*.. « ■«■■ , -s « ' 
 
 .;. r 
 
 . .-^^ 
 
 r\' 
 
 CIHM 
 Microfiche 
 Series : 
 (Monographs) 
 
 * - 
 
 ■■< %'' 
 
 .:r * 
 
 •i- ^■ ->/f 
 
 
 ■.* 
 
 « 
 
 IC1WIH 
 collection db 
 
 microfiches^ 
 (nrionographles) 
 
 Ciinadian *nst|tiitf4or Historical IMicroraproductiont / Institut Canadian da miccoraproductions historlqu'as 
 
 ^^.^ -. -■ /- ^:' ■■■■■"■ :■.. V ,- : •, Jfc 
 
 .A..^ 
 

 Tf 
 
 TMhnicafand Bibliographic' Not**/ Hoiati tachniquts et bibliographiquM 
 
 Th« tmtitute hn attemptMJ ta obtain the batt original 
 dOpV' available for filming. Features of this eofiy which 
 
 ;ay be bibliographically unique, which may alter any 
 rthe images in the reproduction^ or which may 
 significf Qtly change the usual metlMid of filming, are 
 checketf below. 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'H 
 lui a kxk possible de se procurer. Les details de cet 
 exemplaire qui sont peut-ltre uniques du point de vue 
 btbliographique. qui peuvent modifier une image 
 reproduite. ou qui peuvent ei^iger uhe modification 
 dans la mithode normale de f ilmage sont indiquik 
 ci-dessous. 
 
 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 Covers damaged/ • 
 CouvertuM endommagto 
 
 r^ 
 
 □ Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 B 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagies 
 
 □ 
 
 n 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restourie et/ou pellicula 
 
 Cover- title niitsing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaurtes et/ou pellituMes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages dicolories, tachet^ ou piqu^ 
 
 n 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gfographiques^en couleur 
 
 n Pages detached/ 
 Pages ditachies 
 
 historlqu'es 
 
 □ 
 
 
 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ ' 
 
 Relie avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serr(6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distorsion le long de la marge interieure 
 
 Blank' leaves added during restoration may appear 
 within the text. Whenever possible, these have - 
 been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans' le texte, 
 mais. Iprsque cela^etait possibMt/ ces pages n'ont 
 pas ete f ilmies. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentavf s supplementaires: 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est f ilmi au taux de rMuction indiqui ci-dessous. 
 
 10« 14X 18X 
 
 7 
 
 BShowthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 Quality of print varies/ 
 Qualite in^le de I'impression 
 
 Continuous pagination/ 
 Pagination continue 
 
 Includes index (es)/ 
 Comprend un (des) index 
 
 r 
 
 Title on header taken from: / 
 Le titre de l^n-tCte provient: 
 
 Ul 
 
 itie page of issue/ 
 Page d* titre de la livraison 
 
 I ~\ Caption of issue/ 
 
 □ 
 
 Titre de depart de la livraison 
 
 Masthead/ ° 
 
 Generique (periodiques) de la livraison 
 
 22X 
 
 26X 
 
 XX 
 
 J23(- 
 
 4tX 
 
 20X 
 
 2«X 
 
 28 X 
 
 32 X 
 
Th« copy fllmad h«r« ha* b««n raproductd thanks 
 to tha ganarosity of: 
 
 * . ■ ■ 
 
 Hetroporitan Toronto Reference Library 
 Baldwin Room 
 
 Tha Imagat appearing hara are tha bast quality 
 poaalbia' considering tha condition and legibility 
 of tha original copy and in keeping with th* 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper cove,rs ere filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with e printed or illustrated inrpres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are* filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last peg* with a printed 
 Or Illustrated hnpresston. 
 
 ■■m;. ■ ,.; ^■■■• . 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol -"^{meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol ▼ (meaning "END"). 
 whichever applies. 
 
 ♦ , - ■ - 
 
 Mapa, plates, charts, etc., niay be filmed at 
 different reduction retiosi Those too large to be 
 entirely Included in one exposure are filmed 
 baglnning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 L'exempleire fiimA fut reprodult grice A la 
 g«n«rosit« da: - 
 
 Metropolitan Toronto Reference Library 
 Baldwin Room 
 
 Les images suivantae ont «t« raprodultes avec le 
 plus grand soin, compta tenu de la condition at 
 da la nettet« de I'exemplaira film*, et en 
 conformity evec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplalres originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est ImprimAe sont film«s en oommenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 derniire pege qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'lllustratldn, soit par le second * 
 plat, salon le ces. Tous les sutres exempiaires ■ 
 originaux sont film*s en commen^ant per la ^ . , 
 pramidre page qui comporte une ampreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustratlon at en terminant par 
 la darnlAre page qui comporte una telle 
 ampreinte. ;^ 
 
 Un des symboles suivents apparaftra sur la 
 darnlAre imege de cheque microfiche, seion la 
 cas: ie symbols —*«- signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbols y signifie "FIN". 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc.. peu vent dtre 
 film*s A des taux de reduction dlff«rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grsnd pour Atre 
 reprodult en un seul cllch*, 11 est film* A partir 
 de I'angle sup«rieur gauche, de geuche * drolte, 
 et de heut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'Images n^cessaira. Les diagrammes suivents 
 illustrent la mdthoda. . 
 
 6 
 
 ■J 
 
vi» 
 
 ICROCOPY RESbUJTION TEST CHART 
 
 (ANSI and ISO TEST CHART No. 2) 
 
 ■* ■ 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25. 
 
 1^ 1 2.8 
 
 I&3 
 
 Urn 
 
 US 
 
 IS 
 
 13.6 
 
 14.0 
 
 1.4 
 
 24 
 
 2.0 
 
 ' 1^8 '1 
 
 #'• 
 
 ^ y^PPLIED IIVHGE Inc 
 
 5^ 1653 Eost Main Stre« 
 
 rf Rochester. New York U609 USA 
 
 = -.(716) 482 -.0300 - Phone 
 
 S (716) 288-5989 -Fox 
 
'»i^!Bfr«|'»w"«»""""»'" 
 
 
 y 
 
 THE 
 
 RESTORATION 
 
 ,V-. #•.::.: 
 
 -'r-' 
 
 f 
 
 ^ WITH SOME REFERENCE TO A SERMON BY THE 
 
 REV, D. J. MACDONNELL, 
 
 BT THB 
 
 REV. U Jy. McLEOD, ANCASTER, Ont. 
 
 =•.« '^.. ' 
 
 -■:.;* 
 
 "~x 
 
 * torqWto : 
 PBBiSBY?^BIANPRINTINa HOUSE, 102 BAY STBBET. 
 
 1876. 
 
 itii 
 
 f -i 
 
 1 I' 
 
 ■3 
 
 « L 
 
 J 
 
•a 
 
 .-r 
 
 Rl 
 
 WITH 
 
 BE 
 
 yRBSBYT 
 
'^'- / 
 
 THE 
 
 •a 
 
 RESTOBATION 
 
 \ 
 
 THEORY, 
 
 WITH SOME REFERENCE TO A SERMON BY THE 
 
 REV. D. J. MACDONNELL, 
 
 BY THE 
 
 BEV. D. D. McLEOD, ANCASTER, O^t. 
 
 -.A I > * I 
 
 1 
 
 a*^- 
 
 TORONTO : 
 ?MSSBYTEBIAN PRINTING HOUSE, 102 BAY STREET, 
 
 . ,' ■ .■ : ;' 1876. . . r-'"",::^:' '- 
 
» . V 
 
 ■^^ 
 
 K 
 
 > 
 
 ^2U 
 
 ■J' < 
 
 ,: \ 
 
 I propc 
 marks on th 
 created some 
 and also to 
 no matter of 
 the Gospel u 
 part of his di 
 find a profes 
 the teachings 
 What has jus 
 that referred 
 the extent of 
 the deliveren 
 as a whole, i 
 come to a d< 
 second, the ( 
 the doctrine 
 ther it show 
 not been si 
 down devoui 
 tine might ri 
 implies that 
 ciently stud) 
 satisfactory, 
 other part ol 
 And their di 
 two hundred 
 quite as safe 
 learned than 
 able therefoi 
 additional li| 
 mised to all 
 the more lea 
 
 
 mem 
 
>^. 
 
 IJ^tRODUCTORY. 
 
 I'-r. 
 
 I propose in the following pages to make a few re- 
 marks on the sermon of Rev. D. J. Macdonnell, which has 
 created some sensation in our Church and in the community, 
 and also to discuss the doctrine therein referred to. It is 
 no matter of surprise in thife present day to find a minister of^^ 
 the Gospel unfamiliar with some of the subjects which it is 
 part of his duty to expound. Nor is it a matter of surprise to 
 find a professed Christian teacher impatient under some of 
 the teachings of Scripture. These are every day occurrences. 
 What has justly caused some surprise is that such a sermon as 
 that referred to should issue from a Presbyterian pulpit. And 
 the extent of the surprise occasioned, shows how happily rare 
 the deliverence of such sermons are in our Church. The sermon 
 as a whole, is a confession, in the first place, of not having 
 come to a definite belief on the subject discussed. And 
 second, the expression of a wish, and alrjiost a hope, that 
 the doctrine as now held by us may not be true. And fur- 
 ther it shows that Mr. McD. considers the subject has 
 not been sufficiently studied ; he Avishes the Church to sit 
 down devoutly and study it, and that some second Augus- 
 tine might rise up and give a deliverance upon it. This 
 implies that the compilers of the confession did not suffi- 
 cientiy study it, an6 that their dehverance upon it is not 
 sarisfactory. Now that they studied it as much as any .^' 
 other part of the confession probably, no one can deny. 
 And their deliverance upon it has stood the inspectiorj of 
 two hundred years, and of many learned and pious men, . 
 quite as safe interpreters of Scripture, and possibly more 
 learned than even Augustine himself. It is quite question- ^ 
 able therefore whether a second Augustine would throw any 
 additional light on the subject. The Holy Spirit is pro- 
 mised to all of us, to guide us into all truth, as well as to 
 the more learned, and He is our best guide in investigating. 
 
 f». 
 
•>*,.v 
 
 auch'a doctrine. The sermon would seem to suggest also 
 that this was a difficulty not sufficiently pondered by the 
 Church. And some ignorantly think it has now been raised 
 for the first time. I thirtk it would have helped Mr. 
 McD.'s people, had he told them how old and stale the 
 difficulty is. For it is no new one, nor by any means the 
 only one in the Bible or the Confession. If any one 
 thinks it profitable to place problems and difficulties before 
 his people, he will find su^h attached to everyone of the 
 system of doctrines to which Mr.- McD. professes to adhere. . 
 But it is not my intention to criticize the sermon 
 narrowly. It would not perhzips be fair to do so. And 
 yet, when a s'ermon so plainly suggests that what we hold to 
 be a dangerous error may be true— that what we hold is 
 not to be found in Scripture, is to be found in Scnpture— 
 it cannot be altogether overiooked in discussing the present 
 aspect of the question. Meantime I would only make one 
 remark on the sermon with reference to the theory of 
 restoration suggested, and on his speech in vindication of 
 the sermon before the Presbytery ; and that is, if we adopt 
 that view of the truth, we will part company with all the 
 evangelical churches in the worid. That, of bourse, is of no 
 consequence if the view is right. But the mere fact of the 
 character of those we would leave being such as it is— for 
 learaing, intelligence, and Christian worth— that alone 
 should make us pause. We leave all who hold with 
 the compilers of the confession— pious and learned men 
 of every age, devout^ students of God's word, sound 
 Divines— and enter the school of the Rationalist, the 
 Unitarian, the Univefsalist. We may have the com- 
 pany of Tennyson and a few German comraentators— 
 but even these in all sober Christian charity are not more 
 fit to instruct us, and not more likely to guide us safely than 
 the compilers of the confession. This ,is only presehted as a 
 consideration that should have some weight with us aU, and 
 not as an argument. We are not to bow to human author- 
 ity but to truth. But it is universally acknowledged that 
 the compilers of the confession were godly and learned ex- 
 pounders of divine truth, and we should have good reason 
 
 .>K, . ..-■.■ ■ 5 . . . ^ . ^ -■ , - . - ■ .. . . . , , 
 
N 
 
 10 offer when we reject their deliverance on a subject of thif ' 
 kind. In Nhis reply to the Presbytery, Mr. ^cDi cliMinf 
 freedom to investigate truth. Now we all desire this fre©^ 
 dom, and are as jealous of our freedom as ministers of the 
 Gospel to investigate the truth, as any one can be. Mr. 
 McD. knows ihAt he has that freedom under the co%^' 
 fession he has adopted. He knows that no one desires to 
 hinder him in his investigations. But freedom to investi- , 
 gate the truth is not freedom to propagate errors, to which., 
 this sermon comes dangerously near, if it does not really dp 
 lor And it was on this account that it seemed to propaF- 
 gate error, and not because it was an attempt to investigat<5 
 the truth, that the whole church as well as the Presbytery felt 
 it was necessary to take it up. And with regard to the subject 
 of restoration itself, I would only sa} at present : if the view 
 of ultimate restoration is adopted — then every other doctrine, 
 in our system must be modified in accorda^e .with it. . In 
 short, adopt this view and we give up not ohe doctrine of 
 our confession, but every one of those doctrines which dis* 
 tinguish us among the reformed churches. " It naturally, 
 ajidinfact, leads to a renunciation of all the essential 
 doctrines of the New Testament.*' It is the old lie of the 
 devil in another aspect, — " Ye shall not surely die." %% 
 
 DIFFICULTIES OF THE RESTORATION' 
 I ' THEORY. 
 
 I. Suppose it is true that after a few years — for millions 
 eve^i are but a few compared with eternity — those who have 
 been sent to hell will be restored; on what grbund will they 
 be restored ? Some restorationists say on the ground of the 
 work of Christ. And this seems the view favoured in the 
 «ermon referred to. Then the work of Christ did not avail 
 for them while they were on the earth, and the efficacy 
 of the death of Christ to save sinners extends beyond the 
 day of judgment. Now do we not hold a§ taught by Scrip- 
 ture that, the work of Christ as a Saviour is completed 
 before the day of judgment. Is there any single passage of 
 
 •>-'p 
 
 • I, 
 
 '.v.- . 
 
 :?.'• ■ 
 
 I 
 
• f 
 
 
 l-f ' 
 
 Scripture that points to His carrying on the work of Saviour 
 after He has judged the world— and said "depart ye cursed." 
 Thfere is not one that we can find. Docs Scripture or doe» 
 reason itself lead us to believe '•or to expect that to those 
 persons to whom He ha^ said "depart from me ye cursed 
 ihtp everlasting fire"— He will yet afterwards say, "come, y^ 
 blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you 
 from the foundation j)f the world." . ' 
 
 If so, then the atoning work of Christ must be contmued 
 after that sentence, of condemnation has been pronounced— 
 and the sentence must read, "Depart ye cursed into ever- 
 laying fire, ye whom I still love and will, yet redeem." 
 Then it will be that after Christ has made an end of all 
 tilings, after he has closed this dispensation, ajter He has 
 once for all judged this worM— another dispensation will be 
 begun, another day of judgment appointed, or a work of 
 judgment be continually carried on, all which is entirely 
 contrary to the teaching of Scripture. 
 
 ' 2. Again, if sinners in hell are to be restored on the ground 
 
 of the work of Christ, then they must be dealt with as moral 
 andLresponsible beings. They must be approached and appeal- 
 ed to as reasonable beings. They must have this gospel of 
 deliverance preached to them, they must be wrought upon by 
 the Holy Spirit— for surely of themselves they will not be 
 willing or ^e, any more than we are, to repent and turn to 
 God. And if^preached to, why not prayed for now, and 
 why jiot be prayed for by Christians now as well as by the 
 saints inglo^. Surely it will be right to seek to hastentheir 
 repentance by every means. We are to pray for what is accord- 
 ing to the will of God— and their deliverance is according to 
 Hw will. But Scripture teaches us to regard the lost as be- 
 yond the reach of prayer and the appeals of the Gospel. 
 
 3^ Restorationists know, as we all do, that mere suffering 
 does not change the heart— nay, can we rtot reasonably 
 conceive that this great suffering should awaken a more 
 deadly enmity against 'God, and plunge the sinner into 
 more violent blasphemy arid rebellion. Or, if we admit 
 suqh suflfering is needed to bring some sinners to repent- 
 ance, then what monsters in wickedness must they be who 
 
requis^tQituries of hell to move them. And what weakness, 
 what want of resource does it argue in God, (I Speakirith 
 reverence,) since He can find no other better way to bring 
 these sinners to repentaijce than by subjecting themtd 
 **everlasting fire'* — thai is to some centuries of fire ? Gould 
 not the Holy Spirit bring these poor sinners to repentaticfe 
 without that? Has He not brought many other sinners as 
 wicked as these to repentance without having to send thctti 
 to hell at all, even by the gentlest means? 
 
 And if these poor creatures 9xe still the objects of the 
 love of God as they must be if He means to sav6 thfin, 
 then can we think it just or right to subject them to ever- 
 lasting fire, that is to fire for so long a period as may be 
 called everiasting— before He brings them to repentance, 
 when He could have brought theip to repentance by other 
 means, and when He has brought myriads of others to 
 repentance as guilty as they w6re, without subjecting them 
 to such suflFering ? 
 
 Hence we see we must believe, if the Restoration vic# 
 be adopted, (i) that there will be another dispensation and 
 another day of judgment, and '(2) that there will be mis- 
 sionaries sent to the condemned or appeals to repentance 
 addressed to them as responsible and firee agents, and (3) 
 that there may be prayers offered for them, and (4) tnat 
 God's ways m bringing sinners to reprentance are most 
 unjustly unequal. , ' 
 
 • 4. But again, as we have said, if this restoration theory 
 be true, the oflfer of mercy in this present ^dispensation of 
 gtace made to th^ sinner is not God's ultimatum, it is 
 not His last ofier. There is still hope for the sinner after 
 death. And why not only a few years after death ? So 
 that while we tell the sinner he must suffer in hell, he can 
 say,. " no matter, for in a few; years I will be in heaven. "And 
 as the work of restoration goes on, for it mu^ 
 be a gradual process^ sinners from hell musi 
 constantly be rising to heaven until hell 'is erapt^. 
 The "great gulf" of which Christ speaks must bebridged ovet, 
 an d t-h**" flftpr every sinner has been restored, on what 
 
 f ., 
 
 111 
 
 ground can the devils be stiyi left in prison ; must not they" 
 

 by the same reasoning follow, according to merit. Does not 
 such a doctrine rob the gospel appeal of all its power— when 
 it says, " now is the day of grace— and now is the day of s^- 
 vation." That is not all the truth. According to this theoiy 
 there is another day of grace— there is hope in hell— there is 
 salvation in hell— there is no everlasting fire— there i& no un- 
 pardonable sin. To preach that is surely not the gospel the 
 Bible reveals. And what reason has Mr. McD. or any of us to 
 think that men whose hearts will not be won by the love of 
 God in Christ, will be won by the statement that "God must 
 save every man.'' Reason and common sense seem to assure 
 us that to tell men this would be the surest way to bring con- 
 tempt on Christ, and would rob hell of its terrors in the eyes of 
 the sinner. ^ If after a few years oC sufTering smners are to be 
 restored, many will willingly pay this price for lijjerty to sm, 
 and those martyrs who shed their blood for Christ will not 
 have much advantage over those who crucified Him, seemg 
 that they will spett^ eternity together in the enjoyment of 
 the same rewards a^d blessedness of heaven. In shprt, what 
 is this restoratioh theory but another and a worse form of pur- 
 gatory after all. The idea that gave rise to the doctrine of a 
 purgatory was par'tly, that by means of it some "of the diffi- 
 culties attending on the merely two-fold destiny in the 
 fiiture might be got rid of, and this restpiation view is 
 adopted for very much the same reason. But_ we see that 
 the difficulties into which it lea^s its advoc^A are greater 
 than those from which they seek to escape. / 
 
 5. And fiirther— and this seems tome tjie most important 
 consideration— what is God's view of sin? Is it the same as 
 ours? He saw it so vile as only to be atoned for by the 
 death of His own son— and when to man's other sin is add- 
 ed the rejection of that atonement— can God regard it lightly. 
 Does He not know what doom it deserves? And how do we 
 know but that there is something in the very, nature of sin 
 and the sinner's case that renders restoration impossible 
 after Christ has been rejected. "Who is capable of de- 
 tftrmmin g the great question— When shall all that the justice 
 u of God required, all than His law threatened, all that is 
 requisite to answer the ends of punishment be attained in 
 
 the doom of 
 
f, ■ ' ' . ,' . 
 
 the doom of the sinner? Only the Infinite intelligence 
 can." And He tells us that these ends are only attained by 
 a punishment that is everlasting. Unless, then, we can say 
 we take the same view of sin that God does, unless we can 
 say we know the nature of it as well as He does, we cannot 
 say that it is either unreasonable, or unjust, or unmerciful* to 
 ,9onsign the impenitent sinner to eternal banishment from His 
 presence. ^ 
 
 6. -But again, if the wicked in hell are under 
 another dispensation— which they must be according to 
 our view— ^it must be .also a dispensation of grace, as this 
 present dispensation is. God still loves and pities, and 
 intends to save them. If so, they will be saved so soon a^ 
 they repent. How long, then, will it take of hell suffering 
 to make a man repent ? Surely but a short time. Would 
 not one day — one yeau: be enough? Xhen where is there 
 rbdm for the everlasting punishment in any sense ? God 
 could not in justice keep them in after repentance ; there- 
 fore there could be no punishment at all corresponding to 
 /that which is described in Scripture. 
 
 But does God love the wicked in hell? All Sdripturt^ 
 tes^fies not. They have passed beyond His love. They 
 ate with the devil and his angels. Inere is no passage that 
 speaks of them but as forever cast out — cut off froto^^od to 
 all etemitv as those who have no hope, who perish, %)pe 
 rejected, lost, cast into the fire, cast off, bid to depart 
 from God, vessels of wrath fitted to destruction, wtto> siiall 
 never see life. ' * ^ . ' ; 
 
 7 . Again, if the wicked continue in hell without repentance" 
 a ^ousand years, or any number of years, refusing to repent all 
 that time, will they not be much more guilty at the end of it 
 than they were at the beginning ? Will they not deserve hell 
 more than when they entered^ and will they not be much less 
 likely to repent ? Will they not be far more prone to sin after so 
 lopg being under the power of it, so that their repentance at the 
 end of a thousand years is less likely than at the beginning of 
 it, and their guilt then is aggravated a thousand-fold. Now if 
 . this is so, if they are restored after thousands of years of sin in 
 hell, are they so much better than the devil that he should be 
 
>■•■ 
 
 , ' / ;■ rfn** ■' 
 
 ;tJi' 
 
 \ 
 
 .-^wS' 
 
 ■ '/ ■ 
 
 ■v *' :' ■ 
 
 kept there to all eternity. No, if they are restored, so must 
 ht. The same passages that would lead us to hope for theur 
 restoratioiyas reasonably include him. Put we have no word 
 of any such deliverance in Scripture in reference to the devil. 
 In their case, therefore, as in his, the consequence and.punish- 
 ment of sin is more sin and increasing; guilt to all eternity. 
 
 8. Agam, if they are in hell still in a state of pro- 
 batidn— on trial whether they will repent or not— is there 
 any likelihood that they will repent ? They were on proba- 
 tion on the earth and failed, and why, when every cause 
 that led to their failure on earth is aggravated a thousand- 
 fold, why may they not fail again even m hell? Will a 
 few years of heil-siiffering be more efficacious to convert the 
 soul than the love of Christ presented in the gospel ? If it be 
 said that God will compel them to repent, then surely their 
 punishment has failed of any good purpose in their case. 
 We see then from these and many other considerations 
 thit might be adduced, that the restoration view is just as 
 full of difficulty as the doctrine the Bible teaches. 
 •* And the truth is that the difficulty in the orthodox view 
 arises not from any dealings of Godi^^but from our limited ca- 
 "pacity to understand His wjiys and thoughts. The difficulty is, 
 "why does not Cod think as I do ; and^act as I think He 
 should." In short the difficulty is one of rationalism and not 
 of faith. The same faitfi that enables us to accept all the 
 other mysteries of our faith, and wait patiently for their ex- 
 planation in the future, fnablesus to accept of this truth also. 
 "These shall go away into everlasting fire but the nghteous 
 into life eternal " It may seem hard thus to condemn eternally, 
 but we may rest assured that God is not less just, or less mer- 
 ciful, than we. His sinful creatures. . 
 
 However, passing from these and many other difficulties 
 that attach to the Restoration theory, we come now to the testis 
 mony of Scripture, oh which I make two remarks introductory : 
 
 /'WHAT SCRIPTURE TEACHES. 
 
 I. If the Restoration theory is the true Gospel of Christ, 
 if there is no everlasting fire, "surely our Lord Himself Ims 
 
 be pronouncec 
 
 lasting." And 
 
 the Restoratic 
 
 minence wouU 
 
 left to be gle 
 
 sages tliat maj 
 
 3, The wholt 
 
 has, strangely 
 
 theory be true 
 
 are — i. Matt. 
 
 speaketh agaii 
 
 him, neither 
 
 In Mark Hi; 2 
 
 shall blasphei 
 
 eness, but is i 
 
 not most evid 
 
 onymous with 
 
 That pa 
 
 Scripture sue 
 
 that there are 
 
 assert that th< 
 
 giveuj is to 
 
 language of S 
 
 Another 
 
 sec his brotl 
 
 ask and he i 
 
 death." "T 
 
 shall pray fo'i 
 
 be . punishec 
 
 destruction — 
 
 than in ^e t( 
 
 Judevi. 
 
 in everlasting 
 
 the great da 
 
 away into ev< 
 
 eternal." 1 
 
 would add ; 
 
 fi^evelation s 
 
 helped to mislead his people, since in the very sentence to I vii. 22-23 
 
S i 
 
 5 . .' / ;■ rfn?* ■■ 
 
 ^.* V » 
 
 ■•. ■ .5 
 
 n 
 
 •>■• 
 
 be pronounced at the last day, He has used the word ever- 
 lasting." Atid— 2, Surely we might reasonably expect that If 
 the Restoration view be the true Gospel of Christ, much pro- 
 minence wOuld be given to it in Scripture. It would not be 
 left to be gleaned by far-fetched infefence from a few pas- 
 sages tliat may quite justly be interpreted otherwise. And— 
 1, The whole Christian Church up to the present tune 
 has strangely misinterpreted Scripture, if the Restoration^ 
 theory be true. The passages^ wbich Mr. McD. quotes, 
 are— I. Matt. xii. 32, in which it is said:' "Butwhosever 
 speaketh against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven 
 him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. 
 In Mark Hi: 29, the passage is given thus:— "But he that 
 shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiv- . 
 eness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. Now is it 
 not most evident there that "hath never forgiveness is syn- 
 onymous with eternal damnation? ^ \. . 
 
 That passage above surely declares that there ism 
 Scripture such a thing as sin that hath never fprgiveness 
 that there are some who are guilty of this sin, and surely to 
 assert that there is a time coming when these shall be for^ 
 given^ is to contradict in the most direct way this clear 
 language of Scrit^re. ■ ' 
 
 , Another passdge quoted is i John, v. 16.—" If Miy man 
 sec his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall 
 ask and he shall give him life for them that sm not mito 
 death. " " There is - a sin unto death, I do not say that ^le 
 shall pray for it." Mark ix. 43, 2 Thess., 1-9, ''Who^shall 
 be. punished with everlasting destruction? Everlasting 
 destruction— is there any greater mystery m these wpr<lt 
 
 than in the term everlasting life. , ,^ , . i .4 
 
 Judevi. refers to angels. ^'Theangels He hath reserved, 
 in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgmeat oT 
 the great day." Again Matt. xxv. 46,-"These sh^ go 
 away into everlasting punishment, but the nghteous mto We 
 eternal." These are the passages Mr. McD. quotes. I 
 would add a few others. Luke vi, 24; Luke xvi. 25-36; 
 Revelation xiv. ii; xx. T0-15 ; Isaiah xxxm. 14; M att. 
 
 
 vii. 22-23. Heb. vi^ 4. 
 
 These, abd many other passages 
 
 ^y 
 
 "I 
 
 
 i 
 
/■ ^ 
 
 
 19 
 
 <-^ ■• • 
 
 which do not so directly indicate eternity of future punishment, 
 but yet do so by implication as strong as though it were said in 
 so many words, seem sufficient to establish this truth beyond 
 question. "They leave us (to use the language of a most 
 learned and philosophic divine) unshelHered, unreprieved, 
 naked and trembling before the terrible simplicity of revela- 
 tion, of those unambiguous oracles in which that God who is 
 & ccHisuming^fire, hath described Himself in the very volume 
 of mercy as bidding 'the cursed into everlasting fire,' into 
 a 'hre that is not quenched,' that is 'unquenchable,' whose 
 'smoke ascendeth up for ever,' whose 'torment is day and 
 night for ever and ever.' Let us take advantage of this 
 merciful dispensation; let us dare to speak about these 
 eternal miseries as matter to which reason may address 
 itself ; with awe indeed, but, as y«t without being utterly 
 lostaqd consumed in the terrible truth it contemplates." 
 
 There continues, however, to be much discussion on 
 the terms translated " everlasting, "• "etiemal." It is said 
 thdr meaning is to be restricted to a limited period of time. 
 Let us hear the opinion: of a compet<;nt scholar on 
 this subject, therefore, and to his comment there is 
 no need to add di^ything further. The argument 
 in it has never been successfully m<g» He says:;— "I 
 trust it will not be questioned in regain to the nine cases 
 where aton is applied to the happiness of the righteous 
 
 . in another w^rld, and the fifty-one cases where aA7»w is 
 applied to the same, that a happiness without limits, without I 
 end, is intended to be designated. ' Can it be reasonably 
 doubted, then, that the five cases in which aion is applied to 
 
 J ^e future punishment of the wicked, and the ^even cases 
 in which aionios is applied to the same subject, have a 
 meaning like that of tfie preceedihg , casei? The time 
 4e|$i^ated in both is future; the world is future. The in- 
 lention of the writers seems very apparently to have been 
 ^ipilar in both cases. The invariable laws of interpretation, 
 tl|[erefore, would seem to demand a like exegesis. I take it 
 tp be a rule in construing all antithetic forms of expressipn> 
 
 . ^att where you can perceive the force of one side of the 
 antithesis, yqu do of course come to a knowledge of tlie 
 
.%., 
 
 *Toirce of the other side. If //^ dental is promised on one 
 side, and //«i/>5i etfrnal is threatened on the other and Oppo- 
 site one, is it not to be supposed that the word e{ernal which 
 qualifies death is a word of equal force and import with the 
 word f'Arwa/ which qualifies Hfel In no other case could a, 
 doubt be raised with regard to such a principle. I venture 
 to say that the exception here (if such a one must be made) 
 is without any parallel in the ju^t principles of interpretation. 
 If then the words aion aud aionios are applied sixty times 
 (which is the fact) in the New Testament to designate the 
 continuance of tlie future happiness of the righteous, and 
 some twelve times to designate the continuance* of the 
 ftiture %nisery of the wicked, by what principles of inter- 
 pretiqg language does it become possible for us to avoid the 
 conclusion that these words have the same sense in both 
 cases? It do^s most plainly and indubitably follow that if 
 the Scriptures haye not asserted the endless punishment of 
 the wicked, neither have thi^y asserted the endless happiness 
 of the righteous, nor the endless glory and existence of the 
 Godhead. The result seems to me to be plain and 
 philplogically and exegetif ally certain. It is this: either 
 the declarations of the Scriptures do not establish the facts 
 that God and Hi^ glory and praise and happiness are end- 
 
 / less ; nor that the happiii$:ss of the righteous in a future' 
 world is endless; or else, they establish the fact that the 
 punishment of the wicked is endless." — ^|*rof. Moses Stuart^ 
 on aioA and aionios. 
 
 • With regard to the passag^ on the other side which 
 Mr. McD. quotes, I think it will appear that he dra\ys a con* 
 elusion from them which is not warranted. He says "thie < 
 teaching of Soipture is not clear on this jsoint. It is not 
 such as ta give anyone a right fo say dogmatically, 'This 
 is true, and that is false.' '^ We hold that the teaching of 
 Scripture is crear and unmistakeable, and does enable us 
 to say dogmatically; that the restoration theory is not true, 
 is not once clearly stated in the whole Bible, £uid to say that 
 the punishment of the wicked is eternal, is a truth which 
 is cleaxly stated, and can only be set aside by wrestle^ 
 words from their ordinary m^dail^. , 
 
'<«•»#,, 
 
 
 ■ ^i^' 
 
 V"*^-' 
 
 .^' 
 
 
 H , ■ ■ '■ ' ¥'-■ ■ ' ■ ■' Im 
 .' ^ / ■ . ■■ 
 
 The firSt passage which hie qtiQtes tl^t I shall refer 
 to is I Cor. XV. 22 : "For as in A«$a«if all' die, even so in 
 Christ shall all be made alive." I shall quote the com- 
 ,ments on this passage given in the Connju^ntary of Lange, 
 who> Mr. ' McD.- says, favours more (*r »lfess distmetly the 
 view of restoration. (Although, the commentary is pub- 
 lished as Lange's, the comments on the various books are 
 made by different writers— that on this book by Dr. Klmg.) 
 " Some find in this passage a statement of universal sal- 
 vation—the restoration of all. The question is : ought not 
 the word all to have the same scope in the two clauses? 
 The cdntext does not justify our limiting it to believers 
 in the first clause; for he is throughout treating of the 
 dead in general whatever may have been their religious 
 state. */ . . But whether the dogma of a general restoration 
 is 2i Pauline doctrine is, to say th^ least,'' (the italics are 
 in the commentary) " exceedingly^ problematical." Then 
 it goes on, as Burger says: "It is not possible to prove 
 from our text, nor yet from the context, the doctrine of 
 a so-called restt)ration of all things, which asserts that all 
 at last, both good and bad, even the devil and his angels, 
 shall be made partakers of divine grace. ... Accord- 
 ingly we must side with those who take the word at// in its 
 broadest sense, and understand the being made alive of a 
 general resurrection. Accordingly the main thought would 
 be, that Christ, as the risen one, is the informing principle 
 anid commencement of all restoration to life in the race, on 
 the part of God. In this respect he constitutes a parallel to 
 Adam." " As the death of all mankind came by Adam, so 
 the resurrection of all men came by Christ; the wicked 
 shall be raised by Him officio Judicis hy the power of Chnst 
 as their Lord and Judge: The righteous ^haU be raised 
 benefido -mediatoris by virtue of their union with Him as their 
 Head."— ^^i^. The'necessity for adopting this view, the 
 commentator adds, will more fully appear as we proceed. 
 
 We see, then, this pass^e gives no support to the 
 theory of restoration in t he view of this comm e ntator, and 
 can be explained quite legitimately in accordance with thfc 
 orthodox doctrine. And this could be much more fully shown 
 
 r 
 
■. \ 
 
 from the nature of the Apostle's argument, and from thj^ 
 views of the most learned commentators, both anciem 
 and modem/did space permit. 
 
 Verse 25 — "For He must reign till He hath put allene- 
 midS under His feet ; the last enemy that shall be destroyed is 
 death " (/. ^., death, the las^enemy, shall be destroyed). Now 
 I hope it will suffice to say that in this passage, from 25 tp 
 ay, neither Lange nor any commentator he quotes, and he 
 quotes all of note, nearly, sees any reference whatever, or 
 any evidence whatever, for the idea of restoration. 
 
 And with regard to verse 28, which is—" And when all 
 things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also 
 Himself be subjected unto Him that put all things under 
 Him, that God maybe all in all." "In this last clause," 
 which may read, "in order that God may be the a)ll 
 things in all"— though if seems a slender foundation on 
 which to raise so great a structure — "is found the main 
 authority for the support of the doctrine of a final restoration 
 of all things." Now, though there does not seem muqh 
 danger of this passage ever becoming generally accepted in 
 that sense, and though it would require more than this brief 
 statement to overthrow the passages on the other side, let us 
 hear what Lange says of it : 
 
 " The expression, * be the all things,' signifies pri- 
 marily absolute supremacy or rule. But how are we to 
 Understand the other expression, * in all ?' Is the adjective 
 tO' be construed as masculine or neuter? On the former 
 supposition its scope must be limited to believers . . . and 
 this entirely excludes the doctrine of restoration. 'If the 
 other view of the adjective is taken, then all created exist- 
 ences must be understood, and thus with this will come the 
 cessation of damnation, and so the restoration of all things. 
 But could the Apostle Paul who puts the lost in con- 
 trast with the saVed as he does in i. 18, have had such a 
 doctrine in his mind?" And in words following for which we 
 have not room, the commentator distincdy repudiates the 
 view of restoration, atad asserts the orthodox view. Mr. 
 
 MacD. says, referring to the 25th and 28th verses : "Wh€i 
 could r^d those wdrdsif ht&id not those other passages 
 
 V 1 
 
 •- i 
 
 
 ■':>* 
 
 J 
 
 ^1 
 
 ^1 
 
 •4 1 
 
v.F 
 
 '•^' 4 •- . 
 
 i-.','|i^'- .t*.''' 
 
 
 t( 
 
 about eternal punishment without thinking, that by and by 
 the time will come, when all things will be put under Jesus 
 Christ, etc; and he asks, •Does that mean shutting them up 
 in hell to sin, and disobey for ever and ever?' What does 
 conquering . enemies mean with Christ if not transforming 
 them into friends?" I would atswer his first question by 
 saying that Scripture cannot contradict itself, and where a 
 number of passages clearly state a particular truth, these 
 passages must guide us in the interpretation of any other 
 passage that may seem capable of an interpretation which 
 contradicts these ; and I wotild answer the second pfirt of the 
 question by a quotation from Lange, who says: "We must 
 therefore suppose them to b§ 4hut up, as it were, in some 
 prison house, in some outer darkness where they shall be as 
 5" they were not, and neither the sight, nor the hearing, lyr 
 the influence of th^m shall, in any way disturb the blessed- 
 ness which shall reign supreme throughout the realms of 
 God, the Father in whose presence there will be a fulness 
 of joy for ever and ever." , ^ ; 
 
 And I would answer the third part of the question, 
 thus : If conquering enemies means with Christ transform- 
 ing them into friends, then it plainly follows from this, that 
 the devil is not conquered yet by Christ, and will not be 
 conquered till he is released from hell and teansformed into 
 a friend. Now surely this is quite contrary to the view 
 which Scripture gives of the exalted Saviour towards His 
 enemies, as in Heb. x., 1 2-13, " Sat down on the right hand of 
 God . . . expecting till His enemies be made His^^ 
 footstool.' And m the verse quoted above, I Cor. xv. 2^, 
 " He piust reign till He hath put all enemies under His 
 feet'; — which expressions cannot mean transfbnning them 
 intofiriends. 
 
 Phil. ii. 9-10, is another passage given as beann^ 
 on the subject of restoration,— ** Wherefore God hath 
 highly exalted Him and given HiflW a name which is 
 above every name, that at the nam^. of Jesus €very knee 
 
 atWVC ^VVi*/ v«w»«^>, *.»«*«■ »»» «■"■» "- — t"-- ^ — -y 
 
 should bow of things in heaven, and thmgs m earth, 
 things under tjhe earth." On which EUicott says : "' 
 
 and 
 three classes htere mentioned are not to be understood witfi 
 
 He t hat si l tetl i 
 
■ ^ 
 
 any ethical reference." <i. e., as though of saints and sinners) 
 "but simply and plainly, Angels and Archangels in heaven, 
 men upon earth, and the departed under the earth. The 
 last class he does not think refers to the lost or the devils 
 of whom Paul, Eph. vi. 12, speaks, as dwelling in high 
 
 places. ' 
 
 Jonathan Edwards says on this passage : "By thing* 
 in heaven is meant the Angels, and by things in earth 
 is meant elect men living on the earth, and by things under 
 the earth, or in the lower parts of the earth, is meant 
 the souls of departed saints whose bodies are gone under 
 the earth, that by things or creatures under the earth is 
 meant souls of buried saints and not devils and dammed 
 souls in hell, is manifest from Rev. v. 13, — 'And every 
 creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the" 
 earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, 
 heard I saying, blessing, and honour, and glory, and 
 power be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and the 
 Lamb for ever and ever.' This would not be said of 
 devils juid wicked damned souls, who are far from thus 
 praising and extolling God and Christ with such exaltation : » 
 instead of that they are continually blaspheming them." 
 
 No doubt there is coming a time when ever>' knee shall 
 bow before Christ and acknowledge Him Lord, but that 
 does" not imply that His enemies shall become His friends. 
 Th^idevils believe and tremble. And no more awful, more 
 overwhelming proof of His Divine Sovereignty can be 'dis- 
 played before an assembled universe than shall be seen in the 
 utter and eternal subjection of His enemies in hell. 
 "In the place of torment, God, in His terrible justice 
 reigiis alone. Satan and his angels and his victims serve 
 in penal fire and chains for ever." . ^ ^ v 
 
 Eph. i. 10, and Colossians i. 19-20, contain this same 
 glorious truth of Christ's universal sovereignty, which we 
 hold, and which Scripture teaches is quite consistent with 
 the fact of His enemies being in subjection to Him, as it is said 
 
 He t hat si l letli in the heavens shall laugh, the Lord shall hav e 
 them in derision.^ I will, therefore, first, only refer to the one 
 dause in the passage in Colossians which seems to need 
 
 / ,-i 
 
-■\;...- .•■■. ■ ■■ iv'';"-\, . . ■■; •■'■'■:^'-i/ ^ ■■.:... :: ^- 
 
 ■r . -•• - ' 'M .' ' ' ■-■ I -0 '■'■'■ -/""■ 
 
 illI>lMiatton, namelf — *'b)r Him to recoacile all thingt uata 
 Ittmself ; by Him, I say, whether they be things in esulh or 
 things in Heaven." ^ 
 
 On which passage, Ellicott says : "The revelation con- 
 tained in these words is of the most profound nature, and 
 must bfc interpreted with the utmost caution and reverence. 
 This, aad no less than this, it does say — that the eternal 
 and incarnate Son is the awsa mediatu^ (i. ^., mediating 
 cause,) by which the absolute totality of created things 
 shall be restored into its primal harmony with its Crea- 
 tor, .. . more than this it does not say, and when 
 God is silent it is -not for man to speak." Jonathan Ed- 
 wards holds thfttWtlJMe term all signifies — all intelligent 
 elect creatures, \lftrd says on it: "So that our interpre- 
 tation may be thus summed up, all creation subsists in 
 Christ; all creation is therefore affected &y His act of pro- 
 pitiation ; sinful creation is in the strittest sense, reconciled 
 frohi being at enmity ; sinless creation ever at a distance 
 from His , unapproachable purity (Job xv. 15 ; iv. 18) is 
 lifted into nearer participation, and ^igher glorification of 
 Him, and is thus reconciled, though r^ln the strictest, yet 
 in a very intelligible and allowable sense. And of the "all 
 things" in Eph. i. 10. he takes the same view. Jonathan 
 Edirards also takes the same view as given above. 
 
 While Ellicott says on " the all things" in the passage, 
 Eph. i. 10, " Without entering into , the prpfound questions 
 which have been connected with these if Qids, it may be said 
 
 .V . .^ ._ ,..1.. 1 1 -11 1: :i^..,X :««.^SJU.I>»..*4An<> • a4'/« oi-a 
 
 that, as on the one hand all limiting i 
 opposed to the generalizing neuter and 4 
 ness of the expressions, so on the other 
 to the redemption or restoration of thos 
 our Lord said everlasting fire was prep 
 noyxnced fundammtally impossible." \ 
 
 There only now remains. unnoticed 
 McD. quotes from Rom. xl. 32—" F6r 
 
 ,^ons, etc., are 
 lirehensive- 
 
 jiP^hom 
 ^be pr( 
 
 the passage Mr. 
 God hath con- 
 
 cluded them all in unbelief that He might have mercy 
 
 ^m 
 
 On which he r emarks,— " The mercy is as 
 
 which is no 
 
 upon 
 
 wide as the belief." 
 
 This, he says, is the natural interpre- 
 tation of these words. ' Horn I am. not aware that the^ 
 
<^C- 
 
 t , 
 
 *^ 
 
 words are generally appealed to as ^uppiM^itfjIf^lii^f ''trine 
 of restoration. And I think few wilt W^^jf**^ m»U to 
 undersund that doctrine, as sjate^^efr, Wlhe natural 
 interpretation of these words. ^WMp ^^<x^ ^^ ^^ mercy 
 on all when He offers Christ to""wworld afa a Saviour? 
 On this passage ^Iford remarks : ** Who' ^re the all of 
 both clauses ? Are they die same, and if so, is any support 
 given to the notion of an apokatastasi* or restoration of 
 all men ?" CerUinly they are ideqtical, and signify all men 
 without limitation. But the ultimate ditference between " the 
 all'! men who are shut up under disobedience, and "the *U" 
 men upon whom mercy is shown, is that by all men, this 
 ju|prcy is not accepted, and so men become %clf-excludcd 
 f{*om the salvation of God. God's act remains the same, 
 eq\ially gracious, equally universal, whether men accept His 
 mercy or not. Hodge says somewhat differently: ''As 
 therefore all men had forfeited every claim to the divine 
 n\ercy, God had determined to display His goodness by 
 having mercy upon all (that is upon the Jews as well as the 
 Gentiles), and thus bring all ultimately to one fold, under 
 
 one shepherd." ' i- -^ :^uu..^^i_^jii- -^ 
 
 I have thus gone over the passages quoted by Mr. 
 McD. as favouringyfoaflriew of restoration, ^ving th^ com- 
 H^ts of standar^Mwfes on ,y|||^> axlt^ will be aeen 
 that these autl^B|U8E|P^ witl'^me views of the Con- 
 fession of Faitlr^Rneir interpretation of them, the onlj 
 exception being the interpretation of Ellicott on Col. i. ao. 
 But even tljere he is far from asserting that the restoration 
 view is distinctly supported, but leaves the passage as one, 
 the full meaning of which he is no't |)repared to state, while 
 in speaking on the parallel passage in Ephesians, he dis- 
 tinctly repudiates the doctrine. Ajad this much is manifest 
 from these passages, that th^re is no such clear support 
 or expression of the idea of restoration as we have of 
 the truth of eternal punishment in' the opposing passages. 
 If the former is there at all, it is only by an inference 
 which is no mor e natural, no more n ^ ecessary^ than other 
 inferences which do not at ail .imply such a doctrine. 
 "rj McD. says: "I repeat that the. teaching of the 
 
 #> 
 
■ ■ ;■ ^ •'■•■ I ao 
 
 * Scripture is not so clear on this matter as the majority of 
 good .men and good women have thdught, and as it is stated 
 to be by the confession of faith of our own Church." Now 
 we have seen th^t the passages quoted on the side of 
 eternal punishment do distinctly use the terms "eternal," 
 *' everlasting,"— that the term "everlasting" is used by the 
 Lord Himself as the Judge at the last day. All men and 
 women, good or bad, can see cleariy that these terms are used, 
 and that they must be very much twisted indeed, set aside 
 ^together, to make way for the restoration theory, and 
 c^ see that in all the passages quoted on the restoration side, 
 there is no distinct statement of that truth in the judgment 
 of the best divines. If, as we have said, it- is there ^ all, 
 it is only there by inference, and the inferente that it is 
 taught there is one which no one will say is the only 
 natural and possible one. Now what is the natural common 
 sense mode of dealinjg with two such classes of passages? 
 Is' it not to accept the clear, often-repeated statements of 
 Scripture on the one side, and to conclude , that an infer- 
 ence which is drawn from one or two difficult passages, 
 which seems to.contradict these clear statements, is not so 
 
 . likely to be the true Scriptural inference as one that corre- 
 sponds with these. That the punishnent of the wicked then 
 is to be eternal— is to be endless, is the clear and oft- . 
 repeated declaration of Scripture; that the wicked are all 
 finally to be restored is not once cleariy stated ; so that 
 there is nothing left for us, but to believe as Scripture And 
 our Confession teach, that there is no hope for the wicked 
 beyond the grave. ' ■ ^ 
 
 And now as to the Confession of Faith, I fear many 
 that condemn it have not read it. Its utterances on this 
 subject arie by no means ultra dogmatical. They are 
 
 , almost entirely^ given in the words of Scripture. For 
 example. In chap, vi., which deals with the punishment of 
 sin, it only says : " Ever)^ sin . . . doth in its own nature 
 bring guilt on the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the 
 wrath of God and curse of the law, and so made subject to 
 death, with all miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal." 
 That is not a very strong statement in view of the state- 
 
ments of Scripture. Again in chap. xxx. 1 1 , of the state 
 of man after death. It says : i- • • • • And the 
 gouls of the wicked are cast into hell, where they remain m 
 torments and utter darkness, reserved to the judgmetit pt 
 the great day. Besides thelse two places for souls separ- 
 ated from their bodies, the Scriptures acknowledge to none. 
 2. " The bodies of the unjust shall, by the power of Chnst, 
 be raised to dishonour; the bodies of the just," etc. ^ 
 
 These again are not very strong statements m view bt 
 the Scripture language on the subject. Again in chap. ^ 
 xxx. 3, on the last Judgment, it is said in almost Scripture 
 words, « but the wicked tliat know not God and obey not the 
 gospel of Jesus Christ, shall be cast into eternal torments 
 and be punished with everlasting destruction from the pre- 
 sence of the Lord, and from the glory of His power. This 
 is the whole offending of the much traduced Confession of 
 Faith Will any one, even the most ardent hater of ilf^y 
 that it dogmatizes on'this subject. Does it in one word go 
 beyond the severity of Scripture itself. Could any one who 
 holds the doctrine of eternal punishment state that doctrine 
 more moderately than it is there stated. I think not. i^d 
 is it not warranted by Scripture most clearly m stating what 
 it does. I think every unprejudiced reader, whether he be 
 a restorationist or not will admit that it is. Mr. McD^ 
 therefore, is not warranted in representing it as gomg beyond 
 the clear statements of Scripture, and in contradiction to 
 the assertion above made, we are quite warranted to say 
 that the "teaching of Scripture" is quite as <'cledr on this 
 matter as it is stated to be by the Confession ol Faitli of ^ 
 
 our own Church." , . 
 
 In conclusion, although I am aware there are some 
 material points not noticed in the foregoing remarks, which 
 have a bearing on the controversy— such as the term ♦'all 
 in Rom. V. 1 8,— still I think, apart frorii what might be said 
 orfthis, enough has been said to vindicate substafitially the 
 views of our confession and of our church, or at least to 
 assist to a clearer understanding of the^e views those who 
 may not previously have directed their attention to the 
 subject. And with regard to that passage, Rom. v. i8. 
 
 ?V!^ !"'I 
 
ai 
 
 ■»•■ ■ 
 
 Where it it Uaid, " . . . even so by the righteousness of 
 <Mie the free gift came upon all men urito justification of 
 life,"— the term "all" is explained by Alford and other 
 writers in the same sense in which it is explained in the 
 
 .^passages above quoted — ^namely, excluding the idea of the ' 
 restoration of the lost. And as to the " triumphant tone" 
 in which it is saiti the apostle delivers this truth, no one will 
 seriously attempt to base an argument on any fancied singu- 
 larity of tone attaching to the apostle's words. We have 
 surely enough of ground for divfersity of opinion in the 
 language of Scripture, virithout introducing the supposed 
 tone of the various writers as an element to be considered 
 in arriving at a conclusion as to the doctrines they teach. 
 
 •It has been shown then that there are quite as many 
 and as great difficulties arising from the view of Restora- 
 tion, as from the doctrine of an eternal punishment for the 
 wicked. It has been shown that the former view has no 
 clear direct support from Scripture, and that the latter has 
 very clear and definite support from many passages. And it 
 has been' shown that to adopt this old heresy is to alter 
 not one article, but every article of our creed, and to in- 
 troduce another Gospel which is not the Gospel we have 
 received and believed. And I think it will appear from 
 what has been said, that there is no need of being alarmed at 
 a candid and intelligent* study of this awful and important 
 subject, that there is no likelihood of the foundations of our 
 faith being shaken, or any alteration being effected in the 
 common belief of all evangelical churches. It will afford me 
 satisfaction if this attempt to elucidate the truth should lead 
 anyone to more confirmed views on the subject, or Should 
 lead some one more competent to expound and defend the 
 truth of Scripture on this important subject.- "I trust nothing 
 has been' said to give offence to ^. McD. I have sought to 
 avoid doing so. But if anything unbecoming a fair ex- 
 amination of his views has crept in, I trust he will over- 
 look it as unintended, and not take amiss a friendly 
 attempt to controvert what seem to be the tendencies ol his 
 
 ' sermon, and to point out as it appears to me the unfounded 
 nature of the theory which his sermon seems to favour. I 
 
as 
 
 ....■ ■ 'i,-mt 
 , ■■•&•■ . 
 
 would dose this imperfect review of the subject with 
 the wowis of a Divine already quoted: "Whatever, 
 erefore, be the fate of human speculations on this tre- 
 mendous topic, be it ours to cultivate the simplicity of faith 
 which is independent of them. Even though in its vastness 
 and mystery it continue to rebuke our feeble reason, let it 
 stand in the naked simpiicity of fact; a truth grea't, and 
 terrible and certain ; planted deep in the nature of God's 
 attributes, and, therefore, unfathomable jmSI things that are 
 of Him; but withal addressing itself -t^pfe simplest and 
 strongest feelings of man, his dread^i|^^||Lin, his horror of 
 shame, and misery, and death; meettrigM»ina at every turn 
 to evil, and casting a fearful shadow across those pleasures 
 that are not of GcS, and those glories .where God's glory is 
 forgotten; meeting you .at the first fatal steps upon that 
 course which ends in the abyss of woe it denounces, and 
 warning you at once to flee the bondage of seductions 
 which grow as they are obliged, and strengthen with every 
 victory ; warning you that all the temporal results of sin — ^ 
 all are but shadows of the overwhelming peiialty it brings, 
 when the mercy, Mich still restrains to these limits the ful- 
 ness of divine vengeance shall have ceased : and the sin and 
 the punishment which are now but temporary, passing to- 
 gether into tho world of eternity, and stiU, as ever, bound in 
 inseparable links, shall become themselves alike eternal." 
 
 
 ■V 
 
 i ^. 
 
■m. 
 
 
 
 - ■-= 
 
 ■ ■ 
 
 » 
 
 ■'#.."■■ 
 
 
 ^M: 
 
 
 
 ''. 
 
 ' t 
 
 
 
 Kj' 
 
 If 
 
/• 
 
 
 N 
 
 « » , 
 
 .^ 
 
 I 
 
 » ^ <^ - i-* I rfot. 
 
■r 
 
 i" 
 
 / 
 
 ■^■■i 
 
 /; 
 
 /' 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
 y 
 
 / 
 
 
 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 '^m 
 
 ^. 
 
 .^^^^^^W 
 
 
 
 '■ ■ .- . 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 / 
 
 V 
 
 I 
 
 • 
 
 1 
 
 r- ■.''■■■ 
 
 
 ^^^^^^^^ < 
 
 
 fO ' ■ 
 
 - 
 
 -• '"'■ 
 
 t' 
 
 
 
 
 
 /. 
 
 
 .._. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^H 
 
 f . A -■ 
 
 ^ 7- i 
 
 i 
 
 ■*« 
 
 
 
 -- 
 
 
 •■ . 
 
 » 
 
 
 - 
 
 ¥ 
 
 
 • ' 
 
 ■ ■■ \ 
 
 
 'V' ■-•■.; 
 
 ■ ■; 
 
 ■;,. < 
 
 ■■':"Z 
 
 ■^ 
 
 
 a ' 
 
 
 
 
 ;■ -^ " ^^"' >\ ' 
 
 :::■#.■ 
 
 ■*- '■ ; ■ 
 
 
 " ■" 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ - ' ■ ■ ' 
 
 i( . 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ . 
 
 
 / 
 
 
 
 
 » 
 
 \ ■' ■• ;:;' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 W 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 *. 
 
 
 
 \j 
 
 . * 
 
 ■ -;■. ' ■ ■ ■ \ ■.*■■■■ 
 
 ' '^■"- -' ■ ." 
 
 '- . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ '« '■' ■;; 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . :,..-._. ..■ •^- 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
(T 
 
 'J>. 
 
 / .