions hurrying to their doom; and considering this, and that they have in reality but the meanest show of evidence for their side, it does seem an animus more than anything else, when they show such anxiety to secure these sufferings for their fellows. Heavenly humanity tries to prevent suffering, and it weeps over what it cannot prevent; and moreover, is reluctant to receive news of a calamity, and clings to the hope that so great a disaster will not prove true. But these—what shall we say? They seem to exhibit something like disappointment if we show them that these endless, inconceivable miseries will never take place. We point out to them the clear lexical common-sense language of Scripture, and they shut their eyes. They seem not to wish to see that ninety-nine-hundredths of their fellows will not suffer endless tortures. No matter what is the plain meaning of the Judge's sentence, they have determined that the wicked shall be so punished; they will not hear anything to the contrary; and if they had their will, and they were the executioners, we might be certain that the victims of their wrath would have to endure all the anguish thus provided. Truly, David exercised a wise discretion, and made a good choice, when he said, "Let me fall now into the hands of the Lord; for very great are His mercies: but let me not fall into the hands of men."
Is not this ungodlike spirit the result of their own teaching? Can the worshipper of any God rise higher than the character attributed to Him? They worship a God who, according to their account, saves one out of the hundred, and sends the rest to endless irremediable perdition or pain. Man's nature is unloving and selfish to begin with, and what may it become when it worships and adores such a God as this? The bloody wars that have disgraced humanity, and cursed Christendom, are accounted for. Christendom It is a misnomer.
Scores of thousands of brothers deliberately stand and shoot down scores of thousands of brothers. Kill one, it is murder; kill myriads, it is glory, vindicating national honor; and he who has laid the most in the dust is surnamed " The Great." These are some of the fruits of believing in a God who takes endless vengeance for sins committed in a short life. Christendom! Did Christ, by a reward of gold, stimulate the ingenuity of men to invent engines more and more efficient to vomit out, as if from hell, fiercer fire and heavier shot, so as to slay more victims still. Christendom, Heathendom; barbarians; devildom; but not Christendon. Laity of England, laity of Europe, how much longer will you allow what is so senseless, so disastrous, so destructive, and tolerate the unchristian doctrine which so greatly contributes to such results? Arouse yourselves, read your Bibles, pray to the God of love; and work vigorously and continuously for the suppression of error, for the diffusion of truth. Demand a completion of the blessed Reformation, and that they who are engaged to teach the Bible, shall teach it, and nothing besides. No teaching for doctrines the commandments of men, but simply heaven's cure for the ills of humanity.
THE END.