la
AsMclation for Infermation and liiia«« Managmwnt
1 1 00 Wayne Avenue. Suite 1 1 00
Silver Spring, Maryland 209tO
301/587-8202
J
■ \
f :# ■■
>
k
A
O
*
.«•
*
,*i
Centimeter
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 mm
miiImiiIiiiiIiiiJiiiiIiimIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiImiiIiiiiIiimIiiiiIimiImiiIiiiiIiiiiIimiIiiiiImmImiiIiiiiIiiiiIiii^
m
Inches
ijJmjIynJmJnMJ^^
1
. \
1.0
3
LA1Z8
4
1^
ta
I.I *
1^
1.6
1.25 1
1.4
,.f^
■■/
..I
■*-' , y
^
1
:0'
■^^,. ^
MRNUFRCTURED TO PIIM STRNDORDS
BY flF^PLIED IMRGE, INC.
y I
^
^.1^
'!«.
<i° «?.
V ^J
*^^
r i
9
\
^
i^
CIHIVI
Microfiche
Series
(l\ffpnographs}
ICIWIH
Collection de «
microfiches
(monographles)
■»■* ^1
.."^ :
Canadian Institute for Historical IVlicroreproductions / Inltitut Canadian de microreproductions historiques
Technical and Bibliographic NoMs /.{lojcs techniques et bibliographicfuer
The kistitute has attempted to obtain the best original
CORY available for filming. Features of this copy which
may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any
of the images in the reproduction, or which may
significantly change the usual method of filming, are
checked below.
□ Coloured covers/ i
Couverture de coul|ur
n
n
Covers damaged/
Couverture endommagte '
Covers restored and/or lam
Couverture restauree et/ou pelliculie
inatei^
Cover title missing/
Le titre de couverture manque
Coloured maps/
Caites gtographiques en couleur
» I — ^ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blu« or blackl/
I I Encr'e de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)
□ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur
-*.<■:,.
D
1., "
D
□
n
/ . .■,■.■-■
Bound with other material/ .\
Relie avec d'autres documents "
Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/
La reliure serrte 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, lorsque tela etait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas etc'f ilmees.
Additional comments:/
Commentaires supptementaires:
This item is filmMl at the reductioi^ ratio checked below/
Ce document est f ilme au taux de ripduction indique ci-dessous.
L'Institut a microf ilmA le meilleur exemplaire qu'il
lui a k\k possible de se procurer. Les details de cet
exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques dii point de vue
bibiiographique. qui peuvent modifier una image
reproduite. ou'qui peuvent exiger une modification
dans la mithode normale de filmage sont indiqufe
ci-dessous. , <
EiFj Coloured pages/
_| Pages de couleur
□ Pages damaged/. ^
Pages endommagtes
□ Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaurees et/ou pellicultes
i
C^;
ages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages decolorees, tachetees ou diquees
r~~| Pages detached|^
Pages detaches
QShowthrough/
Transparence
j 'I'Quality of print varies/
I ^\ Qualite inegale de I'impression
n
Continuous pagination/
Pagination continue
*
I "kfncludes index(es)/
I 1 1 Comprend tin (des) index>^
Title on header taken from: /
Le titre de I'en-tSte provient:
□ Title page of issue/
Page de titre de la livraison ^
□ Caption of issue/
Titre de depart de la livraison
D
Masthead/
Generique (peribdiques) de la livraison
l^i}-
10X
»
14X
\
18X
22X
/ 26X
30X
'
*
y
/
■s
12X 16X 20X
■•r
28X
32 X
1
The copy filmed here has b««ji reproduced thanks
to the Ijenarosity of: /
♦ Metropolitan Toronto Reference Library
Business and Social Sciences Deparcmenc
The images appeafing hfra are the best quaUty
possible considering the condition and legibiliry
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specif iOatJona.
Original copies in printed peper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover ar\d ending on
the last page with a printed or il^tj^strsted impres-
sion, or the back cover when agp'ropriate. All
other'original copies.are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.
The last recorded frame on each microfiche.
shall contain the symbol — *^ (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbpi'^V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.
L'exemplaire filni^ fut /fproduJt gricii A la
g4nArostt6 de:
Metropolitan Toronto Reference Library
Business and Social Sciences Department
Les images suivantes ont At* reproduites avec le
plus grand 9oirf«compte tenu de la Condition at
de la nenete dsi I'exemplaire film*, et en
conformite avec les conditiona du contrat de
filmage.
Lep exemplair«s orlginaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprimee sont filmis en JBpmmancant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dermere page qui comporte une etrlpreinre
d'impression ou d'iliustration. soit par le. second
plat, selon le cas. Tous les.autree exempiairjos
originaux sont filmie en commoncant par la
premiere pege qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'iliustration et en terminant par
la derni^re page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.
Un des symboles suivants apparaltra sur la
derniire image de chaque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbole -»^ signifie "A SUIVRE , le
symbols V signifie "FIN".
<^,
%■
Maps, plates, charts, etc., moy be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed ..
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The'following diagrams illustrate the
method: ,. ,
1
2
.3
«
m
■♦*
Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent itre
film^'s 6 des taux de reduction diff^rents
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre
reproduit en un'seul ciich*, il est film* d partir
de Tangle sup*rieur gauche, de gauche d droite,
9X C9 haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images n*cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la methode.
t
,- •
I ■ ■ ■ ' .
A
2
3
1 * . . ■
/ ■ ■ ■ ; ' '-f'^
■
■
4
5
e
6
.■:V ■ ■Mr---
\
4
■»
, - - /. ;!.■. - . •.
\
fill
i
/
'W'
/
ll h
t
'■
.#■
■' -■ ■
. ■-
■^
ifi
^ "
1! '■^' -'
' ■ ^>. '
J "V
'>■•.
" sSi
m :
' ' .•%c..J^
-■_
/
•
J *
■■ •• ->
■ ■. - (
■ *
■.^.. ;
ill "
■ ,if/**r^^?^
^1^
*., ■ _ . .'l..
^ >i _ ;^ ■ ;■. , _ . _.
■- ■ \ - ■
. -^ - :■ - -;r-:,-^
W}- •
--.f-^ -'^
^^r
r <
•V ■ A,.
•
"■ ■ «'
RrT
i;:,^'Cl
P^?S
»•■
'^ •■..■■ v ■-".;•• .
■■'■.,. ' ' . \ . ;
^^H^m.
-.1. .,:>■,, ^,r .•
^ ^ ■■ '■ ..Jr
■ ■ •
91
^\\e collar bolts c6nnect tliu l)rat'ket8 between tlic tran-
soms and>trail, their collars keeping it rigid.
The trail piece lies between the brackets at the point,
and rivets pass throngh the whole. This piece eiids in an
eye, to go on to the limber hoyk,.aud is steeled to prevent
wearing.
A bearing piece of steel is bolted nndeV the end, and a
plate is bolted above to prevent damage, if the limber ia
driven over it. ^ »
The axle-tree bed is of wr;^nght/iron, and forms, with
the axle, a beam of box-girder section.
The axle-ti*ee forms • the bottom/ of the box, a-^'picce of
angle iyon rrveted^along each side of tliebody the sides,
•while the top is formed by a plate riveted along the npper
sides of the angle iron pieces. The whole is fixed into
recesses in the brackets. Avliere it is secured by being rivet-
ed, to the frames of the latter, by angle iron stays riveted
to itself in rear and ^o the frames, and by tensile stays,
from the shoulders of the axle-tree, to the same.
A strengthening fplate is riveted on the inside of each
bracket, extending from tlie bed to the rear transom.
The carriage is fitted w^ith capsquftres and keys, metal
sockets to receive the trunnions of the elevating gear, a hand-
spike ring, trail handles, range plate, and a lot of other small
ones.
The elevating screw, which is known as the Wli it worths
pattern, Plate VIII., is attached to the gun in the usual
way by a bolt and is worked by a metnl*nut through whi{;h
it passes. Bevel teeth are cut upon the • lower part of the
nut, into which a bevel wheel upon a horizontal spindle
gears. The nut and bevel wheel are contained in a wronght-
iron box, having a trunnion upon each side, by which it is
supported and can oscillate between the brackets. The lid
of the box is secured to the bottom ,by four long screws and
has a lubricating hole in it for oiling the bevel wheels
through, which hole is filjled by a metal screw to keep dust
and grit out ; a drip hole is made in the bottom and the
h.
%
5i;crf')t':z^^.<^G7
-'36t.
,*•
*V,
•■ jf
i^ v'*
■■'•«[
SepT 2 6 1910 Z^*:
S3:523:-
PPRESENTED BY ^
N'l
/2^tjc^ (3^/Le^
* 7^v ^y**-^**«— <-
^ <3
oa
r^
interior is coated with red I6nd, The spindle of tlio Level
•wheel passes through a metal bearing or honeh in the right
trunnion of tho box and upon its extremity outside the
right bracket of the carriage has a metal hand wheel by
whicU it is worked. To removp the box from tlio carriago
tho lid has to be taken off, the pin holding the spindlo
pulled out, and the spindle withdrawn. The second tran-
som of the carriage has then to be removed, after which
the bolts of the sockets being^tiken out, the box with the
sockets can be moved to the front, and the former freed
from the latter. : I -
*• The axle-tree boxes are arranged to carry two rounds of
case and small stores. The lijtl serves as a seat whpn re-
quired. The boxes form seats, with back and foot rests.
The limber is also chiefly of iron. It is formed of three
futchells, a splinter bar with two stays, a platform board, a
slat, an axle-tree bed witli^ limber hook, axle-tree and
wheels. .
The splinter bar is of plate iron, bolted to the futchells
and. strengthened by a stay of round iron from the extrem-
ities to the axle-tree bed.
The axle-tree bed is deeper, but of lighter construction
than that tor the gun. The futchells of tee iron are let
into the bed, below the top plate.
The limber hook has three long arms, by which it is rivet-
ed to and also held at the proper distance from the rear^f^-
the bed. It is steeled.
The platform board of asli, and foot board of elm, are
placed on top, and fastened to the futchells. The slat is
placed in front, between the splinter bar and foot board.
The shafts are the field shafts off and 'near, of ash. The
off shaft has the part bet ween%pl inter bar and axle-tree, of
iron, to give room for the wheel to work, it being fastened
for ordinary draught outside the wheel.
The limber is fi.tted for either single, double, treble or
bullock draught.
Limber
Murk II.
A- ■. ,
F^
KEFEl
"An
mandu
.^tL^
■ # . ' »
■ FACTS AND THEORIES
AS TO A
FUTUKE STATE:
1)
THE SClllPTUllE DOCTRINE CONSIDERED,
■WITH
n?=-
KEFEllENCEfifcllKUENT DENIALS OF ETERNAL PUNISHMENT.
By F. W. grant.
>
"And this is love, that w« wiuk aftor His commandments. This is the com-
mandment, that, as ye have heard from the beginniu-, ye should walk in it."
-i John 6.
I>
NEW YORK:
M. CATHCART, 20 FOURTH AVENUE.
• TOllONTo. t'AXADA:
S. W. HALLOWS, 308 YONGE STREET.
" IS79^ — :
'■iS.- .<?.-■■; '}■:
Pri
Int
li^l' ^'A -;
r\iA
i:
PBINT
Paym- i^woriiKWS. „
K«S. KI.KrTin.T^I-KUS ANL STI:UK..TY1'KRS,
■•,7 VMIK 11"^* • '•^■^^' '»"'f'^-
I.
4*J
■ J
1-1
X
X
o ( ) N^ T K :n t s .
Prkfack.. . . .
INTIOMM ( I ION
VAOE
K(I|{M> «•!• Dl.NlAL OF EtKIINAL
1*1 N IMIMKNT
PAirr I —MAX AS IlK IS.
CFrAPTKU.
I.— Is Tin; JJoDV Ai.i,?. 19'
II.— Man a Tkium: Bkinm;. . . .... 29
I II. — Th i: Sim i;'it of (iou. . - . . . Sfj
I\'.^ — Tin; Si'iinr OF Man ... .... 44'
\'.- Tin; Son. . . ,. 53
\'l Fl .NrTIoNs AND ItKFATlONSHir.s oF SoUL
ANi> Sim KM. ,-. \ . 6vi
A'll. — Soul ANi> Ski.i'. ^ . 72
VIII— TiiF Fall ' ... 80
IX.— M^an}^ I{fl\tion.<iiii' To (Iou. . 88
^*Airr ir.— DEATH AND the ixteilmediate
STATE.
X.^ — Dlatii .^. ...... ^-i. ... .. 88
. XL— 'CoxsciorsNFss altfu DLyriL— I 99
XII. CoN.si ioi:.-i\Fsj aftjik Dlatii. —2 .... . . 112
XIII.- -()i5.n:<TioNs FROM Tin: OldTlstamknt. . 124
XIV. — SiiLoL, IIadls and Tauvdisk . . .(U. .... 144
PAUT III. THE ETEUXAl/lSSUES.^
X\'. TlIK AVTirolilTY AVI) USL OF SCU11'Tri{F.\ 153 .
XVI. [mmoktality : N w Conditional? . . . ^'102
XATI. -Etkkxal Lifh: What is it':'. ........ 169
XVIII. -Thk FiusT Shntlncl . . . .180
XIX. — Dfstki'ctiox, and its Klndkld Tlums. —
TiiF OldTlstamkxt.. ■ ■ ■ 187
.^Jr
M- ^.
r<?>T'»'V«f-/5,'«^.'<.".'ll!!WpK?«
E?- n
<?•
!v
(JHAr»TEK.
XXI-
XXIL-
XXIII-
XXIV-
XXV-
XXVI-
XXVII-
XXVIII.-
. XXIX.-
XXX.-
. XXXL
, XXXII.
XXXIII-
XXXIV.
XXXV.
XXXVI.
XXXVII
XXXVIII
CO STENTS.
rA(iK
-AFtHTnr-;*iSrKVi:Y uv TfiK Scumrui:
Tkkms. .; • - -'^*
-Til K 'MiKi^^iiv-iM^i^fe^i-/- >■• •-•■■• •■'-^fLj ■•
-TulfPURlFICAVTIO^ \^V KLKSsfKa OF - jW
-Till- Xkw Ti:sTAMi% r^i'^Tiox of tiik
-TnK Ni;\YTK^AMKNTSriyi'trKHs .v?^Tu
TllK .IriMlMlvNT OF qp-^WUlM.l) . . .270
-Tin; K):!>i;nui;rTiH^)p^^ift'>^K>^'i"- • • •
-JiixJMK^S^f: WhkAnI^^jiat? ., . . .
-Tin: Doom v'i' Satan \ • • • • • • • ^ • • • •
-Gkiienna ...... ^- •.•."; K^. •';^'^'V.' '■■.■ f-
-Tin: AiMMAi.vi'Ti<%Vi>»loNs.-i-V^-,y S
-Tin: Ai'ot .vi.vpTK Vi%ox^:-^:i>^ , ^
-Tin: AiM)( Ai.^ itk Vi.sruNH?--')r
-•' EVKKLASTINO Vl-NISIImI^T ' I N >I ^Tl"-
XXV. • • -■ ^ v.-. ^ . . . -i-l'*
^••Tm: (Josi'KL OF Moim:' .... -i^^
'■
•■•I i^i^
300
30;")
319
33H
3r>0
— AsNnilLI>T-H»'lOUATH.M:
M
^-M n.
DlNN'S
Thkoiiy
XXXIX.—" Tin: l{i:sTiTUTro
,1
v OF Ai.L Thinos.",—
Mu. .11 Ki:s
XL. "Tin: l{i:<rnrri<'N oi Ai.i. 'rinNos.'—
Cand.s Fauiiau .
XLI.— Mk. Kii:ks' Vii:\v ... •
XLII — Tin: Etiik Ai.A2ii:>rioN •
XIJII.— La.-T Wo'uDS^VCnri ANNlinLlTlONISTS. .
XLIV.- I v>T WoKDs unii Ui;.«^TouATi(»\i.vis. . .
3Sl
30(
41.")
4:M
4 so
4SS
■1
91
*>»■■■
ui;
■OF ■ J'W '
... . !iy(#-
II i:
. . . 2(50
. . . 270 "
. . . 2h;{
. . . 291
. . . 300
■ *.. ■
^. 319 °
33H
^ 3r>0
\'ri'.
v. h:}')
M u.
... 3S1
. jy
. . . 397
... 4i:.
. . . . 431
. . . . 4;M
STS. . 4 so
rs. . . 4sS
•■•I -<^
■^
^' A--
r
■4. ■
• 'Vt'
/
v
■.^^-.
J.
. ■*
■^.v "
»■/
i>iih:
■M^\.^
)E.
'
^ M
•
^
4v
.c^'i.;^■;•4
J*
.*■*■
■■^i
"if—"
TnK present warUjii llu' <levelojfmt»uV of one publishetl
some years ngo, niul now otft^ of print, l)ut which toolc Up
only .1 j)ortion of the snhject here eon.sidered, and at iftnoh*
leK8 lenjifth. TTtr? rapid spread of the views in que.«iti9lv/*thefr
varkpty and their importance, render a prolonged and patient
examination of them ahsohiteiy necessari'. ^^'Tltti .qiiestion
has become one of the leading (juestions of the 'day*, and
nothing sliort of an extended api)eal to Scripture will
satisfy the need of those entangled by the error, or of those
who may be In danger of beeomiiig entangled.
For others also, (piite outside of these, the ca,reful exam-
ination of Scripture upon a subject of such deep interest
will be foun<l very far from uiiprotitable. 'I,E^'^^^ ^^A whole
is so connected^ in its various parts, that we cannot appre-
hend any one of these more fully, without this leading us to
a.ljiller apprehension of many other points in which kindred
triiths touch this. While th<* perfection and profundity of
the wonl of God will more an<l more be reali/AMl.as vts
abilitv is j>roved to satisfv the real need of the soul and
ijieet the natural thoughts and questions of the mind. ^
Scripture thus proved will be its own best evidence as a
Divine revelation. Xo doubt there is abundance of exter-
nal witness to its truth; but the surest of all is its own
direct testimony to man\ heait Oi^ud conscience. — Without
e
PREFACK.
Scripture he is au enigma which his own wit cannot explain :
he knows not from whence he came or whither he is going ■
he knows neither .himself nor God. With Scripture, " light
is come into the world;" and what makes all things mani-
fest needs not, although it everywhere finds, a testimony
outside itself. Truth speaks for itself -" commends itseW
to every man's conscience in the sight of God "-although
the true it is who alone will hear it.
In the following pages, then, the doctrine of Scripture is
what is first examined, not merely negatively an answer
sought to certain views. -The statement of the trut,h is the
only proper answer to the error. This the writer has sought
everywhere to keep in mind, while yet endeavoring to meet
whatever has been advanced on the other side as fully as
possible. Especial attention has naturally been given to
certain writers who are most prominently identified witli
the theory of annihilation oh the one han<l, or of universal
salvation in 'its various modiHcations upon the other ; and
they are allowed to speak for the, most i)art in their own
words, and at sufficient length to ensure that there shall
be no doubt or mistake as to the views they hold. Among
these, Mr. Constable has challenged criticism of his argu-
ments, and to him I have naturally sought the more fully to
reply. To- the arguments of Mr. Roberts also, the present
leader of the Christadelphian body, who has printed an
extended' examination of my original volimie, " Life and
Immortality," I have necessarily devoted considerable space.
May the Lord in His pity and love to souls, for whom He
has died, be pleased to use these pai^es for the blessing ol
manv. and to His ow?» trlory !
t explain :
is going;
re, " light
ngs mani-
testimony
nds itself
-although
jripture is
III answer
uth is the
has sought
liX to moot
as fully as
I givon to
itit'd with
universal
>ther ; and
their own
here shall
Among
i* his argu-
)T0 fully to
he present
printed an
" Lit«} and
•a])le space.
r whom He
blessing ol
INTRUDUCTION
FOIIMS OF TIIK DKNIAL UF KTERNAh PlINISII^fE>^T.
In' entering upon a subject like the present, it will be\
desirable in the first place to get as clear a view as possible
of what is involved, the. questions it is proposed to answer.
The denial of eternal punishment has two main forms, that
of annihilationism, or, as solaie prefer to call it now, "condi-
tional immortality,'* and that of the final restoration and
salvation of all men. Of these two there are again several
mpdifications, and even (contradictory of one another as
they may seem) amalgamations. Each of these we must
Iwiefly notice.
Annihilationism is at the present moment very widely
spread, and there are perhaps few Christians who have not
in some shape or other already met with it. It is a dish
dressed up by skilful hands to suit very different tastes.
From Dr. Leask and the various writers in the " Rainbow "
to the editor and contributors to the Ghristadelphian ; from
Mr. Morris, late of Philadelphia, to Miles Grant and the
Adventists of various grades, it is found in association with
very distinct and very opposite systems of doctrine, from
Trinitarianism down to the lowest depths of Socinian and
materialistic infidelity. But, on this very account, it will be^
well to look at it, not only in itself but in its associations,
to lead the minds of those who, meeting it in more dec§nf,
form, may be in danger from its plausible sophistries, to ap^'
prebend what it natur a lly connects itself witfi and prepares
; IJSTTRODUCTIOK.
-
4*
the way for ; and, mt)reover, to arouse the minds of Christians
in general to a ^ense of the practical beariijg anfl results of
an evil which is spreadinfij rapidly, and lifting up its head in
ttnlooked for places.
This may bo my justification, if I should lead my rea<lers
into the examination of points which for the ChristiaR may
be deemed unnecessary, and speak too of things which
rightly shock his sensibilities as such; Moreover, I do it
because upon any j)oint whatever, where Scripture is
appealed to, it is due to those whose minds might be injuri-
ously aifected by the mere sfemhuj to4lecline such an appeal.
My desire is, God helping nie, to meet the hontsL need of
minds unexercised in- the subtleties presented to them, too
often with a skill which, .alas, shows in whose hands these
poor annihilationists are Hm\i itting instruihents. And if,
in so doinir, the verv foiindations of our faith should have to
be examined (and they can sustain no harm by it), it may at
feast (I repeat) serve' to convince? my readers of what is
brought in question by a false system, which is helping
to rfpen fast the i)redicted eyil of the later days.
To come now to the point in liand. AYe, have a number
of steps to take before we reach the lowest level of so-
called Christadelphianlsm. ]\raterialisin is indeed its inev-
itable tendency ; yet a large number of those now holding it
are by no means materialists, as Edw. White, Heard, Maude,
.Morris, Dobncy, etc. On the other haml, ^Nfr.* Constable is
tlie leatlpr of a very ]»r(>n»»um-ed njaterialistic section of this
sdipol (which we may call the Trinitarian^school of annihi-
lationism), and with whom, though differing in many ways.
General Goodwyn fiifds his jdaee. The * Adventist "' school,
on the other hand, with some exceptions, are not only ma-"
terialistic but anti-Trinitariai> also : to these belong Hudson,
Hastings* and Miles (irant. Christadelj)hianism is all this
and more, a system in Avhieh no clement of real Christianity
Messrs. Hiitlson and llustini^s are l<> s(»iin' «\\l«'ii( «'.\f»'|»iiori.s.
-X-
1
i
r.
■■■I
I-
t^:.
iNTkODUCTlOy.
V
Christians
results of
its head in
r.y rea<lers
istiaH. may
iigs which
LT, I do it
ripture is
be injuri-
an appeal.
;: need of
them, too
inds these
And if,
Id have to
it may at
)f what is
is helping
a number
I'el of so-
l its inev-
holding it '
1, Maude,
iistable is
)u of this
>f annihi-
my ways,
■' school,
only ma-'^
Hudson,
s ail this
ristianity
lit ions.
remains behind. They liuve riglitly, therefore, given up the
name of Christian. ^ !
The psychological (iues|iou is that upon which these
writers diil'er most among [themselves. " Some believe in a
true trichotomy of body, j soul and spirit, as Mr. Ueard;
some are dichotomists, believing the spirit to be superadded
in the case of the regenefate, as Morris of Philadelphia;
most are, as already said, matei-ialists wholly. I shall notice
briefly the main distinctions on these points. ■ '
1. And first as to the spirit of man. Mr. Heard in his
"Tripartite Nature of 3Iaii " maintains its substantive exist-
ence in all men, as that which implies " God-consciousness," "
which the brute has not. In the unconverted it is deadened
and inert, but quickened by the' Spirit^of God when we are
born again. With him, as to the latter part of this, Mr.
• White agrees, although he can speak of " the royal qualities
of spirit, whatever tiny may be " (!) /y^ a queen-bee, " which
incite or enable ber to takejthe lead in migrations or swarm-
ings,'' (!!) so that for him j^can scarcely imply what it does
for Mr. Heard, and its possession or not by man would seem
to be of very small account.* He allows it to be, however,
in him " of a superior order, as ' the candle of the Lord; '
he has more wisdom than the beasts of the field; neverthe.
less he shares spirit with all animated uatures.'f
Mr. Morris, oirlhe other hand, believes that the new na-
ture communicated in regeneration is alone " spirit " in the
proper sense. The word is used as to ilie mn-egenerate only
for the " motions and emotions of the soul." Li Eccl. xii. f
he thinks rnach should ratherbe"breath,"orif not, « it may
be used to signify the motion of the soul in passing away '
and passing into the custody of God ! ''+
Passing downwards towards the naked materialism in
^which this doctrine ends, we find General Goodwyn also main- '
taining the addition of the spirit to man in regeneration
only.^ ^ ^ .
*Lifr in Chris},, p 18 f P- ol ~ % WhalTs U:m% pp. m ;^^,
% Tn liis " Iloloklpri.-i." *
r-.g4jyiK.M:^ Jt-^Sj^^ f?he\£!j
10
INTKODUCTION.
Jt
Mr. Constable's doctrine, gravitating evidently toward*
♦Christadelphianism," is that the "spirit " {riiaeh or neaha-
nah)\n man is the Spirit of God, yet it is identified by
iim also with the ''breath of life; " the cause of animation
to th^ body.* God withdraws this at death, and the
man breaks up an^ dissolves away. This view Mr. Warleigh
(whoto Mr. White stj^les " an able and resolute thinker ")
ha« adopted, differing "only in this — that in the case of
Christian believers, the Spirit, which he describes as the
Spirit of Gody becomes according to him a disthict individ-
ual spirit of the man separable from the soul ; and he thinks
that this "SpiritL" with all the attributes of an individual
' r&ind, survives in paradise till the resurrection, when it
riyoins soul and body at the Lord's coming. t
w' i^otmany degrees below this comes .the materialism of a
certain class of A(Iventists, who maybe fitly represented by
the editor of the '[ World's Crisis," Miles Grant, of Boston,
Mass. He deniesi that the spirit is other than the breath in
man, and that it is " the thtoking accoufttable part, or that
it ever did or over will thinK."J And this leads him to the
denial of the personality of the Spirit of God also. He
i 1 ■ says :^ "2. The Word spirit . is used to denote an influence
proceeding />om a being. Hence we read of the Gomfort;,er
or Holy Spirit, that * it proceedeth from the Father.' In
mesmeric operations there is a spirit proceeding from the
operator to his subject, by means of which he controls him.
All men and animals e.xert this influence more or less.''
All Adventist aiinihilationists are not as gross as this.
Messrs. Hudson anct Hastings, for instance, are not material-
ists to this extent evidently, although in the same boat with
those that are. Messrs. Ellis and Read, in a book which has
gone through at least six pditidns, on the other hand, are as
oui-spoken as IMiles Grant. They lay down these propo-
ffluons :|| _^ 1 . '
• In hia treatise on " Hades."
XU"ot«d from " !''<"<* in Christ," p. 298, n. \ Spirit in Man, pp. 31 , ."52
— ^ib. pi. !| Bible 4- Tradition, pp. 13. 8 4-87.
'f-r
tly towardfl
ch or neaha-
ilentified by
>f animation
h, and the
[r. Warleigb
e thinker ")
he case of
Ibes as the
net individ-
id he thinks
I individual
an, when it
riallHm of a
resented by
of Boston,
le breath in
art, or that
him to the
. also. He
n influence
Gomfort;,er
'ather.' In
J from the
ntrols him.
• less/'
ss as this,
t material-
boat with
; which has
and, are as
Bse propo-
n.pp. 31,.'}2
INTBODUOTION.
11
^
Fmt, we BhaU prove from tlie Bible the corporeal„lieing and
mortahty of the soul, and the nature of the spirit of man, which
spirit, not being a living entity, is neither mortal nor immortal
"f"<^^ (spirit) is derived hom^uah, ito blow,' and nesme,*
to breathe (!) pnmarily si-nifies 'wind, air, breath'; but it is
sometimes used to signify a principle, having some relation to/
electricity, diffused through universal space, a principle thai
stimulates the organs of men and animals into activitv, and which
18 used by the animals themselves to control their voluata^
motions. . . . This principle, being the principle of life in all
features, is in the hands of God and controlled by Him, hence in
Him we live and move and have our being ; and God is the God
of the spints of all flesh ; when God taketh away His Spirit and *
His hrenth-i. e.. God's Spirit and God's breath-then man
retumeth to his earth and his thoughts perish. " "
From this it is scarcely a step down to Christadelphianism
the system of the late Dr. Thomas and his followers. Their
views have been little, if at all, noticed by any who have
taken m hand to reply to annihllatlonist doctrine ;t yet there
IS reason to believe they are spreadmg, not only in the
United States, but also in Britain, where mdeed, their first
originator had birth. The system is acknowfedged in the
Utle page of a book that lies before me, by Mr. Roberts of
Birmmgham, England, their present leader, to be "opposed
to the doctrines of all the names and denominations of
Christendom. They adopt professedly an Old Testament
basis and deny almost all that is distmctive in the New •
d/J'' '^.^k'^i" ^^''\*^" personality of the Spirit, a personal
devil,andthe heavenly portionof the saints. ToquLfrom
Mr. Roberts' book,t they believe that " the Father is
? filr nftr A^^'f ''^' '^ ^"° ^'' ^^ ^^^^i" i° the creative
i iocalization of His will power, by me^ s^ofHis^MrepSr^
«nl^^r '"'^" ^"^ ^ -^^^'^-' ^- ^^-^n^point of
t Twelve Lectures, pp. }H(), 140, H",,
which fills heaven a.i.l c-arth." 'Vhey l.elieve in ''a Lamb
ol Oro.l, guileless from his raten.it y\ and yet inheriting the
human sm-nature of hi.s nrotlur. " IJ„f, being free from ac-
tual sm, " He could meet all the elairL of Gorl's law upon
that nature, anVl yet triumph over its i,peration l^y a resur-
rection from the <lea.l." Go.1 '-raised Him from the dead
' to^ g^ovioxxH vx\^^uc^^ ,.y^^ to equality with irimself"
And now life is deposit e.lhi Him for our acceptance, on
condition of our allying ourselves Xu Him, yea, on condition
of our entfy mto Him." ' Baptism in water is the cere-
mony by vvluc-h believing n,en and M'omen are united with
Christ, and constituted heirs of 11,.. life everlasting, which
ile, as one of us, has punliase<\' , ' '
In this, its suited home, annihilati..n tb.urilshes <' Spirit"
IS, according to Dr. Thomas, an c-lement <,f the atmosphere, ■
e.^sting ord.narily <.ombine<I ui.h nitrogen and oxy-en
' II rf/ 'r' V'^'^'r •' '^' "'"^"*'"' '"^•^^'"' -"4iect;i3ty;
con8t,t„te the breath and spirit of lives of all Gpd'.^ livinn:
souls. * I =•
Mr. rif»l»erts asks:— }j
. ".^■^,'^t/^ tl^at whi,.h is n.,t m.tt.-.r? It, will W/ do to say
ilrT:^ 7 "' ''^ '''^'V"" ""'^""^ ''^ "^ f^"«* tl^« Bible,
a rmghty nisl„„. .„,l. ^n.! .na.l. tl..- ph... shak., ^howing itf
tobecapabl.of.,nc.e^anin:l inomontum. .-uul therof^ as much
on the hst of material forcos as Ii,d,t, heat and .loctrieity. Com
mgnpon Samson, it .n.r.nz,..! his museles to the)' snapping, of
ropes like thread ; an.l, inhal..] l.vth. nostrils of ^n a^d be^ast
It gives physical lif..-' | "^^^'
The questions as to the spirit are. therc^re,its beincr or
not an act,ialhving entity in man; its function^; and.'^on-
nected with tins, the personality of the Spirit of God
2 As to the soul then- is still considerably y/iriety of
aoctrme. Messrs. White. Heard, Morris, Maudd and others
beheve very mueh according to common orthodoxy of the
i "a Lamb
eriting the
'e from ac-
s law upon
^(y a resur-
» the dead
Himself."
'ptance, on
1 condition
the cere-
nited with
ing, which
'^Spirit"
rao8phere, '
oxygen,
lectricity,
^(Vk livinjr
«lo to saj'
the Bible,
tocost like
lowing itf
^ as much
y. Com-
ipping of
ind beast,
being or
and, con-
.d.
triety of
d others
y of the
INTRODUCTION.
13
soul, and of ,t« survival too. Mr. Hudson also* admits its
mimatonahty, although he supposes it to be" dependent on
embodiment for the purposes of acfi.e existenceJ Mr
lJobney_ recognizes the ;.-o/.,^>///^/ of the soul beincr^n
nature distiiict from thel.ody, but doiiies " a purely .bsem
bodied coiidition.'t ' 1 "«'y t«'8em-
Ordinarily for common n.atcrialism, the soul is the animal
, life, as With Mr. Constal,let dow.i to Mile. Grant & It is
a View u-hkh has the ni'erit of simplicity at least, and a pa,'-
^ tial foundat.oii .n Scripture also; but in this application as
falsehooT '''^'''' " "'""' ^'"''''' ■'"'*' '"'•'^ ^'" '" *^««»"t«
General Good wyn differs from this, and his view seems
peciharly his own. The soiil for him i. '• that combination
of parts of the nou^r man, which is the seat of the mind and
a^ections, and, having the- breath of lite, gives action to the
otiter members of the body.'H That is, the soul is appar-
- ent y the lungs and h6art and their connections '
A fourth and a final view (very near akin to Goodwvn's)
IS commcjn to Messrs. Ellis and Jiead, and the Chds3eb
phians alike. With these soul and body are one. " A liWnl
bony. The word so.il," says Roberts, " simply means
a breathmg creature." "That whi.-h it u. u • ,
^foa I'l .., ^"»t ^^"'^-h It ilescnbes IS spoken
of as capabl.of hunger(Prov. xix. 15) ; of beingsatisfied with
food Lam. .. ll_lf)) ; of touchinga material object (Lev. v
;i; of ^^p" '""^ 't ^"^" '^"' ^^^"'- "--^)5 "f -«^-g
out of it (Psa. XXX. . ), etc. It is never spoken of as an im
material,' immortal, thmking entity. . . It is not only repre-
sented as capable o'f death, but as naturally liable to it " etc **
The questions as to the soul are s,ifficiently plain in these
quotations. ^ «.««dc
[0.S 1 .
* Debt anrl Grace, p. 2*>n. ♦
t SrripUiVe Doctrine of Future Punishment, pp. 93 141 '
- r '!^K. t !'::''"'• :j-::^""-^^-^-^ition. irElpisI.rae1.
weh-c T^echir.'v, |,[, .■■{•(^ ^o
JLJIl
:^i
/
14
iNTnonurxroN,
fhf ' ^l^^'i^! ^"^"'^ '***^ "^ ♦^^^ ^'^ked, these writers have
.tiie mem of almost complete harmony. The wicked ar.In
be "bun.t up»,to be-cxtinct," " destLyed utler,;'' in h :
sense of it, " blotted out of oxistonoH" etc tL ul
this. Eternal l,(e „ eternal rxislence. and tluH alone the
r-!^ .r J ^ f ""'"""""''"™ 'n »"="-<loinB. The rest
w,th the dev,l (for those that believe in one) wHl finaltlf
may be after protracted torment in the lake of flre^pL'h
and come to an end. Kvil will be extin-„ishe,l ,n,I f„T
«g be over forever; the whole univeC t;^ "■ 'e tm '
■U ™„bns, and the resti.n.ion „f all .hi„,s be Tle^
These writers dirter a., to certai., ,,oi„,s, how<.ver Son,,
affirm the resurrection of ail men • some even f •
any of the wicked : bnt these mJst levc re.l''''f'' "' *"
ftom the number oft hose j„.,t spoken • Th7 f , T-'*
real retribution seems 'V^^Jf:::{^lJ'::Z:^
anmhdationists thein.selvcs has come forth , 1 „ i ? "^
The followers of Thomas helioTel a ' anhl re ""^ ''
from which infants i,li„,s «,„, ,,, ,. F, """""^oi'O"
and new birth for th m ^n v nto i "" ""'"''*''•
. Other differences .earce™ 2; e ! "bT^rrtr""*- v
::r:^eii-:;~
«2^frrt™tt;:;L-"?h'"'rY^"^ "«'
are divided into twp main .; '„r ''Z^^YTr
that of the laree Universilis. ,1 „ "•"»"". The first is
;^th the Unitarian '^::^::i^^zz2::^'t;^
t«re,^he.veri:w;; ,tf,,::;;;;::;:f-;f".n "P «-P-
ofthon^.ht. Tl ,| ,i,,, ■"' ','. •"'''■•^^.' «-,tl, e„„re freedom
l'"--l""i IS the qnestion of main
mters have
3ked are to
•Jy " in this
rhe whole
8 affirming
' alone the
those that
The rest,
finally — it
re— perish
ind suffer-
free from
at length
?!•• Some
y it as to
^f course
ial of any
'r among
gainst it.
irrection
xcluded;
•n state,
th in an
i^iewR of
nd will
Id them
'■ first is
lentified
With
ural in-
Scrip.
rce4lom
iNTKOi>r(moN.v
16
, mtc.ro«t.a,>,l .,o..e^m with them, a,„l th«« w« may have to
ilo with them. ' '"
The Beco,„l «cho„l is „,ainly a Oerma,. importatioH, where
.t ean boast the names of Rengel and Neahder, of Tholuok
and 01ehi.>,«en. Through Maurice and others it has gro™
mto notonety in Engl=„,d, and Dr. Farrar's well-known ser-
of Etema IIo^,e," have ,,u. 1 hem before the masses in a way
to attract almost universal attention. His book has little in It
thM ,s or,g,„aU.owover. being in large part a reproduction
of one by .Mr. Co.v, of N ottingham, in which the three words
"damnation," "hell" ,.nd " everl.asting '• are challengTt
mistrans at,on., in the .same w.y as they are by Canon Ial"
A th,rd book, ft„,n which Mr. C„.v him.,elf ..onfessedly .o
muc . ,s ,h,.t of Mr Jukes, u.ore broadly heterodo/th,^
either, oven to denying iu the Swedenborgian manner the
reaurroction of the dead.? , Atonement is idso se.^1 1
h.s work „n restitution ; « „„save,l „,a„ in Gehenna be-
comes /.,., „„„ siu-offoring.^ an,l rises „,, to God, wht as to'
rnTCph-'Vr 'V""""' ''^P™'"' ''»'h and j„dg
Messrs. Coxandfarrar ,lo not indeed reproduce but the
thought of .atonement is not in .heir bo„ks,[and t is fair to
nfer that it ,s not in their minds. Saintly Luis for d7 F
heir samt mess secures; In,, f„r „,„„,,•. „ »,,, ^'r fn
there may be no remedy but Ionian m-e.,! True, it isthete
of God 8 love though „, Gehenn.,, b„, Clirist did not die
that they might have that. ""^ uie
., Com,,. Snlra.,,,. M„„,,i, p„. ,,„.,,, J ^ -"; __ . -
/
f main
-Se»."FternaIIIn,„.,-i,..86,otc.
c
Id
tXTRODUCTlOK.
((
These thVcebook-, "Etenml ll„,,e,- ''tiuhator
he liestitut on of All hm • ,. ^^"'vaior
>resentative of .r • ^ '""^'«' »»•'»/ >e Ihirl^
"t-qmiative ot this nsm.r s,.k„«i /w .. ,. -^
repreqentat
will not all<
difficult
18 risintr
Mundi,"*
"fe'«, maybe fairly taken as
school. Of these Canon V
or
himself to be classed as a Universal
'arrar
may only
passages stan
I iii^fi
listt T
wo
18 way, although these
may make ashamed, no doubt- bur h !" ^'''P'' *^'^*
' it. When Scripture is td^^^^^^^^
cannot. ^'^'''' ^'^^'''^ ^''e few hopes we
which i, a sd^CThl'i:;:^!'':?''."!'*'' """«»■"
■•epresent a theory of , ,e rttitirn V ,". '"•<'«'»'•'•. ""'I
urge G„.rs tein/„.e SavCoT „"»„;" Z'T K '"'"^
men should be saved Ffr.rr,.i J ' '^ ^^''" ^hat all
rabbine, and which unifP« tK, '''''''''''''' ^^^^^''tam
restoration. TheLX "s ^Mr IJ ^'' T''''^'^^ ^^
Mng followers among f;.mc'?il'r 7 ''"""' ^"^ ^---
^•ng reauy met f„ .meeting tho e o 1 .V "' ' '""'^' ^t, Arguments
Farrar. his disciple, botlV b^etter kn^v^ " '"'"' '"^ ™^«^«^' - «f Canon
tMr.^Giemance also refuses n.eter„;
by ^''i^of h"or al^m";:^ »>au> spoken
« " ■ S ec cl . a,.ter xxv. of o.is h^fc ' ^' ' "^ '" ""^ ^''" ""iverse at
fo
Fi
he
hii
at
E>
coi
/
^i
at ses
^W'
»tor Mundi,"*
lirly tak(;n as
^imon Farrar
Jalistt Two
though these
»ge," so that
a hope that
east indulge
w hopes we
school have
all things," ,
)roader, and
t'rse. They
kill that all
eternal, and
rhe phrases
as " ages,"
vever long,
s and Cox,
3trine of a
• mercy of
mercy.
se points,
of certain
ation and
and he is,,
fiihilation-
arguinents
>r of Canon
ath spoken
lui verse at
/I
INTRObtJCTION. 11
Death ,,ot L, c," to rq.laeo it by a„„tl,<.r c.n.itlcl "Hope
for our Kaco,',„ which ho advocates Mr. DunnV theory
Jrom ,t I learn that Mr. Dobncy ha.s also given in hi» ad
.os.„„ an,l that Mr. Hudson accepted these views before
h.s death. Mr. Storrs also, writer „f the "Six Sermons "is
at present advocating them in a paper entitled " The Bible
..^■' °r.? "f ^f*'* (q»"« 'igl'tly) the pre-miUennial
commg of the Lord, but wrongly connects this with a
general resurrection ; after which Christ will be asain
presented to the wielded by the elect church, and then re
^tCoWl rr' ""; ''•"■ ""'" "'"""°'»S ""^"-""^ there
IS the lalce ol hrc and annihilation.
A recent tract, now being circulated in the United States,
modifies this statement by confining the number of those
cvangehzed to those who had not heard the gospel in their
ormer h,e on earth, and adds the conjecture (startlinriy
sugsesfvem v.ew of Mat,, xxiv. 26) that Christ may
already be upon <v,rrt ,„„<,, and only be waiting the moment
to manifest Himselfto His people.' , '"""'™
; IV. ^ ,
In conclusion I need only allude to Mr. Birks' view
which I have examined at some length in a separate chap-'
ter. He does not <!e,„j eternal punishment, but he does
reduce ,t to the minimum; and his views iavc found 1
expositor and popular poet in the author of " Yesterl;"
To^ay, and Forever," as the Restorationists have found
theirs ra the present poet laureate.
railed" Thev"' ""1 *"™ ""Wf"™. -e the qnestions
raised They cannot be for m,ny really met without
patient, protracted examination of the whie subjecTfrl
the stand-pomt of Scripture; which, if it be God's
j^^ord,
4
IB-
finally authoritative; if it be something lesrthai'Ih'irwe are
at sea and in darkness, withoi.t rnddcr and withontSIpC
ft
V.'^"'
V.
18
ixTRomrn
.<^-
Bc,«.<l be <.„,., .•.".„! .hjfcWJm^,,- conflicting .,.^.
menta „„o a«.ura„lh, «j^]b5t||,tay and comfort „f „„
Zl' ^ l.K '"' "■*'jii'>J'«.^. •'"»« know of the doc-
trine, whether it be ujUllPr' ■ (♦
rv
0'
I •».
\"^'"-
■I
i^-
f'lf
}'m"
nflicting Htate-
omfort of our
3w of the doc-
^R,
FACT8 llNB THEORIE
AS TO A miTUKK STA
FAKT l.-AfAX AS HK IK
i- >,''»
()HAl4"KR I.
%
THK niW
V ALL
^ Ix the language of absolute mfmriali.m th6 body is the
il^hole man. It may need breather/' spirit " (in the Thomas-
|ite se^se) t^ make it capable^ of ftUfilling its fi&tions, but
|m materialistic language, thoifght, reasonr mind>aie proper-
I ties pertaining to "brain in human form," Dr Thomas
|gravely adduces Kom. viii. 6, where he translates r6 ^,o-
frvua r,s y. , the " thinking of the flesh," as an ii^refrag-
kble proof that the "/..A ist/urthMinr, srd^stanee:^ i 7
the brain; whieh, in another place, he adds, the apostle
terms the fleshy tablet of the heart." (!)* I .orily quote
t\u7 ^""'"^^^ h«^^ thoroughly with them the lody
'" ""-^ ^^ '''"""^ ^^^y «••*>' was such before the breath of
" ' ■" ■ r ,/ . ■ . ■_ _ ■
/"Elpislsrael/'p. k). , " -
t Roberts objects tiat it i. ,m>i deHned whether .. livu.c body is
:r;:L::j:"L::!:-i^-!^- '----^-^-the.^^^^
i s th e whole
r n . , . 1 'liaii.aiid are wonderin" what obierfinn
»o»Hheor.v, l,e cannot iv„„l r^sarding ,„„ ,!,.,„„ ,„„,,.„, „,, ^^'^^
N
^1^
%
^w^
^ ■
fe ■ -^
i
^
I
■ ^ ■ ^^
%Tho
■|
;:$ ■ ^,
•
^>
" ii
1,
.1' •.
*
' .
''±1"
1- ,;
. ,;?' •
:- ■ ■..:^\^-
iriiily lioriiB. S f "
|Tho A tolMJ It now tettcwl under liydr«u!lc [m^wrn to
iftup'rttii and tlmt thur© i» no loaktj?©.
*Tko ^b^U vmt ii HOW turni'd over to the length of 32
in , tor«|n iniw' (ni tlie«« gmm the /iwcA coil in enUed
the B tuK,) pljvloualy made of two eoll«, und h giw chan-
nel ,»,r •»"• ^•»***' '•* *'"^ n»'»"»»^'y """""^^ '*'" ^ ^"''*'' conununl-^
eating by ttar grooven at the end, with the gan ew;ai)«. If
anythinj^ given w»y about tlic breeeh end, the g^^capo*
and given warning. ,Ji'Mlk
The tube i« n.ade double at this parC, so that 'wflP'*^''
layer give* way the gan may eucape without biifiFilig the
giiii ; |uul aUo it enable*, by the »lirinking on of the Ii
ttibe, griiftter ntrength to be given to thi« part. The whole
tube is tlbn tine turned to proper diinenaii.ns, allowing a
little play Iwiween it and the cusing, bo that it can be easily
forced in. Great car© in taken that the bretsch end of tube
bears fairly against the bottom of the bore. The curvof part
of the end of the barrel is made with a longer radiun than
the oorresponding curve in the cast iron, the space between
preventing a wedge like action, tending to split the casing.
When the tube is adjuHted, the collar is screwed in at tlnj
muzzle, and the hole bored under the trunnion*; and a
wrought iron pin screwed in. The bore is thou rifled, with
three small gl^|ove8.
* The old vent is closed by a wrought iron ^crew plug,
and the now vent drilled a little IVoiu. the breech end. A
BtalM.
f
%■
Veat.
Jdit - 1-
I:
!■
it
r "»
^
ao
u
FACTS AND THFOIIIES AS TO A FVTUUE STATE
life was breathed into him. ^'D
list thou art" expresses
^
^
f:i'
what ,c i» i,, hi, wh„h, b..i.,g. Say« Mr. Cons„.l,U. « God
formed man of the dust of the ground. Here hV me the
HiLTf U^" '^""'t'^l'"^" thi', for God tolLs uf o
"^^^iireneriv "^h ''' .'?°"*-'"""' "'"' ^ '''"'' "^ V'tal-
, fe energy, ihe «/r</i hunse/t' is tli,. l,r..l,r *i i
.bat Ilea in the grave. Spirit id »':, ''2^^ .'in i^
Jsa.ssoc.ated from man; man may rei„„, to hf, Y^ "M
.tr^ r "^k'"' """" " ""• -" '•"' "-^ • ° ^ th J haTe
Mr. Blam's emphatic challenge, « where does the Imok of
Confidence so assured ought to l,o well foun.led Tl
answer .s ea.,y, ,h.u ,hey are „„|y .p.o.in.f ^ " j,,/ '^
^^ErrrM;^-rr-J:'
- __ _,_-_^'_^t^tme and proper man. This opinion we
soul. ••' •' ^"" 'i^f the spirit nt.r tlio
* Hades, d •> + tk ». c , ^
•>•- tlb.,p.5. tPeathnot L!lv..l:iM.H..p.4->
1
STATE.
irt " expresses
msfiiblo, " Got!
•e wc liave tlie
yet this figure
tl tolls us so
«k, or feel, or
i nit ion of the
Constable, as
. Thomas and
he breathing
ler the breath
dnd of vital-
ly— the dust
fly again ^IkJ^
liis old cori-
ily they have
"Wfiere,"is
tlie book of
11 is made of,
declaration,
mded. The
one side of
inconsistent
thus repre-
ristendom.''
Hot inhabit
'0<ly or not
opinion we
iPoiy tpachcs
le house are
n statement,
' R. may put
>int ii(»r the
& THE BODY ALL?
''^'9:
believe to be the very foundation stone of -m nm«,- '
^ amount of false doctrine. This talse phiL:^h;;c:Xl ^
. human nature has tainted the theology of centlri!i.I-"%.
JVow, how IS It possible that Mr. Constable h.«
: ^en that this "current opinion of Chr^;::^/^^^^
' ^ r 'v^ ' ' ^'' ^" '*'^ ""« «'<'« F»««a.res such a!
, those he quotes, which seem to make the l,o,lv Jl th 1
I many oh the other side that would on,. I ' '"'^
I I'l^^x^?''^'''''^ '^iniive.':!^^::^" ™
I !^,^'"'"rf- to 1- absent from theb4" (v^'sv
q?.\^T ' '^ 7v yourselves also in the bo.ly " (Heb vi i - '
13)^ '^n my flesh shall I see God " (Job xiv ^y) 'k
ingthat I m..^p,^off ,,j, ^^ tabiaclcf '^op^i i ur" ■
I Now I ask Mr. Constable U nnt ^. ^^ ^ *-^- '• '*)•
f he object, .„, ,he foujS,'. t™ t^tZ T^ I'T^^
^ of error but of truth V 'I acJ„T^-,l^.. .i ^'"P<«<"^) not
sious are indeed the Ji:::^':^Z^:^ ^ "''!"''■ i''
On the materialistic ™PPo.iti,„ tl.e'^L: „: „ .TT"'' *'*»
passages never could have arL„ It fs nX, ! "'°
tl.e interpretation of any s,,ecia tcv lT„f ?,""'*'"" "^
words which contradict at the outset he 'l"e „ T "'r °'
phdosophy. Men have sought to evade ,t "f ""''«"=
the phrase "in the body " l. mean " M JbUyf.rv^
were m contrast with the glorious bodvnfl^' ''^ "
But the fact that they have to clu.^i' 1^ resurrection,
order to make it suit them is\ T^^ • , e'^preseion, in
not suit them as it is Fo'r „ ,t ' '"'*'""'" **"" " ''»<'=
still be "in the body" ,hLl ^\"'''"'^<=tion man will .
will ; and in po n otfkct t 1' o' h '■""' «'""'""' "^ >'
in the passage'jnst qutVj h ret^ •"T:""^ T' *""'
see God." Thev mav nprho ' ^ o^J Afish shall I
, hey may perhaps quote againsuhis, that <^ flesh '
* ir-'.le.s, ,,. 4.
■^■'^t^-
22
FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God ; " but it will
not avail them ; for the Lord's own expression as to His
own body in resurrection is, that He had "flesh and hones »*
though not " flesh and blood;' and it is the combination of
the two of which the text cited speaks.f And the Lord
was raised from the dead, the "first fruits" and pattern of
our resurrection from the bej^i^ning, not raised and changed
afterwards, even as they t^^eep in Him 2.x^- raised^
m glory." There is no es^v%>'m the plain sp'eaking of the
passage in Job, that to thaf^hich is i< raised in glory " he
refers. And this alone is positive proof that " in the flesh '*
or " in the body " does not, as a phrase, speak of a present
corruptible body in contrast with an incorruptible one.
And there are other texts which would still stand in the
way of their establishment of this position, if the passage in
Job were gone. For when the apostle says of his vision qf
the third heaven, that he could not tell whether he was " in
the body or out of the body," no words are needed to
assure us that here there was no question of the resurrec-
tion body. For it was not ^cheti he was up in the third
heaven, that he did not know if he were "out of the body; '*
had it been so, there might have been some kind of doubt
aA to whether he might not have fancied, in the entrance-
ment (5f the vision, that the resurrection had already come.
But his words are precise and prohibit absolutely such a
supposition. He could not, at thf^ fhnc he tn-ote, question
whether he had been clothed with the resurrection body,
and agam lost it on his return to earth. Yet here " in the'
body " and « out of the bo<ly "are just a^ much in contrast
as "at home m the body " and " al>sent from the body "in
2 Cor. V. 6-8. And as « out of the body *' cannot in this
case mean "in the resurrection state,' so "in the body"
o^not mean, as they would make' it, " in this corruptible
8tate."§ *^,
* Luko xxiv. 397" tl~CoT XV. 60. X 1 Cor. rv. 4.3.
$ T<, all tl.is Mr. Roberts do,n„rs upon tl,e warrant, as he represent.
U, of Ro,... v„ . I o Cor. i. ^. and a list of j^aH.ages ot Iho das.
I
I
If
I
ATE.
but it will
as to His
ad bones,''**
Moation of
the Lord
jjattein of
d changed
3 *' raised I
cing of the
glory " he
the flesh'*
a present
one.
nd in the
massage in
vision Qf
^ was " in
eeded to
resurrec-
the third
e body ; '*
of doubt
entrance-
Lly come.
y such a
question
on body,
5 "in the
contrast
»ody " in
t in this
I body"
ruptible
epresents
ihn class
IS .THE BODY ALL?
23
Roberts suggests that " without the body " means that
't the things were seen as in a dream." But how is even' a
already adduced by Messrs. Constable and Blain. He takes " my flesh "
in the first passage to mean " my body," and argues thereupon that
Paul calls his "flesh" Amse^/; and moreover attributes sin to it and
not to his soul ! He does not see that in ver. 25 the apostle op-Iosess
the "mind "to the "flesh," and identifies himself with the former in
opposition to the latter. If, as with Mr. Roberts, tlie " mind " is only
the working of the flesh, n6 such distinction is possible. The apostle's
words are thus conclusively against him. "
Hopeless indeed would be man's condition if the flesh and the body
were but one, uu] ' thoy that are in the body could not please^ God "
(see Rom. viil. b;, and strange enough what the apostle affirns of
Christians, that they are " not in the flesh." The whole use of the
language here is foreign to materialistic speech. As to the Scripture
doctrine of the flesh w^ shall have to; speak of it l^gfeafter.
As to 2 Cor. i, 8, we may easily admit tli;at Paul ideuUfles himseli'
with the body there, without in the least invalidating the testimony of
the texts which use an opposite style. Nor does Paul " look here to
resurrection for hope," but to the God of r^urrection, and gets present
deliverance. On the other hand, the belief in the immortality of the
soul does not in the least set aside the hope of resurrection. As we
may by and by see, it secures it.
As to Mr. R.'s list of texts, no Christian has any difficulty with them"
at all. But think of quoting "my decease" (2 Pet. i. 15) literally '
•'n,y exodus" or "dcpaHiire," to support a materialistic purpose'
Ihmk of supposing"/ was unknown hy facer or " whatever a man
soweth, that shall he reap," or "avenged the blood of His servants "
with all the emphasis that italics and small capitals can .rive will con-
vict immortal soulists by their bare citation !
He then comesHo the passages which he has to meet. In Gal ii 20
he takes the apostle as expressing present existence in contrast with'
the ' life that is to come." But that is not the question. Why such
an expression. as "in the flesh" at all, if he were non^ht but fleshj
" Absence from the body," again, cannot be resurrection by any possi- •
bihty whatever. So as to .Job, how else could Job see God. in Mr R 's
way of thinking, except indeed, as he says in another case, he drramed
of Him'? And that will scarce do here.
How decisive these passages really are against him Mr. R. shows by
styling them " the Inevitable ' fictions ' of mortal speech." But why
inevi ta Me? Could not mat o riattsm indeed dispense with thei,» ? And
why " fictions," if after all they convey his meanin<T 9
dr\
FACTS Ax\J> THEOlllES AS TO A FUTURE STATfi.
(am
' without thii body
as ho i)]iraseH if:' The apostle
anyVloubt of l)elH^r actually eaiuj;]
that
<t away to Paradise, a place
\tor Mr. lioW^ts has no present existence; it is the
renewed earth, infhis belief. Did 3Ir. Roberts Uer (wth
whetherW- not he had been carried bodily to a place which
He kaew liail no existence V
The te,Ws Ihen abi.l,. i„ „11 their eimplicity, full of the
meann,g ,vWh f,„„. their si„.p,ieity the, pLess. Nay
11 the comnWnts „f Annihilationists were just their force
won a be littlVaffc.ete.1. For, be it in eontra'st wi^h a rfsur
not)Bm the ,uX, /^ i, ,„„t,a at as " ..v the body: "
not the so.,1 .» nU o, ,„e spirit i, in it merely, but the
MA^. That wluch\l,es in the bcly (and that is the force
'^^r.het[n"..p:3V" "■" •'"''^■"■-'"" « 1'-'- '^)-
the body ,s. 15„ ,t spiritVr s„„l, „r both together the
phraseology of Seripturc in ,Lse texts assc,-.s thit the Cdy
ns such a„ mhabitant. AndXthis language it is that Mr"^
C„ table accuses (under an„,h\na,„e, no'doubt, as bring'
the very foundation stone " of the doctrino hL
S«.p,urc then, be is witness to ^^U^Lilul^a^^Z"^.
dat,„„ o the mnnortality of the soul. ].,.„[ sees visions Zd
has so bttl. thought that ,l,c body is all, tj.at C'Z,
* The Word ii;,,.,! i~, si'tUimr^ •• . i . . \ '
«w-ii..v („,... i, e„i, acc„.ai,' ™ ,„ .] a tiJirrrr'r"*- ■■
Imniiliatio,, : l,„i ,1,0 <I,-slinv „r ,1 ., • , • ''"'''' "' ""'
and W„o.l „atufo into .snirit nmZ',' ^'"'*'' " '^'■°'" "^'"^
■lotLecl with an ■■ c3 ", Vr ' "" ' T '" ' """ """ ""■ '"
ana „e „.,„ .,„.a, „:^. Lr'L! ^-, ; ;;-;;;,:^ :'"^ '° """-
Wf
STATfi.
The apostle
Nor has he
adise, a place
3e; it is the
ts ever (with
dream with-
t ever after/
place which
full of the
isess. Nay,
their force
^ith a resur-
places it is
the body;"
ly, but the
s the force
>0 much so
Pet. i. 14),
labit&nt of
rether, the
t the body
that Mr.
) as being
3 opposes.
the foun-
isions, and
'i he does
e " (Liddell
es our intli-
)odyofour
corruptible
from flesli^
Lhat we are
to clothe.
IS TUE BODY ALL?
25
not know whether he was in it or not, at the time he saw
them. Plainly, therefore, he supposes he might be a con-
scious, mtelh^ent witness of unutterable things while « out
01 the body."
^ We are prepared, then, to answer Mr. Blain's confident
mqmry ,f at least we may take for granted that that which
Paul thought might be -out of the body" is not -dust."
U It be, It IS at any rate dust which is not the body, and
which can exist consciously in separation from it. ^
^ The question is thus a long way toward settlement. If it
be stil asked, \Yhat about the texts which, on their side
Anmhilationists lay stress upon? Is not " dust thou art"'
Scriptuire? And is it not equally written that "the Lord
Crod formed man of the dust of the ground " ? and that
I ^devout men carried Stephen^ ^ ^r^o^. his body merely-^-to
I nis burial" ? ^ ■
.den .fied w.th h,s body, »3 ho is in the former ones wi'th his
?JI ^iTh , , '' '™"''' "^ "■'■""S to argne exclusively
frome,therelass ol passages: «, wrong to say man isallsou^
upon the authonty of one, as to say he is all body, upon th^
anthonty of the other. This last is the vitiating error of
Mr. Constable's whole argument. Neither body%or souP
bodv"'a Th T.;"'r''">' ''"' "^P'* -'0 ™»' and .
body (1 Thess V. 2.3) make up the „,an ; insomueh that he '
may be, and ..,, ulentified with either, according to the line
of thought wh,ch is in the mind of the speaker his iden fi
cafon , nth the body, which man sees and touches bt„t
general the language o( sense, while faith identifies him with
th^umeen " spirU.'- _Dur poor Annihilationists see Ind
lief or pro™:.... a„a >,a» to ao":;,!; „ ■ ' TZ^:^'!, "Z^^ ^
\'
■M
FACTS ANI> TUKOE1E8 AS TO A F./TURE STATK.
■ conCeH, ^hat »en8e recosnize,, and are blind to the other
It 18 a sad evidence of their condition.
Of the Lord Jcsua HimHelf, I read in the account of Hi«
bunal, " .here laid they Jen.,'. „,„, ,u.i Joseph Took Jt
.lown and^rapped y/,„, in the linen, and laid H m in the
sepulchre" (John xij. 42; Mark xv 4r,> T. .1 • .f ,.
conclusive that the Lord ,va.„li,*dt " 'V ™' '"'^';'''
ahput Stephen .o„ld see™ totw^n^ ZlT^l
. Take so„,e ot Mr. Constable's emphatic statement wTkh
he does not hesitate to apply, to the Lord mm^Tif..f
.ends that the con,mon opinion leads to "r«tv°rf-'
supposmg^hat death has converted „,.^rson ^^^
hfe tiere was but one Abraham, i„ death there are two^' -
Inhfe her^ya, but one ChrUt ; during t,^ thrc, d.Sof ilL
«visebusVy.oceu;:,rthfcKr™^^^^
one for him he does not leave doulifu ThT" "
8ists in calling the body Vhen deadTl . "* P""
AbrahamandVobandD: d " W .Vthe ' "'' ^J"^'
aever says that they are in heave.i or !, K'-^^.^nd it
'/-^.a,...» Ofnece'^ssi.y.therth :,. rr ",*"' "'
If spirit is but the impe^'onm b^: " • f jd^rult:^;" ^
l.fe resultant, then, wBen ,he.,e Kvl depir 1,1 ,h
"othing of Christ but what was L^ ^! .. ' " ""^
may be said, of course that th! w t , ** ^''''™- ''
humanity of the Lo^l, ^1 ttT Hi?": L:.^^^
ar^umen^W Mr. Consuble will „„t hold "xhe ^l
tifh"Mr°l:r s^iff !; '" ■""; "■" ^^^^^^^^^^ m;^,
Th™ he thinks thai " faith o„,„el! bv ? h T'" «"i»factorily.
>t c<w»€« at all. Mr R sur^Iv ».,..♦ n / "^ question of how
View of it at leas )i7a tit T„?e!""' 'I'l ■": ''^™^" ^P^"' (^ -• '
thing, un»^n.» TMs i! 1 1.. ".und . •' T JT " ''^ " ^^'^^^ o^'
^ * Hades, p. i: ' ^^" statement he objects to.
! STATE.
ft
to the other.
ccount of His
)h " took mm
d Him in the
his, therefore,
similar words
that /i(3 was ?
>ment8, which
self. He con-
absurditji of
into two. In
ire two I . . ,
■days of His
seph's tomb ;
5n, or other-
^s is the true
'' Bible per-
It says that
?rave, and it
' else but in
conclusion :
?oul but the
there was
grave. It
^nly to the
^ity. This
The Lord,
As the spirit
'fc I>r<>|)08e to
satisfactorily,
iring " helps
stion of how
spirit (in our
evidence of
y'ects to.
IS THK HODY ALL?,
27
dmne and human, was in life but one person. Ueatk could
not divide the one Person into two! The Persoj!^ Mr
Constable says, is the body that lay in the tomb : Deity"
soul and spirit go for nothing. The Lord was in the grave
and nowhere else ! Dare Mr. Constable abide by his own
conclusions?
All have not formulated the doctrine as completely His
logical consistency has carried him where, we may hone
many will hesitate to follow. But as to the consistency'
here can be no question. Just as simply and as surely as
< David ''or Stephen " is said to denote the whole perL-
ahty of David or of Stephen, so (after the same mode of
interpretation) must " Christ " and " the Lord " denote the
true ^nd personal Christ who survived death, or not '^ If
so the Lord," in the whole force of that expression, d d
.e^Wm Joseph's tomb; the words are only a/examp e of
whicrr^' "' sense whicli applies to the material part
wh^ we see and touch, and we are manifestly precluded
Wparrying them further. Now, if the Lord fay in the
^ra^e, and yet the higher part did not lie there so Cnlam vt
might David, or Stephen, or Moses, lie in the X^'t
have another and higher part of them .vhict did not 'lie
Thoinasism, with its fearless selfcon^stency in error and
shameless denial of the .rjorv of tt- i> ; '
shrink from the ext erne ret7 the O "^T^'^r "'^^
earth, could yet say ' 'ThTs f Z"^''^' ''^'^'^^"^ «»
, uiu yei say, ihe Son of man who is in heaven"
they are strangers to. But I would ask even them Ttlieir ^
horrible thoughts were true, how He who hT^' ^
I^^w. His life," had (af>Jr havi^ it^lr^;!: '
to take it a^-ain " Tf f^u .i^., ^ , . ' power
tal^ejtsjife WU ( John .%t' 'h'; tXT^^
- ^J
28 FACTS AXD THKORIli
r
' Destroy thiM tem])lL\
S AS TO A PVTUItE STATE
and in thretj days /will
raise it up •■
possible eve, t<, e,,,„voeute. Fofit w,.s „„« who spake of
H.S own body, who sahl //„ „•„„,,, ,.,,,„ ,^ ^^^^^
not say .t was the Fa,.,e.-„peaki„g „f " „,« o^a body^' Td
herelore the.r cuu.,.a„t ,„a„a,uv,.e fails the,u here. ifsZt
1.™, raised up ilis o«„ body, .here must have been One „„[
: ": "d!::;""'" °"'T""' o-^-'v-s -leath, zz
"died" t" '"'.V'l' *";"' """'"'"'»"• '■'"• J"'-' t^'y
died. rhat the Lonl lay ' i„ Joseph's tomb is truth
b„ not the whole truth. Insisted „n I such, it becomes'
fatal and soul-destrovln.r error "ecomes
nos!) 'ts'he'fou! T^"' '""" <'" '''■ «°-'»'^'' " «it.
ness), lajs^the foundation stone of the soul's immortality in
.ts assertion that the man dwells in (i„. bo,Iv ..SZT- .
denied by its speakin, elsewhere a. if t^eV:,; w r" tt
jnan. Jrom Us own point of view, each of 0^1^:^^
.Ax
•"'»■ " i'- .p.i.- SM,„,..„..J,,„,, ' „ ;,,^:;"",.''"' ">• "'"•■''•
perform ul.alovv,- ll,„„ was ■,,„l„„n' 7 v <"'"l"-fiicy l„
mere oorp,,. „.i,|, .. a„,|,„ , "■ , ■•; * "" '■'""'' ""' ''I"""' "
'•'»^' . aim Hut 'receive,
•'oliii ii ]\i~-2-2.
■J!
*■'*!,
/
T».- ■
y 8TATK.
11 raise it up ?
» it is scarcely
w^ho spake of
• They can-
u body," and
Jre. If Jesus,
been One not
leatli, to raise
Jesus truly
>mb is truth,
h it becomes
staWe is wit-
imortality in
id this is not
ilywere the
38e things is
MAK A TElimE BEINO.
2d
ites "receive"
It adds to tlic
tt. X. 1 ; Mark
V. 10, Pfc. it,
oiiij)el»Micy to
not clothe a
n<l, therefore,
CHAPTKU ir.
MAN A TRIUNE Hlirxd,
! t
of , nan wh.el, d>v-eils ,n the body ? Or. What is the phyei-
cal constitution of man as .leflned by the Scriptures ? '
The ansvver from 1 Thoss. v. 23, is, that he is "spirit and
whol y; and I pray Obd that your whole spirit, aj L,
Una bo,!!, l,e preserved blameless unto the com ng of our
^«^;^!:-^™V , '"" "''"" ''• ""'■'»-tly,fi,rthe Zl
*ere, ,t is, that man is divided into his three consti u^nt
,J»rts, and the sanctification of the whole man is imerp "ted
that the body IS the whole i,«,n; but it is also denied bv '
many othei. who are ftr enjugh from holding the r vtwf
It IS a point, therefore, -which must be seriouslv weighed a^d •
.s satisfactorily .^, possible decided, before we are e„ti'tled
to take It as a settled thin.. «- .'re entitled
it "Th- "" ^^'^y ""'^ themselves convinced bv .
It. 'This cannot mean," thevsiv « tKof «,-- i, "^'"^^^ ^^ ' ^
•erh"'^^ ,-f Tr,„ ^"^ysay, that mJTn has ^oa v/ios^i- *
^:^ r~d Zrfrt""' r' "^^ »^ p'-.
-ea-....on.r,,, : r,:Lr: : ::;c:s;
- * Bible C.V. TradJtioh, p. oj " —
'li.
30
PACTS AND THKORIKS AS. TO A FUTURE STAT K.
:i
41 i
■,,..' V
translated " .spirio"us " disposition " already, that according
to their intorpfetatiou, Imx^ ought to mean '' person," and
also, that it Ajrould be in far better accordance with their
views. But they can sq^rcely expect others to be satisfied
with what evidently faille satisfy themselves, for tliey add,
in defiance of all critic^ : ".And 1 Thess. v. 2:{ muij also
have been a little amen(h(Jbi/ name officious copyist " ! (1). 21).
But even so, they are not -yet satisfied, and, having in the
meanwhile forgotten that '• spirit " means person, tliey fur-
ther add: " And the spinifual nature, Xm it remembered,
doesjiot ijatupally belong to man,l)ut is fupcrin<luce*l as a
subsequent _!f^v peculiar dt-velopment in the cases of those
who liave sulSnitted themselves ti) Christ " (p. 22).
Mr. Koberts, disavowing '- the uLertain an 1 contradictory
statements" of Ellis and liea.l, trik to i)araphrase the three
words in the text b^jO^^d^V' *' litb " and " mind." In this
statement of his, '• life " aij.l 'auind" answer, respectively, to
soul and spirit. J3ut that they anlnot equivalents, accord-
ing to his view, is evident. W^ hUo but to., latelv been
listening to his theories of thinking fleAh,to b(^ abb; to accept
his identification of tiie mind with th^ spirit. Truly, as these
may be identified, his views do not identify them. ' His own
words in this connect ioji are; " Thoiight is a power devel-
oped by hraln orfjanhatio,,, and consists of impressions
made uj)on that delicate organ through the medium of the
senses, and afterwards classlfio-l and arrangeil by a function
pertaining in dirterent degrees to brain in hn,na\i form,
known as rmsohy Plainly, tlien, with him mind ij only a
power inherent in the Hesh, thougli spirit be needed to give
vitality to the brain, just as' It wouM be for the muscles.'' It
is "the flesh that" thinks," as he quotes with approbation
further on.
So, also, is " life " with him not the equivalent of " soul."
Of course he often has to interpret itjso, but he is inconsis-
tent with himself in doing this. ' siul," again, is for Dr.
Thomas and himself but "body"; an i l the Wy cannot b e
m I
Tho
The
ofli;
be S(
Tl
as c
anxi<
appe
the ]
becoi
Third
elem<
then,
blam(
. ducec
5 apost
I Wi
I Morri
here c
"'Thj
soul a
new a
i? borr
body.'
Ishi
siderat
that it
f sense,"
i nature
; aggeratci
i Whal
ATK.
t according
erson," and
with their
be satisfied
r tliey add,
i tnai/ also
r/(p.21).
aug ill the
'^, they fur-
tnumbered,
iiice*! as a
;s of those
tradictory
l; the three
." In this
jctively, to
its, accord-
ate ly been
;; to accept
ly, as these
His own
iver devel-
npressions
uni of the
a function
<i<t\i /onn,
I i|i only a
e<l to give
iiscles. It
►probation
)f " soul."
1 inconsis-
Is for Dr.
cannot be
MAN A TKIUXK BKINti.
81
'>'a
ma secondary sense, is used for it in Scripture. In Dr
Thomas theo^r no basis is left fen- the secondary rneaninn
The life IS with him simply the result of the ruad or bre^h
of hfe upon the body. It is not a thinl constituent that could
be set side ])y side with the body an<l the spirit
There is then no « combincUion of body, soul an<l spirit
as constituting ,the whole man" in Mr. lioberts' svs em
anxious as he is to be apostolic in doctrine, an<l have iJ
appear so. Combination of body an<l spirit for him mak.
the living soul, and the oombination of tlu-se two cam.ot
. become a third principle along Nvith these. There is no
I third^onstifeuent this way, and even one of these is onl v « an
dement of the atmosphere.- These are the three things
I then, that the apostle prays may be sanctified or preserved'
blameless, the body, the breath of life, and the vitality pro
duced by it It It is plain then that Thomasism iLdThe
s apostolic statement do not agree.
'■ M^'."'-""' ''"'"'«»'«»'^''<l'""«l fr"m*llisan,l Head Mr
; Morns „ „, near ..greement. He alio interprets ■• spirit '■
' ]!Y1 " """ """^ "P""""" ""f"-'^- Of John iii. 8 he savs
'That which is bom of the Hesh ' is a child, constituted of
soul and body; bnt ' that which is born of the Spirit ' is a
new and sp.ntnal constituent of personal b^in... He wL
JS Wn of the .Spirit is constituted of a ' ^irU Z.i ,„,iZl
I shall be^ obliged to reserve to another chapter the con-
jdera ton of what '^ spirit " is, and whether his proposition
that .t ,s never applied to man „,, ,„„./, "in a substlT.'
nature of the chOdren of God is "spirit," according to o,»^
* Elpis Israel, p. ;jO. ^^ ~~ ? ~
^lhess.v. 23.; ami awhile afUN-wards adds, " Mr. Grant is auiUv oV
ireatrng as a sci/ntific analysis of hun.an nature a.e fervent nr^lo! •
ISM of an apost!olic benediction ", why st a n d s toutlv b , 7^^
I aggerated expression ? —-■: "y ». luvre ex^
t What 18 Man, li. 57.
«f
therefore.
"^
r^
82
PACTS AND TIIKOUIKS AS TO A PUTUKK STATK.
V_
Lord's wonls, is what nono can with appt'araiuo of truth
deny; but. upon the face of what ho ways himself, his explan-
ation of the text in this way is thorouirhly inconsistent and
untrue. For the " flesh," he says, in the wonls of the Lonl,
John iii. 6, is " the whole natural man, and the entire off-
sprmg of the natural n^nn, mnl a,„l hmbf (p. *J7). The
ajmstle then puts <l<)wa this soul and body, of which nothing
good can come, side by side with tlii^ new and spiritual
nature, which (still according to .Mr. Morris' citation of Gal.
V. 17, 22-25) it lusts against, and is contrary to,^ — praying
that they may be sanctilied togetlior! If this be liis delib-
erate- doctrine I cannpt tell. It is the doctrine of his
, follower, Mr. Graff,* Ao has only carried out his views to
their necessary conclusi(V, Whether or no, L would r^fer
Jiim to Kom. viii. G-8 for his answer, tliat " the mind of the
flesht is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law
of God, neither indeed ca.v bk," and that is why "they
that are in the flesh cannot please God." Even' tlie one who
in the seventh chapten could say, " witli the miml I myself
serve the law of God," had to add, " but witli tho/f«A the*
law of sin," and if soul and body have this character, poor
hope would there be o{ their being "preserved blameless-
to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ ! "
The grossness of. this mistake lies in its materialism.
Even Mr. Morris, little as he wouM like tb l)e identified with
this, cannot see in the " flesh " anything less material than the
body, although perhaps in coiujection with the soul, vvhich
he allows to be in it. Allls referred to man's phjs'ical con-
stitution, but with this glaring inconsistency with Scripture. ^1
that, whereas the wdrd of ^6d condemns the flesh, with its
-utter-^viVto-hopeless destruction, Mr. Morris' doctrine puts
the old nature alouf/ side of the nctn, to be sanctified.
Now, in tlie text as to whicli I have l)een speaking,
1 Thess. v.23,\it is plain by the terms "soul" and "body,"
■^rifli
♦ III "Oraybeanl's Lay Sermons."
t In the margin " mindiug," <pp6y7f/ia.
■ ti-X
. '^ y-
, ^■r;^'^ -' '.
- ■'^^^'"'--'■^"^'"WW''
■k
TATi:.
iccj of truth
t* ]m explan-
nsistent and
'f the Lonl,
} entire ofT-
. 37). The
lich nothing
>«l fipiritual
tidn of Gal.
o, — praying
)e his (lelib-
rino of his
lis views to
*voiild r^fer
aind of the
' to the law
why "they
lie one who
il I myself
lie Jfesh the
acter, poor
. blameless
lafeerialism.
itificd with
ial than the
loul, which
i/st'cal con-
Scripture, \
sh, with its
ctrine puts
iod.
speaking,
d"body,"
MAX A TUIUNE BEINU.
u
I
'vf
which are used, that the physrdat constitution of man w spoken "
of; and it must bo ociiall y plaj, that " spirit," therefore, also
rcfeVs to his physical constitution. The very paiiis which
Ellis and Head have taken in their interpretation to blot out
all thou-at of the body in the ])xssa,-(., is a proof of it. It'
would have been an Incon^'ruous jumble, indeed, to have
said " disposition, aiid lite, and Wy .- " and they felt it. Body
in Scripture in such a sentence requires " soul " as its natural
antithesis. '^Body and life" make no sense, for the sanctifi-
cation of the ])ody and its vitaKty (which life here must
mean) is scarcely such. And. if, acconling to Dr. Thomas it
is the -flfsli that thinks," and tho brain is the fleshy tablet
of the heart, h^t the body be sanctified, and all is done. ■ And
it win not avail to say that the body needs spirit and soul to
make it cajiable of sanctification, for that still leaves it true
that the body is the only part that can be sanctified, and
there would bd no sense in talking of the sanctification of the
mere agency hi giving it life. ^
But still-and this^is the only question weneed further ask
at present-may not the "spirit » here refer to the new and
sp.ritual nature, which, confessedly, the child of God has^
I answer that, as far as this, passage is concerned," the fact
that the .-xpostle prays for tho mmtificatiaa of the spirit is
proot positive that the new^nature is not meant.* For the
Scripture doctrine is that, inasmuch as - that which is born
of the Spirit is spirit » « whosoever is born of God doth not
commit sm,for4iis seqd remaineth in him, and hte cannot mi
BECAUSE he is born of God.' I am well aware ihat I touch
here upon groun.l not familiar to many a Christian; nor- can
I do more than touch upon it either. I would only say that
the one bom of God is hero'looked at simply in his charac-
y^m so born. The flesli is not seen, bemg, indeed, in the
believer, but a^ a Ibrelgn thing : - Sin that dwelleth in me "• "
(Kom.ViKlO,in that sense, m.^ myself. The now nature
ojvns^o^rogi c ^^ ^^^ y^^^^
* The neNY nature fs" spirit," bntnover called "«A<. spirit." _L >.
r^':-
i
m
.«
f
r
•
•
•
•
•
* *^ .
■>
k
#
•V-,
/
i.
u
\ ^
; P
\
^ .
; . .s ' ' " * '
(
, ■ _
108
And it rtttetl with—
Ck)tiipr«iumr Imm.
Tri|)|)er,
rxK)})*! for tncklti.
Axl«)-tru« ImiuU.
Eye-plnto for liititior.
Frifjt l>iiff«r.
R(>i^ HtoiM, wit)i huffttr.
IKiliiird.
FcNit iiUnkn.
Tlio platfonim |>rovi«lcMl with hydrnitlic! hyffern liuvo no
(;oiiipr(!MM)r burn. ThoHu forfj^tiiiit of lOlin. niul over arc of
the lAiilt-up (firth-bfliy) gtnlor putt«fii. Th« dwiirf niul
niiMnii»[e aru of t)iO|tuiio coiiiitrmaioii, but the forinvr Iiim
hifi^hor trucks iukI u loiulkig i>tfi|(f) iiin^cq to thu tVotit. All
platforiiift for gitiiH of )f in. uiid vivor ^ro to be provided
witJi travertiinfj gtar^ which give* g''*)'^^*)!' facility and ra-
pidity in training than tackle and ring boltii. The racer i«
generally Muooth, a rack racer being obje(;tionablu for land
service ; the rtMir trucks have to(»thed wheeJH fixed to them,
8o that they <!Hn Iw driven by the gcaritrg. ^
MANIJFACTUKE OF OUDNANCK.
V MKTAI.t).
It Ih purposed in the following pagen.tu go bricHy into
the nnmutactnre of the nervice t>r<humce, both S. Ijore and
rifled and also a few of the more important wtorcH connect-
ed with the various j>iccea, an far a» is posHible, without
being able acitmilly to wee the different operations pcrformo<i.
Before touching on the nuitter of actual njanufacturo of
ordnance, it is well to have some' idea of the properties of
the various metals used In their construction. If we then
consider the conditiont^ that the material a gun ought to ■
fulfil, we can thea have a gooid idea mb to tfluit metal, or
coinbination of metals, will befit suit our purpose.
Wo will first discuss briefly those physicial properties of
metals that bear more directly, on our subject. Tliese are: prypSeH of
Malleahilitij^ ductilitij, hardness^ and its converse Hoftnesvi^ Metula.
touijhnenH^ elaHthilty^ ai»d tennile strength. ,
~\
u
PACTS AMI) TUJiUBIES AS TO A FUTU^IK STATE.
does riot sm-^annot. The new nature thus, as proceeding
from God, is altogether according to God. He could not
.communicate a half-evil thing: " that which is bom of th(v
spirit is spirit"— partakes, /. 6., of the nature of Him from
whom it came. Mr. Morris himself says of it most truly
"All the moral qualities of it answer to the moral perfection;
of God." . If so, sin cannot come from it, because it is oi"
God; and, tis born of God, we Cannot sin. Therefore you
cannot talk of sanctifying //. It is of God: therefore
already wholly good.
And *' spirit " is not here the " motion of the soul, as Mr.
Morris elsewhere strangely defines it, for the soul is men-
tioned apart, and there would be no sense in speaking of the
sanctifying of the soul and of its motions. Sanctify it, and
its motions will be sanctified.
We return then with confidence to our first conclusion :
'Spirit and soul and body" are the man The ample con-
firmation of this by every part of Scripture will oome out
as we now take up in detail these constituent parts.
i
r
J
'i
mci
M
tna
1
Bol
i
and
1
wha
1
this
is D
1
betv
i
whe
1
"Th
* r
soun
whit
Here
'
conti
i
them
guag(
4
name
m
more
1
shoul(
%
activii
1
Spirit
-'M
♦Tlu
v^ «r caus
leally tl
jiderath
place to
tin X
well-kno
poor dui
'-^-~
ATE.
proceeding
e could not
bom of the
r Him from
most truly
perfiection :
ise it is oi"
srefore you
therefore
soul, as Mr.
aul is men-
tking of the
itify it, and
jpnclusion :
ample coii-
l oome out
ts.
THE SPIEIT OP GOD.
35
*4
,1
- chapt|:h III.
■ . " ■ >
THE SPIRIT OF OOI).
The word which stands for "spirif" in the Old Testa
ment .s n,. (w.), i« the New Testament, ....«„ (p^l
>»a)_ rhej are words precisely of the same significance
Both are denved from words which mean " to breathe -
and IB their primary sense therefore sicnifv ' breath "'„r
what is a kindred thought, air in ,noul- .4-iiid." From
this as the typo of me,oU^ acHmty, itS meaning of " spiru"
s most evidently and easily derived. The comparison
towe^i the two is what the Lord makes in Joto S^
where the same word pnccna isboth •' wind " and " spirit " •
so?ndT r r" ^'''"' '* "^"''''' -" f"- bearTst the
rhilruTe^KT.""™' "»' tell whence it eometh or
Whither It goeth, so « every one that is bbm of the SoirU "
e^nirtS ''*' """'"" ""f -visible activit;bCnd #
eontro , ">« effects are manifest, the power which produces
them unseen and uncontrollable. I„ the format! onTJT
ii^dt^irar-r^S^^^^^
activity acts nnseen and nnc'onTr:, 'd ' "Zr" gJ^''
Spirit,., and ^he third^rson of the Tring, Jhom .>„■;
really ih. same .^ ." ■• calse ilZl^^^" ", ' ° '"'°"" ""^ '"- -
Plac .„ represent trbll:::";:* "" '*' "'^ ^"'^"'™'' '" ""-' '
36
FACTS AM) TUEOKIES AS Tt> A t'UTUKK STATE.
((
ture represents as the immediate mover, both in creation
and in new creation, Is pre::mmently the " Spirit of God."
To all this, indeed, on bohalt' of materialism, Mr. Roberts
has made sundry objections, the answer to which need not
detain us long. Ho tells us : " A substantive derived from a
verb draws its meaning from the act expressed by the Verb.
Ruach is ruach, because it is the thing niarhr J^ so to speak,
and not because tlic act of ruaching is inyisil)le." But that
has to do with the primary meaning of words only, and not
with the secondary, of which alono we are. si^eaking.
Breath " is the thintj^^eathod, no <loubt, but if I speak of
"a breath of air,'' I do not speak of anything breathed. I
apply the word " breath " in a secondary sense, to something
which in some way it rescinl)les. Tliis secondary sense has
nothing to do with tlie der'n-atloi) ol" the word at all, as a
" breath of air " is not a thing breathed forth, but only com-
pared to that which is. John iii. 8 shows us, for pnmintt,
the real ground of comparison between its primary and sec-
ondary meanings: an illustiatlon wliidi ::\Ir. Roberts silently
passes by, in order thai he may be al)]o to speak of this view
of the matter as an ' o]>lnion having no deeper foundatioi?
than the ingenuity of thos.e^ho have given birth to the spec-
ulation." *
Meanwhile, ho himself jiuts fortlrlvliat is. really that, that
" the power which' glVes lifo was itself in the first instance
spirited (breathed forth) from the Eternal Source of life and
light." To this, moreover, we answer by bringing forward
the passag^^^wh/ch Mr. -R. rightly foresees^' will be a^^ainst
seeking to impross with Ihc I'lct ..f t!).? W.ivj, of G > I. ^.1,1 her Uiat he
had been lookinf? evcrywli'To for God, Imt could not fitid IThu. " Tlici'f
was • God. NO ■ : " She took up a pair of heliows. and blew a pufTat his
hand, which was red wiih eold on^ a winter's day. He showed si^nsof
displeasure, toliilier it made lils liands oohl, while slie, h>okin? at the
pipe of the belloivs, told liini slie could see jiolli'.nz. " there was ' wind,
no':" '' He opened his eyes very wide, stared at tne, and panted, a
deep crimson suffused his whole face, an.d a soul, a real soul, shone in
his strangely altered countenance, while lie triumphantly repeated,
'God like wind ! (iod like wind '. '
TT"':^
ATE.
in cieation
of God."
[r. Roberts
1 need not
Lved from a
y the V^^erb.
to speak.
But that
ly, and not
si^eaking.
1 speak of
'cathed. I
something
' sense has
at aU, as a
only corn-
er pni'Mmn,
'Y and sec-
Its silently
f this view
foundatioi?
3 the spec-
thht, thai
It instance
of life and
!? forward
be against
lior that lie
m. "TluTf
\ |)uff at his
Pfl signs of
kin:T at the
was ' wind,
rl panted, a
il, shone in
' repeated,
THE SPIKIT O*" GOD,
37
-him--" God is a Spirit."* Who breathed forth, then, this
Spirit which God is ? Was God HimselUn emanation from
somethmg eLstL? Mr. K. anticipates this objection, abd trie,.
to provide for it by telling us that " spirit " « comes by asso-
ciation with subsequent manifestation, to stand in its New
Testament use as the synonym of the Divine nature': but this
hy as^^^cutt.>n vrcrdy, and not by philological derivation.''
But how, then, is he so sure that there is - philological deri-
vation m the former case ? This is evirlently a second
conjecture to uphold the previous one, and as baseless as the
former. For, with so-called Christadelphlanism, as is well
known, the theory is, that while " spirit " is a thing '< spirited
torth from God, orU of this spirit all things were ma<le.
,How strange and contradictory .to take, then,. what%, so to
speak the m.. ,naferU,l of all creation, and to confodnd
I ^, .V^^^ ^"^'^ -^ ^'^'•^ nature-creation and Creator being so
I laentihed as one ! .
[ _ ilater;ai;.;m h,« tlms not shrunk from assail ing, along with
^0 GoJhcaa of the .Son, the Personality of the Holy Ghost,
^dthis ,s not confino.1 even to the followers of Dr. Thomas
The interpretation of ''spirit- a lopte.! by Ellis and Read'
borrowed, .t would seen,, by or from the f.rmer, tends di'
rectly the same way. Miles Grant, as we have seen, makes
a more mflueuee. But Dr. Thomas it is who has formu
lated ..ho d,,t,, , ,3 b,f„,, ^^^ Accordins to him, the.
bp.nt of God .s electricity, or, combined with nitrogen and
oxygon, th* atmosphere, which Job calls the "breath of
W ?h tT f ' " ^^' ""'""•'^' ^'' '■»"''»•'"■. it « proved
by the shakmg of the honse on the .lay of Pentecost, and
he cnergizmg of hamson's muscles, when it came on him to
electrietty . The doctrme is developed in full in his fifth
locturo, that God is a material being, furrounded by a kiLa
of electncal atmosphere, so d:mi:„g and consuming in H^
.mmedmte presence, as to be called " light; unapproaehablc,H
Ibl^Mvh i eh^attenuycd^bj d.giwMaJhe_ma^al out of
m^ ' '* *Johniv. 24. ""^
I
■ki.
88 FACTS AKD TH£OltI£S AS TO A SVf VRE STATE.
Which He creates all things, and by which He becomes cog-
nizant of everything, and executes His purpose in the whold
domain of the universe. This is the ruach, the principle/of
life in the nostrils of all flesh, which the foolish anjmals " use
all up " in the mere process of existence, but which wiser man
can use to move tables, read unopened letters, and even
(when, in a high state of nervous susceptibility) to perceive
"distant facts and occurrences ! " \Vh'en concentrated under
the Almighty's will," it "^ becomes Aohj spirit, as distmct
from spirit in its free, spontaneous form;" in which way
apostles received k, but « it is given to none in the present
day." In " evolving a new man "in people, " the Spirit has
ao participation except in the shape of the written word.
The present days are barren days, as regards the SpirYt^s
direct operations." * ,
All this is but the legitimate fruit o^ materialistic teach-
g. It is essential to its self-consistency that the Pers<
m
Personality
of the Spirit.af God be denied.. Once get; rid of Him as a
Person, put Him upon the list of material forces— let it be '
electricity or anything else you please— and pknly you have "
at once reduced the .spirit of man also id something just as
unintelligent, and as well suited to the purpose they desire to
accomplish. The atatement I,bave given from Mr. Roberts'
bo6kmaynot seem to need reply, nor anything but its simple
utterance, to condepin it • sufliclently. Nevertheless I shall
answer it; for in these days of wide-spread infidelity, God.
alone knows in what unlooked-for places ^e answer may be
heeded. Nor does the gross folly which marks it all hinder
its reception. Man has no wis^dom apart from the word of
truth, and, once astray from that, the apostolic declaration is
fulfilled, " professing to be wise, they became fools.'^ How
like, too, to what is now oc«upy;ng us, that ^hich he
goes onto say !— " and changed the glory of the inQ«#ruptible ,
God il^tOAN^ IMAGE MADE LIKE TO COBBUPTIBLE MAif ' "
(Roim I 22. 23). .
* Twelve Lectures, pp. 110-125.
-^--4-
■■ /■■■ ■ . ■
•■ i ■
fATB.
•ecomes cog-
in the whold
prmciple,of
nimals " use
h wiser man
s, and even
to perceive
;rated under
as distinct
which way
the. present
le Spirit has
•itten word,
the Spintf's
listic teach-
Personality
)if Hinl as a
'8 — letit be-
lyyou have
ling just as
e^ desire to
[r. Roberts'
It its simple
less I shall
lelitv, God-,
*ver may be
t all hinder
\e word of
claration is
ols^ How
^hich he
Q<#ruptible ,
LE MAN"!"
THE 8PIBIT OP GOD.
f
^/f-
-;(
- 39
Soriptnre disowns this system in all its narts Tn '«„„•
tare tl>e Spiritiof God is a'person, divine an^tellLtT?"
the things of God; Just as. " wha; n„n L,ower,Kht~
This is as different from Mr. Grant's " infl'nence " or Mr
Roberts' " medium ■• through which the Deity reteives^
presswns (m«eh as the human ear sound throTh 2
a^osp ere) but itself asnnconscious as theaUS-if
Which, indeed, accordino- to Thom«« if ^^
we., be conceived. « The SpiritrXfSmi^r;:- Z
deep things of God " (ver 10> V^f r a S ' ^ ' **'®
^piK. as Mr. K wo JhL^.^ huftt SSt^its
ahd knows. Moreover ao-iin " tt ^ \. ' s^drcnes
hearts » / ^- r/i u u ? ?' ' ""^ "^^^ searcheth the
whi^h 1- - ; "t°o^eth what is the mind of the Spirit"
^;ch hvmg and active, « itsk|^ maketh ihtercess^^
as according to God v (Rom.'viii. 26, 27) . ''''°/°'-
It this IS not the announcemeht of an intellicrpnf T>
words cannot convey the idea of one. "^
have it that it is all what he is fond of caUfe^^ Tl"
fictiohs of human speech" OftlT ^^ f the inevitable
__^''^^^^_fPffch^^fthep^8age8from Corinthians
* Mr. Roberts objects against this — " tk^wI^ \7 — — ■
iiieaotocontenilthatthesDiril.nfml' "o". does Mr, Grant
r«,«ire.,rh, Uright in main JlrL he Spril^^o"' ■•"■'''" ^""'^
knowing the iSings „f o„d, another „er,„„° ^ " °"» P"""""'
Mr Oram's vi,„ require, nothing of the sort Th..Mk. --
are j„,t human thing,, a, .• the things of Go"" amdlvln. i'!^ """J* "
not a qnestion of another ne™in In .r.i. " ,"'*""'!'» ""ngs. It is .
0,,d*„^divine things- therriLt"'"'-. ""' " ^"^ SP'* <>'
inrg'ncrCMr' S~'^ -T"-" -'c'-ne„ .„d \
of the spirit of man andThh f 1 <>' .'""■•» '"is infers the personalty
;we^ doe^a.niy;::;^rt^frr:r.!;;- A -"' .'■■• ^^o ^
'* us
■/
its own place,
r 1 ™' " ''"^ -P°"»' point. wVi'chwm
personality in mail is. in
come up agaiq.ifl
V
■ '. *
\
I
40 FACTS AXI)>riU;:OUJ,KS,AS TO A FUTURE STATE. ■ '
ho says* "This describes the apostolic r-lrp^^r/.^ce of the 7'.
Spirit," which;-" to Tni:iK sensations, as we may say, was
separately from th.msvlvos an Enlij^^htoner " Penetrator.
Comforter, Witness, an.l tluT^-lbro aescnbo<l m language
that.n./<?.- as if these functions were porsonaUy separate
from the Father.'* . \^« , . ''
So then it Wr>.^ road as if the Spirit of ( iod were a person . j
The truth is. al-tcr utl. too stfong for the theory. But then ■
this isme^eh-a .lescription, aceorrUng to the human sensa--
tion ' Is it 'true, then, that to their human sensations the' _
Spirit of Goa ^^•as not only separate from themselves, hut
from the Father al,.o ? H'onv dM the '■ ser.sation difter^ .
from what it wot.Id -have hcen had the Father spoken apn- '
from this ^ Could thev not help descnihin- it hy misldad.i. : ^
words'-' Mr. RuLeffs himself can 'and docs describe it
differeutlv. Whv not the apostles r The words <!» read as
' if the Spirit .of God mMC a person, our adversaries, tliem
selves being judgc.s ; an.Ulyy speak not merely of mspired
knowled-c.; but of the c^iKtu^'l/ <'/ //"i .>^^--'^ to,.reyeal.
/And the; is iurther added (ver. 12), "Now .sy have receivca
' the Spirit '-—this Spirit .so c.oujpetfnt in knowledge— that
we mi'dit know." T/. h- knowledge is distingulyhed from
the Spirit's knowledge ; and the doctrine is comprcte that
theirs proceeds from their reception of One, who had it m^
Ills own power to impart dlls to them..
The ar<uiment that the ,Si.irit of God is in the nostrils, and
so a mere-principle of life in4n living, because Job xxva. 3,
in the common version, > peaks so, I can only say is w<.rthy ol
men who, when thev choose, can quote Cireek and Hebrew^
abundantly, but who are plea.sed vo Jgnore in this case 'the
fact that 'one of the commonest renderings o? j'uoch a^
breath ; and that .the expression refers to Gen: ii. 7,t where
the word for '• breath of life - is a word which is never ap-
plied to the Spirit of G6d at aik And, jnoreover, so far is •
* Man MorUl, i>. 2'). — -■ —
t Roberta allows tl.i^ mimI vet ibinks it " look>^ as much like u inanoju
vTe as posfiible." and spends a full ,.ai:e in lu-vintr (what n.> one will
•ifa.
1:1
'K. ■ ' ,
',e of the Y , I
say, was
mctrator.
lant'uai'e '
separate
a person ! "
But then
I an scnsa- •
alions the?
;elves, l)Ut
ilam apn '
iiisl:?acUii :
eycrlbe it
<?(> cead as
rioHo.theni-
•f Inspired
tOy.reveal.
c received
Ige— " that
>hcd ftpm
ipTcte that
) had it in
'vhe sFiiiiT or ood.
4i
ostrils, and
>b xxvii. 3,
worthy of
id Hebrew^
iis case 'the
>f runch is
. 7,t where
s never ap-
;r, so far is
iko u inanoeu
at no one will
•:1
Scripture from asserting that the Spirit of God is.m all men
.^. that It speaks ol Christians expressly as those "who have
_ received the Spirif, which is of God.' "
■ The proof is Indeed abundant and decisive as to this, which
is_^lone^spit. of .Mr ,, Roberts' protest) Subversive of theTr
n^acn in each ca^e. is .,„i„Iont to ns.er.i^ 'ft^^ "^^^ "r^^^''^'
. cons.,ler such passages as those : ' Whether sl^^llf .^" '
. >M.at conclusion can we come to from t h s bd th.^ t "^^ '^^
1nvi.«ibf,> powoi- (,r ener^v m.I-... Vr , ' "'"vorsal Spirit,
called Spirit, or thn'Su V^' , i? ^'''^ ^'-^^^er, and therefore
hath „i,e nu. Z^::^l^J'Tl^''^"'^'''-^'^^ ''''■•=' '^^ ««^
(Job xxxiii. 4). .A..;r<?io„ , "? " "''■^" ^''^•"' '"« "f«'
created- (Psa cW^ 'u .'"'f'' ^"'■''' '^^^y Spirit, they are
Himself Uis'SvinniruarhfJuiir) ^ "'•^' '^*' "'^ g''^^l^«'' t^'
■Pensh together, and :rS:::^^^^^^
Here we havo.the •itron'rf I, nf At.' n" , ' ^"^"^ ^•^'^'^- l^)."
/«.,and that Ik^Us To | /n n ^^^^'"'^^ ^^^>'^*^-- "o." plain it is
port-to ill wh:;:;:^^r^;;y--'>'<^'^ ju^ ^^^-^ "-p-
nor flee from the presenoe ,.f God 1 . '""""' ^'^Z'"^'" ^^'^ Spirit, ''
"irradiated ^^n^y .:!:::.::::.::: li;^ ^^^^^ ^^^ ;r >^ -
Boborls i,, thai l.c -s ,„ „i„„,„,„ , „,.,?. ' "°°'"'' "'"> Mr-
•4.
42 FACTS AND THEOBIKS AS TO A FUTURK STATE.
whole theory. T6t it is no work of the Spirit that is in
question, as he would make it, but the reception of the Spirit
Himself Nor was (as he affirms) the / aching of the Spirit
ever called thp Spirit. The Lord's words induced were " spir.t,"
but not the Spirit of God ; and " the Spirit is truth " surely,
characteristically, just as is the Lord Jesus (John. xiv. G) ;
but in neither case does that destroy personaUty. All the
way through Scripture we find language which defies accom-
modation "to this lowest depth of materialism. If I begin
with Genesis (xli. 38) I find Joseph spoken of as a "man m
whom [distinctively] tM Spirit of God /.." In Jude W,
some, even of professing Christians are described as " sen-
sual, having not the Spirit." So I find in Gal. iv. G, that
''because ye are sons, God hath sent forth UheSpint of His
Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father ! '^ [Was^ this
merely "truth" that God sent into their hearts? and were
they sons Wore they had received it V] And again, "Ye
are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit
of God dwell in you;" and then it is addled, "Now if any
man have not the Spirit qf Christ, he is none of IIW' (Rom.
viii. 9). Solemn utterance, indeecT, for men who have to
confess that they have no " Holy Spirit": for only by the
Ilolff Ghost u'lmnto us is " the love of God shed abroad in
usTancTthe breath of tlie Almiohiy given us life. Does ihat prove llial
the Spirit of God is only breath 1 And if so, how 1
Again, in what why does God send forth His Spirit when He creates,
according to Mr. R. 1 To us it looks very much like the doctrine of a
living, personal agent, in which we believe.
So^as to Acts xvii. 28, the niaterialism is all his own.
In the last passage, allowing his reading of it (which some accept),
God's Spirit need not surely be impersonal, because the maintainer of
life in all created existences, nor is it identified with the spirit of man.
This is, then, the total result of the appeaVto Scripture as to this so
weighty a point to be established, and 'in face of Scriptures, which (it is
owned) do read as if the Spirit of God,were a distinct person in the God-
head. ,, With Mr. Roberts the Spirit is the material of creation ; in
Scripture the Creator, as indeed he owns : thoughts which are conira-
dictory of each other, as long as Creator and creature are* distinct in
more than name.^
i •
:;i
THE SPIKIT OF OOD.
48
our hearts '' (Rom. v. 5) ; aud " the kingdom of^God is not
meat and drink, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in
the Holy Spirit" (ch, xiv. 17). If that be withdrawn, there
is no more "communion of the Holy Ghost" (2 Cor. xiii.
14) ; /no. more "sealing "to the day of redemption (Eph. iv.
30) ; no more "renewing of the Holy Ghost" (Titus iii. 5).
Sad work indeed, if this he true! and barren days indeed!
But what an adcouht for men to give of themselves, that
they have no commun|on, no renewing, no sealing, no peace,
. no joy, no love of God in their hearts I They have pro-
nounced their condemnation with their own lips, when they
say that the only Spirit of God they know is one subject to
men's wills, and "used up " by animals "in the mere
process of existence." .-^
Yet Mr. Roberts allows that this (impersonal !) Spirit
" was a teacher, more paticularly in the apostolic era, when
it was bestowed on all who believed the word, enabling,
them to work miracles, speak with" tongues, understand
^ mysteries, according as the Spirit willed " ! How strange
an impersonality is this ! creating, teaching, searching,
willing, bearini^, knowing, and yet not a person ! Of <?ourse
this language must be understood as mere, strangely con-
tradictory, human speech. Scripture seems to say this. We
must believe it to mean something that it never even
seems to say !
7
• ^^
44 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FT7TTTKE STATE.
CHAPTER IV.
THE >l'i;:lT OP MAX.
\
The second application of the word '-spirit" is to angelic
beings, and thai wbL-thcr • holy "" or " unclean."'
The application of the word in this, way is again deniedv
by Thomaslsm ds to the latter class, but this is scarcely the
place to examine what th-y say on this head. It will suffice
f'')r our present purpo^f^ that there rt/vj spirits whose exist-
ence as separate personalities cannot be denied. And if
♦his be so, there is no rut^on, at least lK,'ff>rehand, why man's
•spirit also shoujd not be an individuality, a real and living
entity, though in him tVnited to a body wliich is of dust.*
And this is the third applieaiion of the word to which we
must now devote particular attention. - ^
•"A cloud of dust is here on«lcavored to be raised by the.
assertion of tl'c wondTii'al variety of meanings given to the
word. Yet, if we talc- ilic huiiruagc <»f oi;rcoi:i;iion English
version as a guide, and ictc-r to the pas^agc^ in which it.
■ relates to man, we find, us the translation of tlic Old Testa-
* Iloljerts a:»>«erts that •l" a:)''pl,> mo" visihlo, p!c>rious. incorrupt-
ible, corporeal, bc-iims,"' rnaii's spirit hc'.ivj^the '>ppos;if <>i all this.
Cut—- ■ • ~" * /■'.■ ■ .■,
,• (\.) The siroplo question is as. to the osistence of iaiiividual "spirits,"
•vhich is acknouledijed. Difffifn'-f' Vif rondifion frvn :;i nr>wise alter
:he ar^umenf fioui this. ^
(2.) The visibility of the human spirit .n«>ms much on a ] ir with that
of angels. Neither Ms or'iinarily -ffn fcofnpnrp 2 Kinas ^i.'lT). Both
Aacc been. ^ ,
(3.) IIow man :; spirit i.s " decaying;, " Mr, R. man explain.
(4.) Corporeality i;; not provo 1 for angels by examples in which God
(as in Gen.\3Cviii. and xxxii t. or an^el appeared at^ men. This is not
.manif e station of angelic ntauio - , I>ul the ai S Mimntion » i f hnnnn form by
\
I
I
' ^he8e. There may bo mystery in tliis. no iloubt. We soon touch the
bouods of our knowledge, that is all.
THE HPIHIT OF MAX.
48
\
f
ment Hebrew word, but ^ve words used : '* breath,"
" splint," '• aTi^cr," " cour-ige," " mind." And of the New
Tcstaaacnt Greek word corresponding to it nothing but
"ghost" or "spirit" (which everybody knows to be in-
tended for the same thing) and n/rra *' lUc." wrongly, in Rev.
xiii. 1.'), wliere it ought to bo rather ''br6atli.' ThlJ^looks
more lilvc uniformity In thu matter, and a common idea run-
ning throughout, than some wouhi wish to have us suppose.
Of course I do not mean to deny that there are various
sf-coadary applications of the word '-spirit" itself. This
concerns us the less because there is no jioubt of the
primary meaninjj of the En«.;lish word. But surely the
greater the variety of meaning, the more needful to look for
the key (which must bj somewhere), the possession of
which will enable u.^ to find harmony in these various uses.
of the word instead of discord. '
The fact is, that the only key to this hidden harmony is
in an application of the wor/i which these writers almost to
a man reject, viz., ko a real intelligent entity* in the com-
pouhd nature of man, of <^//7 mon as such, "the spirit of man,
which is in him," placed' at the head of, as well as in con-
nection witli, his othc^ cf>nstrituent paj-ts by tHc*apostle,
where he speaks to the The/salonians of the sanctlfication
of thetr "whole spirit and s6ul and body." Let us take up
* Mr. Rubcrt.-> trios to show tl.is cannot bo iho kc^v bv 'insertinT
" intelligent entity " in place of " .spirit " in such passages as i K^ngs x. 6»
''There was no more iuUV.iQcnt entity in hor," etc. This may do to
raise a laugh^ but it ib in fact 'mere childish absurdity. ThcMO would
We no .secondary nyeaninffs at all, if the primary oho could be iuserted
instead of them. /
How tfio key above rnentioned doca-"^i tho lock all round," will be
seen g^^Vward,^hap. vi. ' That Mr. Roberts' key does not may bo easily
seei^^y the meanings assigned ;o " .'-nl^H " hi various connections by
birftself and his leader, t)r. Thomas, in p. 23 of " Man Mortal," he
define.s it as " mind " ; 1 p 30. "breath of life "; p. 54, "abstract
energy " ; p. 6e). " life " ; p. iiT, " conscience " ; while Pr. Thomas says
that " ■~pLr:'s in prison " H Potor iii.) means " bodies."
■ Qa thu otlioi- hand, t^h** lyi'lji is fhns. for T)-. Th'")ias, hoflv, nud son!,
'find S7>irit. . ?
46 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
the proofs of this, examining tiiem carefully as the impor-
tance of the subject demands, an<l submit the separate points
to be examined, one by one, to the test which Annihilation-
ists themselves appeal to— the judgment of the inspired
word. '/ I
Now it is but quoting Scripture to speak of the " spirit of
man which is in him" (1 Cor. ii. 11), and of the " spirits of
men " (Ileb. xii. 2;J). And observe, before we pass on, one
fact here. Scripture says *' the n^nnf of ma/ir It does not
sayV the 8y>irit" but "the «/>/>//« of //<cw." Annihilationists
t^ell W (or many of them) that ' spirit " is a universal
/principle bf life, lent to m.m indeed in common with the-
r beast, but forming no real part of himself, like the air he
breathes, ami in which Dr. Thomas says it is contained.
Now, if th s be so, we might as well talk about the hr.afhi
of men as I of the! r Mj,irlt.s Yet every one would perceive
the incongruity of the former expression. Wfe say "the
breath of ^en," just because it is one common breath they
all breatlW, but it is not one common spirit they all have,
and therefore we speak of their " spirits," because each has
his own,ind it is a separate entity in each one.*
Mr. donstable's identification of it with the "breath of
life " is 4erefore not possible. His view is only in point of
fact Thimasism on a somewhat higher plane, as he makes
* This is witli Mr. Roberts another of those " inevitable Actions • in
which he so largely deals. The .spirits of men are with him not
separate entities, but only ' ' inevitably conr^ined " of as such. " Just as
there \s prirrutrilij but one life, the self-existing life of the Eternal
father, an.l, yet we talk of the /iw/* of the creatures He has brought
HJto being '• :' Is it then only " inevitably conceive.l "aliat the lives
of His creatures are .separate from His oWn 7 Are they not actually
:Sej>arate oxistences ? ^
. Again he says, " As reasonable would it' be for Mr. Grant to say that
because we have heparate ' fleshes/ therefore it is not one common
fleah we all have." Does not Mr. B. ''onfound flesh and body aome-
what ? Eateyve separate " fleshes " ? The argumeni and the Engli»l.
are alike new. Separate UdieH we have, and not one common body.
One common fiesh we liave, and therefore not separate fleshes.
) /
1 i
I-
THK ftPIRIT OP MAK.
47
the breath of life and the Spirit of God alMo identical, quot-
ing the very Kaine passages lor it aa we have already con-
sidered with reference to Mr. Roberts.. He adduces also
Bishop Ilorsley's opinion, that no one " who compares Gen.
ii. 7 and Eccl. xii. 7, can doubt that the 'breath of life
which God ' breathes into the nostrils ' of man in the Book
of Genesis is the very same thing with the ' spirit which God
gave ' in the Book of Kcclesiastes." To which it is enough
to answer that we doubt. Neither Horsley nor hiniself give
any proof of {his from the passages in question, and the sub-
ject will come Ui) hereafter. But in the next place Mr.
Constable avails himself of " Hebrew parallelism" to the
eitent that Mr. Roberts does. ' All the while my
breath is in me, and the Spirit of God is in my nostrils,"*
he thinks conclusive. It may be doubtless for those who
know no personal Spirit of God ;. and it seems as if Mr.
Constable had got aa low as this. The answer has been
already given, and to it we need only now refer.^ Similarly
Job xxxiv. 14 has been considered; but how he can quote
'* his spirit and his breath " to show that the two are one is
hard to understand. The contrary would seem self-evident.
Hebrew parallelism is again made to do duty in interpret-
ing Isaiah xlii. 5, Ivii. 10. Mr. Constable would have it that
parallelism consists in merely using synonymous expressions
in the " parallel " sentences. This is a false and unworthy
conception of it, which would reduce it to mere tautology.
|t' is not so, as every verse in which it is used bears witness.
How unworthy a repetition would it be to make Isaiah say,
as Mr. C. would : " He that givoth hrmtli to the people
upion it, and breath (spirit) to them that walk therein."f
Yet these are proofs, he considers, that eslahUsh the identity
of the breath of life with the Spirit.
Now Scripture speaks of the spirit of man being not only,
as we have seen, ia separate entity in each individual, which
7
^Job xxvii. 5.
^I reserve the quotation of Isaiah Ivii. 10, until wo come to consider
the word found thefe — neshamn. ' .
I
-^ ■ ^-
' . "
■T
1
' ■ - -'-WfiTq
1 ; • '
*
V
j; ■ .
•
«
p
«
4
-
^^^BjKi n
'
-
'
Bl
^■11 J
■*'
»
Bill''
ft
■»
if
. .-./
■ ' \ ■
„ '
/' , .,'-'; ■
1
1 i
4 ■ . .
*■
Iff- '',.'■-.
H':j;
1«
'\; ■-
■" ■ -4
/ ■ -
ifii'! 1 '
>t
|k . '
■ ^
" -. ■ ' ' '
*i
IP'i'
''■''■ ■■
n ■
; '
.■-■-. ■ ■'
11
'i
;
^
u
m
\
■.-.,% -♦ .
mh'ii.
':■ . •* ■ .- ■ ■.
mm Bl^uI''' ' .
' 1 ■ .
V
Ira lffi<jl!B'
Milil!
■■ '
f '^i
ijl. ^'
■ . - ' ' /
jH'j-jjfij
a
*
"i , ' , : . ■ ' ■
.\
«.
,- ■ ■ ■ -..«''
•
. ll- 1
«
■ * .
I
■il
r ■ , ■
' •. ■
•■ . '
■' m
1
,:!!!
■[■ ; ; '-..';
3T
» ■
■1 -
■ i^' I'i . .
':
■m ■--::--- ■-- ■
^- -■' .
'■.'■...■* *■• ■ -
1
•'.'.-'-
''I'I' ii
* ■ •'
ji
1 ■ . ■■
■■■■■
-r-~-r"-- f ■■
._- .__--*-„-,„...
.-- ,.^
■'.— --
- -.-
'.»
■ *■ .' ■
■ ■' ■ • '. . ■" . - • ■' ■ - '. . .
,
■''''.-- ■ ■ * ■ ■
•
. " . • ■ .
- ■ ." ■ ■^■- .". '■■'■
• ■ '■ . ■■.■■■■ ,. ^ ■• V- ■■ ■■'' -■ • -■■ ■■■■'
m
M/y* And, moreover, a wrouji^ht iron gun, except under
extrflordinnry circumstances, would not give way explo-
sively, the Btretching of th6 metal giving \yarning.
It is possible, however, that repecited firing might alter
the formation of the iron, and it might in time lose its
fibrous construction. Qases of wtowght iron railway
bridges have,becn l^nown where the coMinuous jarring of
passing trains has so altered the for:n of Vl«o iron.
In our service no heavy guns are entirely made of
wrought iron, the inner tubes being made of toughened
steel, on accoupt of the comparative softness of wrought iron
and of the difficulty of forming a surface free from flaws.
At first we used it, and the B.L.R. guns have wrought
iron barrels. We still use it in the palliser converted cast
iron guns, in order to giv€ sufficient safety to guns made of •
such weak metal as cast iron. The palliser converted gun
isH very safe gun for its detachment, for before the inqer
tube of wrought iron burst, it wqiild stretch to such an ex-
tent as to split the cast iron casing. .
Wrought iron does capitally fdr the exterior portions of
guns, as it is not only cheap but easily worked, and from its
ductility gives a large nmrgin of safety. '
In the Royal gun factories all iron used is carefully test- TcBting Iron
ed, both as to the distance to whicli it will draw out before
breaking, and as to \\\q weight required to break it; for the
former shews its ductility and the latter its tenacity. y Its
fracture is also examined. A good tough ws:Qugkt iron
ought to present a fracture of irregul^^r silky appearance, •
light grey in colour, and of well defined fibre. ■ '
■ ^ /' ■'-''■.'■
SJeel. ■ /■ '
Steel has, till lately, been defined accordi^ig to its sup-
posed chemical constitution as a form of iron containing from
3 to 2 per cent: of carbon. According to this definition, >
when the carbon is present in certain proportions—the „
limits of which cannot be strictly defined — we have the
various kinds of steel, which are highly elastic, malleable -
t
ij .
^■*
48 FACTS AND THEORIF.S AS TO A FLTURE STATE.
the breath of life is not, but (as the breath c^f life clearly is
not) a th'mgfoi-mfjd within him (Zech. xli. 1) : " The burden
of the word of the Iwor<l lor Israel, saith the Lord, which
stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of
the earth, and fonneth (he sph-if of via it. it^ith'ni him.''
Thus, along with the formation of the heavens and the earth,
as Of equal importanee with these (the body beuig moreover
passed over in the matter) there is put by the inspired
writer this formation o^ the spin't of man. And this is the
complete upsetting of the materialistic theory. The spirit
of man is fonncf within him. It is a separate entity then
in each individual man. not (like the breath of life) a eonimon
principle shared by all.-'
Moreover the possession of a spirit by the beast is not
asserted in Scripture, except in <ino pa.ssage by the writer
of Ecclesiastos (ch. iii. ID-Jl): • For that wiiich belalleth
the sons of men bolhlletli Ik'U'I-'; even one ihinii; belalleth
them; as theonc dieth so dleth tlie oilier ; y(?a, llioy have
all one breath (nvicJi) ; so tliat a man hath no prerminence
over a beast, lor all is vanif y. All no uikto one place : all
are of the dust, and all turn to dust ai::a;n. \Vu<> kntnreth
the spirit of man that goetb upward, mil tlie f<p'n''it of the
beast that goeth downward to the earth "r
This passage has been seized upon by niaterlalists of
course, and is constantly put forth as tlie stronuiioM of their
doctrine. They quote verse* 10 triumpiiant*}-. 'Words
cannot be stronger than thi?,*' says Mr. Constable. "The
* Roberta admits' iiideofl horo " n cnnuiiori spiill (!'Atr;i'U''''l a'-ctn-diiiii
to tlio will of the Creator, ajid t'»r/i'-'> into thf> spirits of uif^ii." Hut
lie has rendt;ro,d this imposMhlo in iiis view of tliin^'-;, l>y t«'lliiiz "^
that the xery fTixfrnrr of separate spirit'^ is n-ily " 'r,)o\-Ur\\)]\' rnnnirrr/,"
but not a, real thiii:^. Does he mean to lell us iha! <jiod '• formed " the
" commou^spirit" he speak*; of into the " :'K".;t,"': " eoiiceptioji " of :i
distinct thing ?
This constant use of lanc^nase \vl)ich is merely firtitions marks his
argument throusliout. What is it but tlie decepion of one by whom
he is himself, alas, duped, and in wliose hands he is the unhappy instru-
ment in deceirins others 1 '
t
«
y
t
/ tuj: siniilT of Man.
49
■ ■
9
preacher tells us not only that man and beast both .have
spirit, but that the spirit of both is one and tlie jsame. He
is here evidontly comparing them in what they had of the
highest kind, and nothing could be higher than the posses-
sion of that spirit which the P^salms and other Scriptures tell
us was indeed nothing less than the Spirit of God Himself.
Yet in this he tells us that ' man hath no preeminence above
a beast."'* '■...'■
This is bold enough indeed : Mr. Constable has the merit
of speaking out his thoughts. In his very highest attribute,
it seems then, man has xo preeminence above a beast.
Mind, conscience, rcsponsibiiity, moral qualities, either he has
not, ^r the beast has, or else these are, after all, inferior,
^things, "not of the highest kind."' "Man being in honor
and rnuhrst<noi;„ri v>t^ is like the beasts that perish," says
thepKalmlst Mr. Constable adds that he has ?/o preemi-
nence over them .nnyliow, and as°ibr "beasts that perish,"
why, one and all perish alike • when the breath leaves them
they but lie down In the du-i, being alike hvt dust.
The argument jjroves too much, and so proves nothing.
If Mr. Const.-uile had but weighed the verse before, which
he omits, he might have found' reason to question his»con-
clusion. The wh<.]e passage is what, Solomon tells us, he
''mid in /./.s- hctri'' .at a certain time (ver. 18). It is not
divine revelation, ])nt hum.-m doubt: the questioning of
man's mind when speculating uj)on the mystery of existence:
" who knoir,tl, the i^plrlt of man "' •.-- etc. It is the language of
a man wh) had '• given his heart to search out bV v.-isdom%on-
cerning all things that are <lone under heaven;'" Avho had
".said in his heart" Mi. ii. 1), " Go to now, I" will prove thee
with mirth," and wb^ had " sought in his heart to give himself
to ^rhu;' and "to lay hold on jhlh/- that he might see what
was that good -^ the sons of men, Avhich they should do
under heaven allThe days of tlieir^Iifo " (ver. 3).* Thi^ is no
SpiriWaught man. In no sueh pa'th docs the'Spirit of God
#
1.0. FACTS AND^HEOBIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
lead ; and the result is that, searching out by human wisdom,
the grave into which all go is an impenetrable mystery : men
die as the beast dies, they have one breath, one niac\ they
<ro to the dust alike ; aa to what is beyond, no more human
knowledge can penetrate it : who knoweth the r,nich of man
that goeth upward, or the ruach of the beast that goeth
downward to the earth ? That word, ruach, with its various
meaning of breath or spirit, suits well the doubtful ques-
• tionin'T oC the passage. But this is the uncertainty of mere
human knowled-e. The Spirit of God could not doubt or
question. It is by the Spirit, surely, that we are given this
history of human searching after wisdom and after good;
but the lesson is, that 6y human searching he could attain
neither the one nor the other. Listen to Solomon's own - .
exposition of this as he comes out into the light : "As thou
KXOWEST NOT what is the way of the spirit, nor how the
bones do grow in the womb of her that^ is with child, even
so thou knmoest not the works of God who maketh all"
(ch. xi. 5). Biit he has something to say now about his
former thoughts : for he says finally an.l conclusively, that^
the fpirit of man does not " go downward to the earth " :W
" Then shalt the dust return to the earth as it was, but the ,
spirit shall return to God who gave it. '
The objection is Raised as to this by .Mr. Roberts, that it
ignores the fact of Solomon's God-given wisdom. But it is
just the point of Ecclesiastes to show how the wisdom of the
^wisest failed here, as in the book of Job the perfection of
human- goodness. The perfect man has to own his vileness
before God, and the wisest men the incompetence Of mere
human wisdom.
For Solomon's wisdom was self-evidently of that kmd
which fitted him for the kingly office which he filled, and
for which he sought it (2 Chron. i. 9, 10). It is compared
with that of other kings, and with the wisdom of the East,
and of Egypt, though it surpassed all these. He was the
naturalifit of his day; h is proverbs a storehouse of practical
\
^.i
k
wisdom for the path on earth. But ho;r8 not the sweet
THE SPIRIT OF MAJf.
51
^i
psalmist of Israel, and his numerous songs are mostly fbr-
gotten. The Song of Songs is an allegory, and he was
evidently in it the unconscious singer of spiritual things of
which he knew>„t little. Who could compare hiih with
David for spiritual insight ? And who but mustWament his
.manifest departure from the path m which his father walked '
that departure which, if it be admitted (as it must be) spite
of Solomon's wisdom, so simply accounts for the book -of
Ecclesil^tes being not the re.cord of a path in which the
Spirit of God LED, however much He might make the one
who walked there the preacher of the vanity of a world
which he had ransacked in vain for satisfa^n.
Now, beside this manifestly excepti<«i||8age in Ecclesi-
astes, there are none that assent or impl^Wffeast's possession
of a spirit. The passages quoted from elsewhere by Mr *
Constable are plainly inadequate. The " breath of life " in
^ Gen. vi. 17 is not the spirit, as a comparison with vii. 22 may
show. Nor is it in Psa. civ. 29. He contends, indeed, that
' If rUach m verse 29 is translated " breatl<" it must be equally
so m verse 30 : " Thou sendest forth Thy breath (ruach)'
they are created." But hero the "sending forth" necessi-
tates the other rendering. Were it breath, however, in
both places, how would it prove Mr. Constables point'
God forms the spirit in man : He does not form the breath
of life in him.* ' '
* Gen. vii. 22 (w,«ry. ), quoted by Annihilationists as proving " spWt "
to belong to hnasts. is a mere mistake. The same phrase is found in-
i 8am. XXII. :^6, and is there translated " The blast of the breath " where
agam it is referred to the nostrils: "the blast of the breath of his
nostnls." It is the action, of the breath upon the nostrils, so strongly
marked mutates of excitement and fear, which is .triltingly referred to
in the pas.sage in Genesis : " All in whose nostrils was the breathing of '
the breath of life . . . died."
As for Xumb. xvi. 22, it refers, from the context, to man simply as
eg. m Matt. xxiv. 22. "Except those days should be shortened no JUsh
should be saved " ; (Gen. vi. 12), '• All flesh had corrupted his way upon
the earth ; (Psa. Ixv. 2). " Thou that hearest prayer, to Thee shall all
flesh come," etc
-4i^ .
■ if ■ ;
yAfiTS^ANIV THEORIKS AS
XO A FUTURE STATE.
52 ,
' '\' •«i,.,„nfidfii'ce to my former position
Iretnrn, then, ^^'^^"f ^"^^ ,;^n,, „ principle., oflife
d,at,sofar from the sp r.t of man_ l.c^„ a Pr P
he,* in- common with t^ >-.^, ^^ ,pP- ^^^ ^^. ,,, .
as-serts the bcusfs possess on oM. ^ ^ ^^^^ .helsllencc of
,S:::;!!rSi;:irU-^;v^-^^ ,
spirit, which they ''f >:> f ,;™t« J'o.Jse.few Scripture •
^ ^"V Tot-K^So. t e'piri. in man, that it is the
xi. 1 will- not Ijen" to enn i , ,■,, ^nd says . ;
finitely of the spirit, of 7'"''""' "[J'„r m.ticSns of the ;
^God formed it. not -^b-^-^^f ^^,, ,,
.oul! Bes,de -h.ch, _ to^.h.s .p ^^^ ^.^^.^_^ j^_^^...
him,- the apostl*-tm I •^""^^•'V ,,.,„„., „f ^ „,a„, save the
ledge: '^ ^"^1 man l^owe h ^ ^''"^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^.^ ; ,,,
i.dtio„s'.o.:.emot^ns-^o ..s,,nU^..^^^ ^^^
,hings of aman^|na V. . „,^, „,,.,,„„ spirit, and ■
know the ihinasotTi^o/s.), 1 . . '. . .
„ ..mineno, -->'---; ;lf,,,„i,, „e doct^e
My ohjet, so la , h»^ "^ ^ ^„^„^„. entity in,
■ "' *^ S"^':™: t;:^ t vT-t nna ..,e relationship of
T' > to the ^"1 will eome up more na.urallyattfr we
te'cIaMl^ed iH .mi.ar manner the Sorip„ire doe.rme of
tho Foulitself. , •",■ •' "- ' f '
. . „or<m..4 in Gen. n- . tor ^'^;« .' ." ^ ;, ,,rilv, as there itn.
o s.„ xxii. 1«. r,eterr«l .o "■ tho 1- • " -;^ ^ • ,„ ,„„„ ;„
pi l ed, the r.» . . ' A '" '"t"' T ' 'il l ^t- .tL" t 'l,^.,fty ....MvaMit
either senna of • l>tenth ';n ywH. " ■ * ^
■,^r ^.;- '
on
life
rEK /.
arid , V
of
the "
*
iure
the
ion?
ech. * '
'dc'.
says. '
the
<
QOW- •
2 the
the
,' the
s not
, and "^
jtrine
ity iw
iip of
er we
ine of '
IP lep-
is the
22 and
ere im-
nacJi in
lUvakMii
THf; S6UL.
53
tdruack; certiinly never. of i higher charai^ec. ' The ^nirit of'tJod is
;^vern-*A«»^«A. ^ It is rather .he/'hreathinST- inspIraSm'-2t "
1^. Psa_.v...lo; I-.XXX..33. As^t^,„,njrt«.^p^s.iv.ofiisb.l^g
a breaching creature.as ir. Dcut: xx. 1(»; Josh x "iaaAti 11 1 1^ 1 ir w
"^o Ji! '• Tn a t ' r "J ' ^^>'\nslated ;%.i)arlj., and pot bv
Should bfe " brea.hin3 " Or " breath " in Gen.^vli. 2!^. 1 K-r^",^!^
. Job xxvi^4 ; xxvH. 3 ; xxxiv. li ; rsa. ii. 22; x.:i. ^ \^^fi:^'^
^^wZ^: l-s^e beside ^th^e in |cn,tu,-cl,a:.d th?^ s.eLs't^
^ T^^i^T^ here ourgfer.ion,trar^|ates ii ..spirit." .et tbat t is cx-
presMveof th^ rtciton/rs^ther than the-ftk/iynf the sni-t wo n,,,,!!
m the passage itself; Prov.x^i/ 27.. ,. ; ■' . - '''^ "^'"^7° ™ay f «
••A
>
■i^.
Y
■J-
.^CHAPTER Y.
• Tin: HCiVh.
■TnE- Hebrew . word- for -'soal-is r:j i^>^phcsh 'the
^Sn,S«.nt ono^sh in vi«w of, what ha, .'iroady ,come be ■
fo^c,us when sno.a clncr r.r fU. u.^>,i .• .. - . ./ : ° "^^
ivX "r"^" •■"-", -' ^ w^v 01, Avnat has .-ilready ,come be-
• fo^c^us when speaking of the Word lot' spirit i^ ihT bo^.
■' • r 7. , ' •=' >vuiu aor &]>irit. I5» | hat 'l-ntb
„ «J^<aA Snrl -,>«,o/;. are, cqualjy «i,i, .,,>„o/, a„,l "l,,,"]
■ derived frpm. words which .i^nifV. ■.■ ,o,y;«„,;„,- The''a2
.dea of „,«*&.., „rtA-.Vy •enror, iu.cUhom. Even Dr Thoma'
tel s.» that ,„,phesh i.s fro« Iho verb ,o brea"h. ahho^t
^.ephesh, he says, • stniihes crea<.,rc, ,M,„ I'fr ,o„]- ,,,
breath,„s-y>„„„, from , be v,rb<-ia,roa.ho.- -Toietum
then to. the philology of-.o„r- subjeoM rep>ari. tha C -
for rfb''' °r'^S"^.''^r''"^'=' whereby the l.aine^slm
'J-.
f ■' ■
■ .-.^til
.*;■
! ■
*. s.
en in
^u,.,ram.. , ■,.,,,„■.....//,,„.,, „„,,,„,,, ^;^„ij.^^ ,.^-
U^-
/
^-:
'54 FACTS XND THEOBIES AS TO A FUTDEE STATE. -
«i;o breath ».d Bonl.- One would think, ffom the .dmitted
derivation of the word from the verb to breathe, that the
triy-.if such t.-.be,wou.d^be ail the ^erway^
and that the K-WW meaning would be "breath, and «o
Weorsoui: In point of fact, «/.toA is only once Bugges^d
afbLth in the ma;gi& of Job ^ 20 and without neees«^^
v.d for "life" only as the priWiple or source of Lfe-a
™eJn" easily derived from the soul being stnctly that
™X:f life \o the body. So that !' soul" (in the common
. :^eptation of the word, is properly the pnmary &r,p««r«^
meaning, and the other meanings are derived from .^
Dr. Thomas, on the other hand, ^t^-t'^-'-f^ '^' ^"'
and body arc one. "Now if it boasted, what do-thcScnp- ,
^res d/finc a living soul to be V-fl>e answer .s a^bvmg
natural, or animal bpdy.'t But I '^ft^^\?'?^'Z^,
or any other who takes the position, if he could understand
Lhln expression as "everything where,»^there was a
ZVm',0- You find in Gen. i. 8(., "'everythmgwir^"'
h e !as-l living soul." Now if the -'f /'l^^^^^
it cannot be the body, and the fact that- .t ■« ca led a.
■ lirin"" soul precludes the possibility of "^sUtmg it
.: fc"°as materialists love to do. A "living J*" ^would
make no sense;{ a "living breath" would be no better
Zl the passage shuts us up to the necessity of allowmg
^at some'hing'is alive ,.Hln.. .be " breathing- frame •' wh.^
Dr. Thomas speaks of, so that the:soul and ,t are d.stmcV
from each other. • . . *:««„♦;«„
Dr. Thrimas thinks he has Scripture for h'^ ■'1«°"!.'=» J""
of^oul and body. Let him speak for himself j2_r|Ung
a ''life living." " We oft^n hear the expression. We .hou Id !•'« * ^'^^ •
\, ^rte ' ; 'so, in the passage, under conslUeration >t -uld b^ cone^^
to say. ' and ^y life .hall live ■ " Jhe Soul. p. 3). Th.s » a no able
,p..iLn of discernment or the-want of^t. If I can talk of gmn„ a
gift/' I can therefore talk of a gift giving ; and u I can «
fng a thought, I can equally speak of a thought thinking !
peak of think -
':^:%
^W SOUL.
65
aW. Ae% the apostle sayi, 'There is-a natural body and
therfe „a spiritual ^ody.W But he does not content him-
self with ^.mply declaring/ this truth; he goes further, and
proves It by quoting the ^ords of Moses, saying, ' For it is
i written, the first man Adim was made into a fiving soul,'
and then adds, 'the last Adam into a spirit giving life.' . .
, Ihe proof of the apostle's proposition, that there is a natu-
ral bod v as distinct from a spiritual body lies in the testi-
Piony that Adam was made into a7//;my sou!, showing that
he considere^^ a natural or animal body and a living soul as
one and the snm5^thing. . If he did not, then there was^no
proof m the -quotation of what he had affirmed."!
. Dr. Thomas\had hei^e to misquote Scripture in Order to
get bis argument, such as it is even then. The apostle does
not say « for," but « and." He is not proving his statement
hj the passage .produced. Why should he undertake to
prove that Adam had ^^.mttiml hoiiy? He is showing,
rather, how the difference between , the first and last Adaml'
these heads o'f the human race,- naturally or spiritually, iljus-
tratcs the diflference betwpen the natural and the spiritual
states, and confirms there being sucli a difference between
what we are now and what we phall be. « Paul quotes the
declaration of Mosbs," says Mrjloberts, '' to prove the ex'-
istence of the natural body" !^his writer fias told us that
th^e^^ir^^ of inan is very ea^ilj seen ; now he wants proof
of the existence bf the fto<7y/;> , • \
' ^' °^*^ *^^^ '^ ^Tv^' **' "*^^^ ^^"^ ^^^^'^ ^a^^'" an<i
* 1 Cor. XV. 44." ' t Elpis Israel; p ^8' '
. 4 His treatment of ^11 ihi^ in " Man Mortal V needs little notice, save * -
to Illustrate the hopeless difficulty df his ppsition. He invekes Dr T 's
metonomy to account for Oen. i. 80. but wisely refrains from applying '
It to the case „. hand. I have already shown that no meaning given by
hem to ?oul will account for it : living bodf, living creature.lWing lif^, ;
hvmg breath-none of them will do l^ere. The metonomy cannot sus- ■
tarn 80 great a burden. ■< \
He admits that there may be "something alive ^' in the body \
as you
may call the red heat of a fire "something aUve » within the coal!
m,
':^-^:
'.♦
!■
y
56 FACTS AND TUKOUIEs'AS TO A FUTURE STATE. ^
from that down to .very crecpin.thing «f;:^^]^;«!^.f^^ '
It is not said Iha^t the beast has a sp.r^t; it is .ajd that it ha«
^souL So much •., that alLtUelowcr ann.^s an^^caM^
*' 80ul« " just as mitch as men arc. Tlus is to btvobserN cd
J^^s i itsolf an anssvc- vo the materialisUc theones^l ^
on^anlzation ol" the most cpmpletc Idud. It outs off at o^ce
Zn::^ -.umonts as t. the iacultios of the brutes,^
display of .machmcnt, etc., which men oround so much
4^. Scripture loads.us t6 account for those, not by reason
onheir or^ni^ation. but then- ^^o.session of a M^.ng soul
as even In man, ^vhiie it reiVu's the un-lorstand.n^ o. ad
human things (I Cor. ii. 11 ) to the spirit vM -'';t;-^!^;^
^nssr..s^m sensual fhcultlo.,- appetites, nay, h.s ahections^
4c.,are ascMlbed to the " living sour-a sc,«l so tot
from the life of the body, that they that - kdl the body ..
r^>*y/o' •• kill th('>onr' iM;Ut. X. ll^).
' Mr Constable will peroeive, therefore, that we" a.^ oik-^ •
with him as to the hcA that man ^nd beast are abke xio.-
Bessed of living -^onl^ We dc» not di^ulse the truth as o
this, but contend ibr It. When he P'^oceeds irom tins to
infer that "the simple and piaper- meaning ot,the lleD.cw .
word u.pM^ when q^plUd f. the lower creatures, iS /j^-
p^nnal tlr^nho goes beyond the record. Cien. i. rIO apphes.
expressly to the lower creatures, and how ean^^we sa>
»' cvervtiiln'r wliereln there is a livmg ///; / i»e oni\
other meai^lng he ascribes to it, when uppiW-d to man, .^
"person "-(p. '^)^ !i"<^ 'Avherein tliere is a hviog person
, will scarcely do either.' ___ " __.__ — —,-
This i. l,;<"i.v vitatrt/fiCion." of courso naain. ami it doo«. iurl.o.b.
-^ To all his bl,;d.rs :. u> nn: ,n.an;n.. I ...uM ,...-,• n.vf oa,l.rs to tnv
' „ook itself tV, a reply. Mr. R nft..,. ...... f. I.v. wvU... h. co,n-
ment« beftfo tie W.S tai,ly pnss.s.,.! ..r tUe n....un..-<>l what he ^^„f.■.
"^^iyr a vrrv -n.od a.-.^;,.: tn^ni .he si.Io nt soiH.c of the diflerence
■ ~' - uM rofor to Mivail's "Lessons from
V
I
betw'een nifUi and l>vu''\ I v.'
Nalu.-o." c];ap. vii._ (A[>plel«n & Co.)
•f-riades,,i>. .f4.
<
dis
be
wh
bre
hot
<lra
. Scr
saic
life,
1
. • the
<f woi
80 f
• not
bod
clc,^
But
:\j
. bec£
forn
nost
Nov
somi
crea
.man
the 1
meai
brea
iinto
V
Avhy
••"•No
pouit
t h e S i
j^-
V
\ THE SOUL. ' , 57
■ * A '■ ' ■ ' '■ • -
Gen. Goo4wyn hus still another detinitioa : " The soul, as
^ . distinguished from the mere tody or soul-tabernacle, niay
; V be considered as tluit cornbination oi' parts df the inner man,
which is the seat of the mind ahd artec;tions, and having the
breath of life gives action to, the outer n^embers of the
body, W^ion the sjrlrlt, |he animating, Principle, is with-
drawn, the man, soul, and; bodo,f,cwises to exist, die,s." His
^'cripture fV)r thiij seems to be Gen. il. -T,/' where Adam is
:^ said to have become a living soul. His inner organs received
life, or breath of e!ustcnct'aji?l.aetioni;*^ .V ' '
Tims Uic .'y/^/^/- o/v/r/zM of the bo(ty^f;eem with him to be
. ' the soul, the outer only, the toul-tabernade or' body. Ife"
^ would be well to \ttempt .■something in the; way of proof of
so startling a proposition r.s ihat, the Irmgs aiid other parts
• not defined are not the body ! - In the bo.ly,^' " oul of the
^ body," '-absent frbm the body, ^' "putting oil' the taberna-
. cle, ' would certainly 'have a new signifieanee in this way.
' But I think it scarc% ncedWi to pursue this further.
Ma«i has, then, a living soul ; nay, he /.v one. How'. he
' , became so Gen. li. 7 informs us : ''And the Lord -God
formed maii^f the dus^^■■the ground,, and breathed into his
nostrils the breath of iilb, and xnauOc cam-i a living soill."
' Now, upon the most cureory glance at this, it is evident that
something more took place in man's /;reation than in' the
creation of the brute. .It Is' plain that Go T breathed' into
man's nostrils the breath of life, an«; ttiat He dwl not into
the brute's. Roberts, inde(#l, conten.ls that Psa, civ. 25-30
supplies what is omitteU in Genesis. He obtains tKis by
means of the old confusion bet wtvn God's Spirit and the
, breath of life. Noi' does any one,dViiy {b«t ''God givetli ,
up;o all Vife and breath and all' things.'" Thequestion is,
why was the gift given in this c^speeial way to man alone ?
- "'No matter," Kays Mr. K., •' if ■tjiey all ha\v it." But the;
pouit is, did ijQd come in in this special way to give merely
^ t ti e same gift after all V .The llinguage is'phenomenal, as Old
* Truth and Tradition, v
. ) '•
Il
•fe
58 FACTS AND THEORIES is TO A FUTURE STATE.
, Testament language largely is, and that makes one only the ^
more to ask, is this breathing of God^not a form of expres- •
8ion pointing to the communication of somethmg from ^
Himself, and more akin to Himself, thw is impUed in water
or earth simply producing?
Surely it'is so. For although what is communicated may
not be yet fully shown-and it is quite the character of an
initial revelation, that it should not'be-it is plain that man
has a//>/A herewith God Himself which the bea^asnot.
And this is not by a higher bodily organization. His
body has been before perfected. It is hu the way he receives
life Now, if the breath of life alone were commumcated
(and every beast has it as much), there is no real difference
answerin«r to this difference of communication: the phe-
nomenal language has no corresponding meaning.^ But thus
it is that man-only dust before-becomes a livmg soul.
And that purports that he is now characterized, as we have
seen before inth^ beast, by something now living withm that
man who was \L now but dust. He is i, living soid ; not
by the comple/ion x)f his bodily organization, but by the
addition of a new constituent of being. He is now not a
mere body, nor a body instinct even with the breath ot lile,
he is ftm>»m a " living soul."* '. . . u-
Still why is man called a living soul, a title which is his
in common with all the animate creation, rather than a
"living w//-iV," whiclj woufd distinguish him from them.
The answer would seem to be that the point of contrast is
not with the lower animals, but with the class of God s
creatures to which as a monil being man belongs. The
angels are spirit.^, never so„U. The distinction between
them and man, - made a little lower th^ the angels^is^B
Vnir Morris- gloss l».at u.plunh rhnyah means a " rtflrorot/* soal ''
will berepudiated by a..y Scholar In a secondary sense n^ ^hayah)
is used for revival and recovery, but its simple ordihafy established
is " living." It is in contrast with n*n (/myaA). " to be, an
the being of a stone, for instance, is distinct from the life of an apinwl-
C
If
meaning
THB 8QUL.
6d
t- that man is a soul. That which linka him with the inferior
creatures, is that which distinguishes him from pure " spirits,"
such as angels are.*
The feet here manifest, that the soul is thus put for the
whol6 man himself, as what characterizes him, or gives him
his place among God's rational creatures, serves to explain
g many passages which would otherwise present difficulty.
We have in our ordinary language similar uses of the
word " soul," which certainly have not grown up from a
materialistic idea of it. Thus we talk of "so many hohIs on
board a ship," -'every soul was lost," and ho one is deceived
by it. There are, however, other renderings of the word
nephesh, and other uses of soul, which we shall look at in
their place. As usual, the deniers <.f the Scripture doctrine
make a great display of various meanings given to the word."
}5ays Miles Grant,t '' N'ephe.sh, the word rendered soul, is
translated in forty-four different ways in the common English
Bible. We now propose to give 4iU these variations, and
il|uote the texts 4hat contain them." . . =
Now I would say that nothing is more common than
various renderings of the same word in our ordinary trans-
lation. Good as it is, and in most cases giving the sense
with sufficient accuracy, it often varies from literal exact-
ness. With all this variation there is far less difference than
» would at first sight appear. Mr. Grant himself reduces
these meanings essentially to four, '' creature, person, Kfe and
<lesir^" "Soul," of course, disappears out of this catalogue,
al^ough it is the translation of nepheah 475 times out of
7^^ And we are, therefore, to translate Gen. i. 30, "every-
thing that creepeth upon the earth where//i there is a living
♦ Because he has this in common with t!ie beasts, Mr. R-. must hot ^
conclude that It is inferred that ra.in's soul is just what the beast's is.
If "all flesh is not the same flesh" even, why need all souls be the
same? ^ ■
And if God speaks of His " soul," condescending as He does to our
familiar human speech, He is never caUed a soul as He is a spirit.
■ 'u:. ■}■ The Soul, what is it 1 p. 20. ;__ __
f
■■ I.
'#'
.i'.#
00
KAtns
A^U TUKOHIKH Afi TO A KUTUKE HTATB.
passages. ^yj,,.„^.,. „,i,v llu- uiiKnisl. of his soul.
Wvxx'Vt "oul"Mhoi>.opl.wusnu^
^"^ xMB y' shuU lav ui, thus. luy wor.b in your soul.
?1;:L xJ^: ^ TI. soUl or Jon.thuu ..^mt to tUe soul
^^"""^Lo- Tho soul of all tho people was fSWa.
" 2Sam" B: Th. bU-llhat uro hat.d oi D.vi.l . soul
'^ifn : What ins soal a..in-th, ev.-n that ho doetb.
• Psa "xm"2 : How hm^ Miall I tako conns Liu .uy scmiI.
'cvi in- n..s.<nth'anm-sintothoirs.ml. %
■ evii 2G : Tlu-ir soul is mclti-trht'Cimso of tronhh".^
..viv MO- Mvsoulbmikethforthclon-mi,'ithatii.
i^a. r^ -Ana kr.ll consum. from the soul oven to the flesh,
liii 11: The travail ••I" his soul. . _
Mi.^ vi' 7 • The fn.it .r my l.o.ly for tho sin of my soul.
' Xow in thosc^ exampios, the soul is aistinguishca from
bo^b;aynna ilcsh. It long, it grieves, it hatev^t loves.
U is inaeea :v living thing, as <'-• '■ -l^-'^^. ,^ .,,,^
Take, again, the Xew Testament eqUivalmU of n.pfu^h
^'![^*3,.og, Fear not them^vhieh kill the body but are hot
able to kill the soul.
xi 29 : y •' «li'i^l ft"'^ ^^'''^ ""^' ' '"^'^^ ^ ■ '
i^ ii is': In whom my sonl is w 11 pleased.
' xxvi. 38 : My soul i-^ . xccedin- sorrowful. ^—
Euke i. 4C : My soul doth mu-nify the Lor^.
"%
John xii
27 : Now is my soul troubled.
^
ii
%■
«
m-.
i
^
i:
f
THK SOUL.
Acts ii. 27 : Thou wiU not leav.- my hqxA in hell (hati^.8):
^J\& ^^^^'^^^'^^S th.! souls of the disciples. .
dl
m-
|l)Ic would it 1)0 to translate with Mr. Con-
person " in those) passages ; or '* body " or
Tiiomas and his follower J or "inner
lodwyn; or "creature, pefin, life or d^-
i;ies(4rant| Take, lor instance, the verA- first
Jxample, and try upon it any or all of these various rfider-
«ng8. LsMt not plain that not one of i)ir,m will make even the
smallest fense ? - .
^ Mr. Constable has indeed done his best to defend his
position, but ho owns that ho takes the expression in its
•' less obviou.s son.se. "and one to which ho is compelled, as
he thinks, by - tlic. general doctrine [of Scripture] upon this
sul^iect. Iho latter as.^crtion is surely incorrect, and a
little exammation witr show ns that the sense ho gives it is
not merely the " less obvious^ but impossible.
He allows that if soul|pl.c lile, -«ian can and does
destroy it. But he argiioT^./^ Is ^, moa^,ntary death:
what he has for the time e.vtinguished is reserved by God to
shme thron-h all eternity: it is not theretbre, m (iUseye
or m/W, lost, destroyed or j)orished." > '-. '
VThis will not answer, however. For it is plain that the
Lord contrast, killing the body here with destruction of
body and .vo,./ in hdl. Xow man can only kill even the
hojlj for a, m>i<ln: he cannot pre Vent the resurrection even
of that. What he can do as to the ])od v he can do just as
much (or as linle) to the life, and therefore there would be
nrv ground lV.r the distinction between the one and the
other which the pa.ssago manifestly makes^ The Lord says
man^c^n kill the body, .oAthe so.il. Mr. Constable says he
can kill the soul (or life) also, but onlv tor awhile: and
that ,s equally true of the body. According to Mr. C it
shou ld hav^l.een '^Fear not thc^m which m n dther h o<ly
njUfe: Tins is not a '• io.s obvious,'' btit In ^poZ .
Die sense. ; • '^ >
"^ •■■■
But
again, how *^«»il? "neji-^h talk of" kiHine the /r/i '»f
■/.
ft.,';-
'•S>.»i
Tf**-
/•
V
II
• ^
r
-/•
I
\ ■ '
no
i..i^:
w.
Shapindf
trunnions.
120
" Every larje forging is nmdejn the saracj way, viz. : Solid forging.
"Slabs" of iron are suoccsaively welded together upon gj ,^
the end of a " porter bar," or carrying b«|r, which -acts as *"**.'
a lever and tongs In .manipulating the wX "
Slabs are formed by hammering togeth^ several blooxs
of scrap iron. ,
To/arm a trunnion rii^, the porter bar ^ heated, and Trunnion
slabs are welded on it, tVo at a time, till a mW of the re- ''"*•
quired size is formed. . . ,
This^s roughly hammered int^ shape, tric\ porter bar
_ being in the continuation of qno of the* trunniW. This
bfock is 6onverted into a ring V.y punching a lible in tW
centre (in the case of l^rge guns, two holes.) These are'
then. enlarged by drivjng ovalshaped pandrels through it,
increawng in sizfe till the holeis large enough.
The trunnion ring has to be heated bets^een each punch-
"^ iug, and the trunnions are then roughly shaped* r
It will be seen that in tljis case the- fibr^ will Wn- along
the trunnions, and round the ring as described.
Scrap trom, turnings is used,, as it gives a good fibrous
iron of good quality. ; 'A
When we want a solid cylinder of iron, cros||liP binding
sl^bs should be welded along the sides of thosWfirut welded \
^ to (he porter bar, as in the cafee x)f the fbr^ng ft (r a large -
' ■, cjtecabel, „-\ ^/\ '" '^'- ': ■ • . '■ ^ ^'V j " ;'■ , ■''^. ^ ''.■'-.,. '^"
THe heavy bars for the breech coil8k)f h^av /guns are Bars for
made by welding successive slabs to the end of tlio porter heavy coils,
bar'till sufficient length is obtained. 9y this mean^ we get
a denser and stronger toaterial . for the breedh coil, where •
great strength is required. \
When an inner barrel is required, several eoUa i^x^t be
welded together. - > / .•
The B tube, or chase, of heavy giins, is also composed of
tw6 united coils, as well as the breech coil, in 8o6ie cases.
To begin with, the coils are turned smootli/at ends, and
reciprocally recessed, th a t , i s, a iprojection is formed on one
aad a corresponding recess is formed on the end of the other.
Forcing
a cascable.
Uniting'two
coils.
Si:
it'':
fV
5
1
' -i.
:r-
62 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE-
much more of " killing the body and the life " V What is
killing the body but destroying its Ufef I must plead
ignoiioce as to kilUng the body and the life being different
things at aU. Nay, further, since "killing" is already
"taking life," I niust confess I faU to see how you can talk
of takiW the life t>/ life or " killing /(/€."
Thus, then, without the need of considering the passages
with which he has sought to prop up his argument (passages
which will be examined, however, in another place), we may
safely assure ourselves that the Lord speaks of a true soul
in man' which man cannot kill even for a moment. .They
can, for a moment, the body, but God will. raise it up. Not
eoeii for a moment can they kill the soul. .
The dilemma has been attempted to be avoided in another
way: Says Miles Grant: "We think it does not mean
this present soul or .life, for the reason that the destruction
threatened is not in this life, but in the world to come.
Man can and does take this life." ^^
Therefore- " soul " has to be rendered the " life to come.
But this it never means : the life to come, or life eternal, is
^oe, never p.meh^: So much so that Good wyn says : '• W her-
ever the word 'psuche is found it is in direct contrast with
zoe, and used to express the natural life or soul capable ol
being destroyed, put to death, or perishing." This is, ot
course, as to the letter part of it, merely his own view, and
in flat denial of the passage' before us; for how, it it be
the natural life, merely, can man, who kills the body, not
km it '■" But the " life to come " it is not. J*surh^\ m a sec-
ondary sense, is " life," because the soul /.s (in effect) life to
the body. This natural life man does and can take ; so that •
psuche here must be (spite of.the protest of materialism) that
which lies baci: of the life //..6//-ti^ veritable soul, which is
out of man's reach altogether.
Roberts attempts an argument, however,' from John xu.
•25 : " The man losing his life in this world for Christ's sake,
it When y When the Son of man comes
>
SOUL AND SPIRIT.
\
iti8»o»,aj«„<,Aeori:fetocome." Now the Lora-B words
hateth h. l,fe .„ th,s ^<,rl<^bM keep it unto life eternal."
Ho_^ could a.ma„ keep hisVe to come «,Uo life to come !
It « h,s present life he in some way* keeps, not mererfor
ever b„t to i,ye eternal. By and by we shall look „ore
closely mto what "life eternal " is, and shall then find" s
no mere etemal. existence, bat far more. His human life
W.I1 enter th.s new condition. But that shows the di^ti nc'
nelksT":, ' '""''"'' *■■*' '* '' ""« •"■■»» ««> the Lord
speaks of m the passage. As I have said. Scripture expresses
-hose two things by different terms: it i^ always Sa'r
never ;««/,./ and Mr, Roberts cannot deny it '
But to give «p here is to give up all as to the soul's
The doctrme they denounce finds to this verse as literal ex-
pression as need bo. If it hn Pl,f«„i„ o • / '"-f™' «*
Pi.»„„- L \,. rlatonic, Scripture is then
Platonic ; or rather, Plato is thus fer SCTiptnral
V -I
CHAM-EB VI.
FUN-CT.ON.S AN,. KKLATtbSSHIPS OP SOUL AKD SPIRIT.
, With these facts before ns, the wayis prepared for us to
see a new and beautiful harmony to the S^cripture teacLg
as to soul and spirit. That these are quite diwinct from o"f
another, though so nearly related, the word of God bears
abundant witness. " Your whole spirit and soul and^ody "
and piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul a^d
spirit, are passages sufficiently plain. But the ouestion
th« which the inspired writings furnish, we find also the
*In »nnt way will b* better considered further on.
a
i i]
>,!
jj.
1, i.
ft*
4
%
64 FACTS \^1> TllLORlE^ AS TO A FUTURK STATE.
foUest confirmation of the foot of the existence of these two
separate* entities in the compound nature ot rnan.
t Spirit and soul and body/ which I have taken us the key
to the discovery oi man's nature, t;ives us, I beheve, ver>
dea^ the on J of relationship. The .oul is here the con-
Z^l. link between the spirit and the body The spmt is
The higher part. Hence, although it be true that - the body
^SK>ut the spirit is dead^' (Ja.nes ii. 26),yeMl- ^P-t-
never looked at as the H/e of the body. Ihe word lor
"life," as we have se<,n, is psu,J.e or n. ,/../>, in its ^econdm-y
or (fcr/i^ec^ meaning. . m^'"'^-^'"' ■ , i*:^^ >.„t
Aud to soul or .l.irit, not mftely the n.o.al M"- '.»=''. l""'
.ISO the sense, an,, .ho cnotional a„.l in.eUortua iacult s
are ascribed. Strikin,. .uct ^ut.riaUsts tl>e 4,«.. (to
which ».,;/ ascribe cverythi5gf#n«t so nu.ch as once men-
tioned from Genesis to Itevela.ion. Xor has the M,"
:; h contains the brain, a'.Vy nK-ma, or n,onil .aenU^s
scribed to it. •' Vi„io„s of the head are "'-'l^-l f •'-.
iv-'IO etc.), l-lainlv l>ec.u.se the eyes a.e .n it. lil.t no
;i;.n.al or moral qualities, no foculties besi.le. are ever attr-
■ i Mo'not'.say this as .lo.btinK ,he result of "«'" •'•«-=^™t";-
Vthis resnect. Uut, as fully allowi,,,- that the t.ram iS. he .
i^,me„t of the intellect, it makes only , he uurn- str.k.ng he
Ivin^hich the Spirit oftiod ,oe. back „1 't';";;'- "->> •
„r,;apto that of which i. ,-.. .K rely ihe oraan ^tdl no e so,
Sse feelings and facui.ies are attributed hgnra Uvely to
the hea^, the" bell,, the bowe.s„the kidt.eys trems) the
WO„,b,and the flesh in ^-eneral. but never .. the ^-f_^^
at' the *i.uarks of Kobert^t belbre e,.ed, and see how th.
■ . S»r:e„ara,e or .eparabl^i^ Mr. lU,!.....' --, - '^ ."- '''-J""-'
fnril.er appeal to 1 Cl.roii. xii. .TJ. J-U-xxxn. 8,and 1 .ov. xx.x. -„as
,vr,nM rr^ad for l.ims^lf tb.- text'- in .lucstion.
( »
\.
m-
SOUL AXD SPIRIT. . ' §5
Wisdom Of God raels the insane folly of wbuld-be philoso
phe.rs. lie Avho forek^^w all these self-sufficient speculations
has>^poured contempt upon them by utter silence; while'
oxcop|;,, the li-urative- lan-uagc alluded to, all the faculties
of man are attributed to what their science of course ^annot
detect, the unseen sx)ul or spirit. They may correct the
AVord mdced, and t^ey are bold enough to do so, by their
m8re perfect knowledge ; but there stands the fa/3b, let'them
m^e^jit how they can. •
But moreover in proclaiming these attributes or functions
of tho^pint and the soul, there is no looseness of langua^
much less confusion. The mental faculties, emotior^.kcn-
sual appetites, etc, are ascribed to soul or to spirit with the
utmost exactness and the most unvarying harmony: It is
to this point that I would call i^ost earnest and special at-
tention. We ^all find in every case that intelligence and
judgment belong to the spirit; the affections, desires,
appetite^, etc.-^o the soul. I place before my rek
passages, or alt the varieties of them, upon whicht
ment may be fofm{||* « ;
And first, with regard to spirit (rwac/i or 2>/*ewm«) .
^ Gen. xli» ST' : (Pharaoh'i^, spirit was troubled. '-
Judges viii. 3 ^ Their spirit was abated towards him.' ' f
Psa. cvi. 3:5 : Tliey provoked his .spirit, so that he spake un«d-
- visedly. f^ - / ^
Prov. xiv. 29 : 'Ho that is hasty of spirit exalteth folly.
Isa XXIX. 24 : They that erred in spirit shall come to under-
standing.
Ezck. i. 21 : ^ho spirit of the Jiving creature w^ in the wheels
Mark.viii. 12 : He sighed deeply in Lis ^pirit.
Acts xvii. 16 : His spirit was stirred wthin'him.
1 Cor ii. 11 : What man knowth the things o.f a man, savethe
spirit of man wJuch is in hitn. /
. Rendered in our version, "miqd'*^' : " ■ ^' .
Prov. xxix. 11 : A fool uttereth all his jnind • ' ^
Ezek. xi. 5 : I know the things- thjit^tome into your mind
XX. 32; T hat--'- ' ^' • ^
.•y^r'
w h ich com^^h into your mind.
Dan. V. 20 : His min-l linnlpncd in prhlo.
$¥
I.-
, L
111
ill
66
FACTS A>I) THKOUIES AS TO A VVTlT&E STATE.
"Understanding" : Isa. xi. 4.
" Couracjc" : Josh. n. 11.
Now hcre'it Avill require no lengthened examinatioix to
see that the spirit is presented in Sbrij^ture as the seat of the -
mind or undenstandbo/,' tin we have just seen it to be some-
times even translated. The passage from 1 Cor. n. 11, is^
indeed the mbs%.j)ositiVe assertion of it that can well be ?
" What man knoweth tiae things' of a man, save the spirit of ;
man which is in him?" Here the spirit of man in the man
is that part of him to which all intelligence is referred.
Hence we mav know what to thwk of the knowledge oi-^
honesty displaved in su'ch a statement as the following from
one of Miles Grant's writings: -In all the 100 passages m
the Old and the JiS.V in the New ^Fe^tament, where these »
words occur, we do not find one that teaches that when
this spirit or breath is in ihan, it is tjie thinking, accountable
part, or that it ever did or ever will think. Why is the
Bible wholly silent on thig point ? Why are we not taught
somewhere that the ruach or pneumfb is the real man?'^'
Mr. Grant of course .'idopts the usual c(>nfusif)n of the breath
of life with the spirit of man, and I do not 'mean 1 5. assert
by any means, that the breath of life is the " real man.''
' But to his latter question Tdo most positiyely and distinctly
answer that the Bible does teach that the .spirit of man is-
the conscious thinking part, and tliat his not seeing it is only
due to his own blindness, not to its not being there.' " It says .
most definitely and distinct ly,.lhat the "man" which knows
the "things of a man" is '- the .s;//?W/ of man, which is IN' v
him." There is no escapi' from its i)lain speakin.g^ It
speaks so plainly i,ndeed that Mr. Grant has se<,'n it best to ''
. ignore its testimonv in his pami)hl<}t just referred to ; Hnd it
'' is hL^ silence that is to be remarked, and not the silence of
the Scrii>tures. ,
This ''si.irit of man,' then, cannot be with Mr. Grant
either an *' influence " or '' a state of feeling," or the " atmos-
' phere or breath of life." tl caimot be Mr. Morris' //>-
-.i_
* Spirit ill Mail. pp. •"!, 32
^
f \
.I' -
u
w
■^: '
»~
■^■■
SOt'L ANI> SPlttlT.
lan.
K'tly
in is-
only
says .
lows
? IX
It
\t to •
ml it
'M of
U
«3P
67
«a^«ro (or obc. all uncoWvortod men ar| born idiots), or
motu.. and cuno^ions-of tho.soul." NofitiK simply wLat
. the words dedarcva c<^ns(.ious intelligent exJMenee ^n the
1^2^;"' mT ^'^ "^"f >'^ »'- intelligence of Suman things
• isdnc. ^ "./'"^ man knoAveth the things of a man, save the
si'iuiT OK mX.v which is IN- him ? " , • "
y Passages which also identify, the spirit as the seat of the
mmd or understanding, I have already <iuoted. It needs not
wr"'"' them here, except to show how other nses of the
wc^d are <l.n.^d from this one. Thus, .in Joshua ii. li,and
. 1, It IS used for « courage," tlK3 connection of which with
presenceoi,.;..r' is familiar to all. Andin Judgesvi^l
^.s used tor , ganger/' which is again the judgment of the
T I J """ 5^1«^^ "Pon what presents itself to it as evil
Another usp of the word, which also we hav^ in English, for
hop..vaun.gten^^
spir t, a sp.nt of pnde,^' etc., seems derived from the fact
of the.spmt1>emg m man the higher part, andthe ric^htful
governor of the n.an-^wha?, in^Wt, characterizes him
^ow letus gather, in a simlla^ay, some passa-es as to
the s^ji^an.! the diflerenc. will l^t once ..p^re^
ihus It is the seat of the affections : > , ^ . . *
f r\'''''?SiJ^'" '^^"l^^ »^e'^^ l^th fo^^our dau^l^ter
^^|..Ak xvnui^Tho soul c^^^tha^ w,3 kniff^to tllT ^^uj^f
,«^;,Psa. xlii. l:'«opauti?thmy^l after theo^O^
Y^^\ ^ ■ ^ ^'"*^^' ^y '«oal thirstcth for Thee. >
Ixxxiv. 2 : My soul longeth for the courts of the J5
^ - cJT^ ' O W ""! '"^''''"*'^ '"' '^" ^""Sing it hath.
«^ant..i. t : o Iliou Avlioni my soid loveth
V ft^\?^'!:^^; With mi^soulhave I desired fi.oe in the night
^ken.^: A swor^shon pierce through thine own sou^ '
Hcb. X. 38 : My soul shall have no pleasure in him.
As it loves, so jt iuibs:
Lev.
xxyi. 15 : If
your soul
2Sani. V. 8: The blind
XI. 8 : :\ry soul loath
/,. .
'^Bj^
It
compassionates :
*r
<) •
08 FACTS
la soitl
Judges X,
^^Qb MX. ^ --^^f °^
?[f>.
"tJTUK^: .BTATUi
V » ■" Tl
^v
V ^
'..,'»
li
tt#i grieS^edfJrjiljfi misery v>f^^ ,
ieat df;>8ts : ? ^' § ^ [ ,%L ^ ^' \'}^
. la :>fut liis scwf d^retK m'*hat ho doelh.
t^^Pid wiekcd boasteth 'of .'Jiis soiil's desire.
t3i'f Flfshly. lusts which ^r against the scfoljj^
ifetitesf.pven, of the bo^ : , , '
fak cvli/'lS : Their soul jxbhoiTol;]^! manner of meat.
i#roW xij;. 15 : An idle soul VarJl s^r hunger. " , ,
li ,"^*''xxv. 25 : As cold watersi to> t'^Mfty soul.
' i kxviLJ : The full soul loatheth ^\ioncycomb. ^
■ iWaU xxii. 8 : His soul hath al;»pdtit^j
liain f ir: MeattoreUovethe^souL .•,
L'^ke xii. to.: Soifl . . take,thiue caa^^t, drink/and be merry.
So Its derWe^a: pjeahings are : '\ '
- ■' "^ F.ppI vi. 7.
xxxiv. IG.
' : JOB. xuv. 1^, iu»t-. >"• 't ^r' '^- , , .
■Mind?^ in 'the sense of ^viU orl.jontion, not of the under-
standing : 1 Sam: ii. 35, 2 Kings ix: ld#^ „ • .
':. A 9li-ht c:«imination of tho^en)i)assages wHl serve to
aemonstrate the truth of niy fornk^r assertion as to the soul h
lee andfunctions. U is hcfe seen plamly as the Imk bu-
Len the spirit,.i,a the, body : ^m^t""^ f^^t
, of thelatt6^:THe sense of " nf||| ofVen given 19 it.n
•;.Scrininre is plamly a meaning
' In jHLls thp (llirerencc be"
inlHRiost marked way, an
maintained everywhere thro
Still objection has- beoii
Roberts has even ventured th
trary,, « spirit" and " soul '^^re' ' .,,, ^
" niostindrscriminatemaunor.' "v inst«i>cas Vjko ». 40 4-^^
^Mysoul dbth magnify the Lord, ana my s|>.rit hatb rejmded
•' - : .. p ut lirw1o»>s not tell us how this shows
from this
rit
very fact,
nd spirit is preserved
ist thdrough c^jQHls^ncy'
£the;Biblev^ . ,' '■ V
this statement. Mr. :
lion that, oh the con*
>jj||tQrchangeably in the
%■
tis)f
♦Y-* ■
«t'
God my Saviour.
ray
their indiscriminate us^.
express how fiiUyitsloBj^in
m
nl doth magnify'' pay well
;{^UtisM;; wWIe '^^jnyspin(^'
5*.
r\
^
>> ■»
^, mini
SRSSW
.r^ "^S^S^^^^^.jM^Jl^^^fJi^^',
.#
.1"
m^
SOUL AND SPIRIT.
M
H'
t" ttffthe 1 "^ f"™ «:^a„dboth heart and mmdthn.
. testify the complete ,vay I'n which the knowledge of a
pra.se There .s so l.ttle opposition here to the view aWe
«wen that .t alone giv., fulness and definiteri^ss to whit
Zn^o^'"''^ hand, Wn.es a poor and „nn.eaning
; He goes on:- --E-;,-- ■■■•■■ -^ ,-■■•■_- ■
" But the fact can bu^hown from the very passages which Mr
tent ha, qnoto,, : for instance, out of nine .^.oteSTolhow tw
to do with mnotton, such as anger, fcnr " cV «« a *
■ ebse e.a.ni„.a.i„„ show, tho„ To t'oaX'.haTthc sfirit, f/a^S
onndcrstaudmg.has to do with trouble, anger. i-rovC Z
II ^s^L- " " ^^"' """"' o"'? to do 'i«. the exercise
«
Ylt%^' .ff ""V''^''"'^'*"^^'"'"^?™''™'! the theory.
H« shows at by mfrrj-ing from it "two survivin'., W»J
Tnl^'Sw ^^"''^■''•■'•'"'""''•'=^<^"^""'"^'-' Spirit, so.^
tSklMjr; ?"", " ■"" """ " P-»''nality," and ccrtain-
■ m*fiM ! '"1 """"" """■ ^'"'- ^' J'^'t'' the body
_ clrojIS for flSo tmie be.ng, out of this tri-unity. Spirit and
' I! sTk ■ '"^'" '**'* ■*'■'' r""- '^"'V'i- In life or in
. fclh the myst#,o«s n^ks«rfe«.ection are preserved, and
f (.n Mr. K. _s- wordih^ ^{ ,,), the spirit is the thinker, and
the sou t^ ./W.,.^|ei,> -are A indop*8ent of each
other,_to„ pers™,Utio.,, ,,«„.. ^.j,,,^ knowledge of the
spmt becomes tlJporUrfof.tte^o„l. thS aflW^s of I
l*r!fiH1 ;r'r?°"?'*^^^°^i"*-- «fB-interkpe„dence '
!*.eh Mr. R-Iays hofif of .isaKiinst the view :_" He shhed
■» S^ f ""fl-n^on at all. The Iang«.ge does no mor^
»nfonnd soul and spirit than it ,loes hod,, and spirit, if
V
\
■\
70 FACTSAXnTlIKORIKSASTOAPt-rrRESTATi:.
rlgiclly (™a u.,„utnrally) cc^truc-.l. But it ^vu« n.enU,!
troll hat i,ro.lu«..,l .!,.■ rigl., His xi""^ .l.sc.r.nng th
Lvon Pharaoh's spirit «as in lilce ...aimer trouUoa. ...
h s e^ because he couia „ot i..ter,„-et his . reau. .. U.so
cases, suppose the spi.-it .as ..,i,.,l, ^vh.v co„ . -^^
alccrns the thiugsQ" a ,.,a„ is ,igh.., ..a...e.l '-^^ ^
the trouble. The so.,1 i., I'haraoh s case, sm.l a,.,! bo 1) n
the Lord-s, .night he i..volve.l; but the evpress,o..s arc per-
fectly ppr«p,-i:te, a»,l the ,1is.i..c.i«.. between soul and sp.r,
^ll thin, 'a real signi«ca.,oe, which for n.ater.ahs.n docs
""so I t.vc shown ai,..ve how the .pi.it in con.,ee.,a w*,h
..n„°cr ■• (as in Jn.lges viii. :i). I'sa. evi. :!:i, an,! P'ov x.v.
.9 Irrreally to l.e c'lassclNvith .his, asS!»evi.U..,t; an,l Acts
vvii C is nea.lv relatcl and easily h.leH.g.ble.
mt let n.eask Mr. Kobens, /,.« l,e fo.u.V- hate, love,
iJta,, et-..e." i.. Sc.-ipn.,-e xscril.ed tothe spi.-i. V It .splan.
"has not .. we sh'„..ld hhve hehrd of il. Does ...^ h.s
Lk the.,, as if the '• ,l,o.,ry ■ had so,.,e lo„..datlo., .„ fact .
As to the soul, Mr. R. asserts that 1 he ,p.otat.<,..s-^
, 11. ll,.,t tl„- ' soul • ..!■ af- liijlle h:is !H inlnh t.. ll.,
"showasa whole, that tlu s"in .- i .\. ,„, ,, ,;.) ,
with hi-her actions ot the mind as th,- spirit : tmu 1 -'■ >■ ;'; '-
, ■ Kviir " ■ in all these, which are thef.i-st three. inotat.o.s,
■ r", ; w"",;? ihal a 1 h-es .ft,.,- divine thfes,,a..d therefore that
L p;'^, d ..owl! I'e' n..t this ,.oi..t i» W''''«-v-;'-';:
1';^,, the soul he without ^'""^^'■^f^^':'!^:^ \^^^.
U 'That mv sonl knowktii right ^^i■ll ,1 "»^ u. i ,
LXtisplea«a,,t to thy so.-,/; rr.-.v. ..iv. M. .^o shall th,-
fo,<,«-/«/./.- ..t "--■»■''"»' he t" thy soul.', , .
That is Mr.-lfl^d,c.-fs disproof ..f the whole a.-gun.en..-
I.Usyto..owhereaga.. h..isn.u.H-ean,^.^^^ ^^
and that the \k'vv i» .|ucsti.)u t.n
of iru'aiiiiig to thi- texts.
For, iw to theiirst three «|U«.tati<)iis
i
]u)\v imjJossihU' woUld
i
SOUL sANI> SPIRIT.
71
I ! ^ .fT- ^ P"""-'"" my """.''after Thee," "my „,w
th.rsteth, > " ,„y ;„/«,, ,o„geth." Certainly it h;, „e"er been
coniended that the soul has not to do wUh divine th^^
contra,, ,t „ the importance of their gettinj; into the
heart, and not being in the mind only, tl.atl TheJ^etto he
.ither tevts .„ obscure to Mr. Kobcrts. The kno,v'edl of
w.dom,„,«, be thus .sweet to the soul, in order.top S If
t-xpianation ot tlie last tWo mmfofi^iSSu o
.....i,.„,..__ 1 , :J ^ quotatior«- So ^ye can well
«1(
.s
O
lotlgo is not
..n.lerstan,! h„^K "t«ft the soul be Jritbont,,
merely superficial and .iowerless bnV ki>, ,„,
turned against himself. '""'''' ""'^^^ff™ are easily '
' statern'r!^' f' ^"'\ '"' " S™^^'^' i-^o-i-^'ent with his own
:"3:d .!i.,t; ^;i::rr*"'" r'"'-^ >-'^"
by "body, life and mi' ■■',;:: t :;:'"" T '•''•'> '
'/-. .,„./, he idetitifie, the:"sp"t"\ tiX":::;^ jt'
beve, H,dced, it is inconsistint with lis system and L
«a.d ..o, but th.ardo..s not alter the f-,,, 7^7?' ""'*: ''*™
m.anilestcoutr,adictiontohi,bti;- '"' "'"' '"^'^ ^"'^ '"
..'.r^.;':';;":::!;!^ ?■;-—' opposition, .^t
while the .spirit is i^scriptu; ;,;fcr:,rtr""°"; T
»ul i.,.the sea,#.me i^eclions ri 'h ' or ton.^f V'" 1
l^al.e,Ju*sts, and ev#<,f:tlA„„,.,iL „.,!*'"■«• "U""'- *
ii)petit^3of (hebody. 1^
i?r
■
P
' - f
1
»-t
1. ' V
1
M''
§•
'j;
*»♦'
«u
]PACT8 AND TH
AS TO A FUTUKE iiTATE.
# CHAPTER VIT.
so VI. A.X D SELF,
V*
hi*
J!^ We may now proceed srill further in proof of the distinct
" ^Wieanlng and hanncMUous use of these words in Scripture;
'^ "-'Wjh added harptiony discovered being o^Apurse new pi ^ '
of t,he reality of man's spiritual being, ar^oftlfc coinple
TSeriptui'al recognition of the fact. -*
W-e have seen the intimate alliance of soul and^ody, the
very appetites (as we speak) oftlitj body being ascribed to,
the soulA Thi%ii^l^cs it .lltt|c wonder thflit "soul" and
' "life" eh^HM^be I© far iden^fied as to be expressed even by
*^*^ 4feP^ W*^*^' 'H^liat/oroiind have we from Scripture,
indee^or speaking of any ''vital principle" a})art from the
g(ju(i? bsecms plain that there 4s niTsuch thing; and that
" life ''^Sit the ptrj^dddh vjSjine- OqJ:/ loith the soul. The
sool- IS Se life while iiaU^fes in coipwtiofi with the body.
The life is -(so to sp^j^'ti^e I'HEXOMKlfeCl. soul. It is no
wo&dei*, then, ^fet-'''^^ ^^'" in^*an"^S^ should easily in Scrip-
ture xm into c|Pln(^ei;,and be^both covered by the same
Greek^or Hebriip' wond. - ,
Thife they do so is seen in a passage which Mr. Constable
*hafl very strangely himself brought forward to show the in-
fluence of " Platonism " in moulding the common translation
^ of our "Bible. He would have tlu; word' ;>s<<cA<:, which
' stands for soul and life in Lulce xii. 10-23, uniformly rendered
" iile '* aH through. Tojhost readers this wilbsurely appear
impossible and aKsilrd. l4ncy a man represented as apos^
trophizing his 7//;^ thus : "././/^ thou hast much goods, etc.,
' . . .take thine case, eat,, drink, and- bp merr/"! Yet, on
the other hand, who can avoid the conuccliou with the moral
. of Jthis very story, '' Take no thought for your life " ? Instead,
then, of manifesting the Platonisni of th*' translators, it does
>J^%
JI-SW
%}
«OUL AXD SELF.
78
as r ltd •„ at tjlt T "'^'""'^■ '" "" P™-"' '««*.
(1 Cor. xv 44, ..P"""' ''"''y of the resurrection
With tho°pn.c.icai «fe whirt^v^ ii rrr"*'' '''«•'
WAV ' Tir« u -^ ^ ^^ the flesh in a SDecml
.word in Hebrew for either •™J|o t^^v^ V"'^ "■"'^
/'«-/,. i. ^sed correspon W|y^°, f:,'"*^ l'^^'"^
the emphatic I or he " \?: T^JT^ '' "^'' ^* '' """'
of a peLn is but the pe^lrhHf '''"^''"''■- '"^ ^-' "
•^^:^:^^^^^!::::^:^^' T "°* ■""-■■ '
" sniilQ " ;,» « , mode ot speech, we speak of
^Prt
again
rw '■■'"""■'""■"''' ■■'•"■■-'""■s/"'"™,
IS iisod but mice (Pro
but once. Fo
" &««o«," Eccl. Ji. 3.
self"
V. xxiv. 8),
lit. "faces." Methim
we find, beside nephesh, only
i
--■^ p •
once
74 FACTS AND'THKOBIES ASTO A FUTuUbSTATK. V
yet we do heiiove in the immortality of tlie soul in spito of
that. Som(;how to ns, as to X\u< writers of Scripture, the
man who dwells in this "natural" body, is prciminently a
"soul." "Soul" characterizes him, whiK' in the ttesh at
least, in some sense beyond spirit or body. The body he
possesses is a soul body ; the life he lives a soul-life; the
man himself is a " living spuhV /^ "
Can we explain this identification, while yet the body is
what is most evident to the senses, and the spirit the.highei-
and intellectual part, and which .really separates jiian, from
the beast ? I believe We can very intelligibly ^v^iplain it.
Fof, as to the body, what is it apart from, that which ani-
mates and .connects it with the sc1}ij|! ^r6iind, nay, which
holds even together its very component^^>arts in one organic .
whole? It is the soid witli A\iuch' w^ have i'>ra"ctically to
do; our intercourf^e is of soul with soul; when the soul is ,
gone, tbe body is but t^he relic of what we once knew.
And even a^ to the' spirit, its connection with •theputer
world is also by the soul. The aperture of knowledge is by
the senses. • The word we have before seen, in VCov. xv., to
'be translated "natural," is twice olsewhefe, tr;uislated "«Gn- ,
sual" (James iii. 15, Jude 10), and is really " psycluc," from
^Hche, soul. The Moul is.tlms really thi' V//:' hx3re, the man
hmself as part of this creation. , Soul/life, self, are so near
akin to one another as alniost to merge', in olio ; but the key
to ^e liarmony is iii no: wise the inaterialist^c conception,
biit the reverse. ; >";-■'• ^ . ^
And this is cohfirmed in a remarkable way by„the use of^
Scripture^ which, when -speaking of the disejnlwdicd, state, '
Identifies mm ^fMAix/y>/r/^ rather than with his soul. Not
that what kills the Ibdy kills the soul. This, as we haver
seen, the Wordempliaticidly dienfesi Butlyet if the present
life be emi^hatically the soul-Ufe-^the living man the living
soul— death is the epd of this |bnu of existence. The soiil.
though iiot extinct in death, may wrellbe^^Huid, according to
the true pl#se in %v% xxiv. 17, 18, to be « smitten " by it.
And, wWl^ dsath the "soul departs' from tbe body.
^
SOUL AND HKLF.
•S6 r
P
75
■ tZ"'J;o ''i'"" "m' ;•""" "' "-'-«<» from death
comt, mto ,t again (1 Jv.ngs xwi. 21), man in tho diiu
en.b«,l.ecl s.ato .i,„ply i, constantly and co„.^i.ton y a ^ir a
not a soul ,v,,l, two exception, only which limitthi, ta a
• Tel^ ft "r^ ".' "'"'" ""'y '""■^ convincingly "h!
realty of the ilwtinction we are making. - >'''■'"'-
The two evceptions are Acts M. »f („hich in onl» .!,„
quotat on of ,.«a. wi. 1..), „n.I Uev. vi.9 Bo , I fhl
evidently refer to .leatl, and the connection with the body
. The ,oul, under the altar arethe-'soul, of thL that We
8la,n for the word of Clod," ->mtte„ " HonlTwWch '^
hen (or hades) no less „ connoclcd with the tlouHit of
the partner-body from which it had been sundetd but
wh.ch .snot al owed ,„ see 'corruption;' in thet^l' .
Ordinarily, the commpn (a„auage of the day, whichleifa'
oMeparted .;,/„■,, ^a „f ,;/„„„,, („„,,, ,Xi the t'on
eqmvalent ,.f the same >™rd), is based upon the oldS
Senptural ..sage, ; A ««piri,," as in Acts Liii. », (T^^e '
common term for • one p:.s,ed into the unseen tate The
Phnnsees confessed their belief in ." spirits," caretll, dl
ri^, >K , ''"""'''''' """•='''* "«^ "«n Lord a '•■sph-it ".
■t^fj'lrr''' f'»>"»''l-i' '■•■'"' not- flesh and
a" '«,l -v -^ .',''" '"•"«'".<•""» on the other hand
^•'leparfs o (,„d il^u gave if (Eecl. xii. 7);' and the I ord
commc.,ds IF.s,„int to 0„. Ka.hcr (I.uke. x '■ ii. 46,, S opheL
Jl to I,.m who I., the l^ey. .,f dcnh and ha^es (Ac.r™
Again, the 5' finiritml "hn.Jtrr.jsr" -" "• ' ^ '
^cooft, -^t,he two oomhinofj'— '• onnnof inhjvrlt *i;« i-"^ i •
nf r;r,.|." /I ri,y ^... <,.mnof jnncrit fhf» Icrno^flom
ofGcKl°"n n
or . XV. ;)0)
r
'■ I
r
I
^ We are ;.„fi,.ii,ati„g here what may seetn r.Hh.rto l,oh,„.
toaluture stage of our i„,„.i,,, i„„ i^- „„„„„, , i'""-
-^
i;
*\'
•M
'W
i ' *,
".-■j^ ■
■•'xw-^tw
■»
126
.;-ip.
ik''
Till) A tube is prepared as pre vionsly described, fi'om a Manufacture
solid ingot. It is heated, wlicn turned and rougb bored, to fenerallyof a
,tbe proper heat, and is phmged into a bath ofrape oil.
Toughening strengtljj^ns the steel very much, but it warps EfftiJ|8 of
it a little, and frequently cijuses the surface to crack, so it
has to be turned and bored true after the operation. . , . ^
■':,. The B tube' is composed of t\vo single and slightly taper The B. tube.
coils,/\inited as before described. It is then turned ; the ,
inside is then gauged so that the ste^Hiube may be finished
' to correct size, allowing OOaTins. at muzzle, and '002 at
' otlrer end, for shrinkage. ^
It is ea8ier(to turij to gauge than bore to gauge, hence
the reason th^Jnside of a toil is carefully measured. ' .
The 'coiled* breech piefce ^consists of two united coils. OoUed breech
The breech end has a screw, cut for the cascable. ^^
G coil consists of a breech coil, trunmdw ring and muzzle
coil, united as before described.
N.B. — Double and treble coils are not now use^the bars
being inade of much Ji^rger' section. ' ^p
The coiled^breech piece is first shruiyk oh to the A tube.
A shoulder is furnjed on its^jpfiuzzle end to receivd a similar
recess, cut in the B tuhJe, whi^^s then slirUnfe-on. . • * - ^
The cascable is now screwed in, so that it|te|s compressed
by the C cqII, wfeich is novv .shrunk ofl over au, and the gim
is ready for (1) gas escape being made, engraving, finishing
bore and rifling. Venting and (2) sighting^ marking, &c.
The gas escapfe" is cut through the threads of the cascablfe.
The. other operations/^ cannot be, with advantage, de-
scribed,* we not being able to see the actual operations.
The gun is supplied with two tangent sights, "a centre
hind sight and three trunnion sights. "" ; '^ ' '
' Larger natures of ^uns are made on similar principles,
The cast patterns of the IS ton and larger guns, Ijave
^ ^muzzle" coil shrunk on separate from the jacket, to which
it is not welded, and it becomes the 1 B coil. .
piece.
C Coil.
'I'M
Putting
together.
'#.
-Larger
nato^eB.'
t»?
,1 •■-
■1
I-
mi
r.
t:i
<."'■■■■
1 -s:
^n-.
I'
n
■ S' 1
I ! I
lit
76
FACTS AND THEOBIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
v drder that we might have a full view of the Scripture teaoh-
.„\!^r,' iDg as to what man is. There is surely a consiste|icy in all
• , thisu which is the consistency of truth itself We shall
. pursue this further in .the next chapter. In the meanwhile
"^ we may take uj> the objections of Mr. Coilstable to that
view cJf " soul " which we have been maintaining here.
Thus he complains of the various translation which in our
common version is given to the word. He argues that the
translators, "despite l-lielr Platonic views, are compelled to
X give * animal life,' as a true ami proper (jense for that word,
which they generally tran^^Iutv' by a term which they suppose
to mean something infinitely higheir in- meaning \than ' anipial
life.' Just as if a wordt-an have fur ifi^'}>Mhiap.if smue two
nijeanings wholly different from' each 6th4r I '' '" '
J Where OUT tr4ri$lators have givseji this rcridering of animal
liiie I cannot $nd. Mr. Constable's object in intrddiici&r
" ablmal " in^o it^ is plain, Jhowever. ' It is to let t;is know thai
»oxd-Vfe (if I may use the expres&'ion) is common %» the
lower animals along with man.' and to let us iiifif ^"^^^^tk
can be no higher^a thlugin u.s than in the •■ beast.*; which,i^|f
ish." This is to decide the question of tha,p„ours immoilalT .
ity by sleight of hand. I'ht-, inference in rtot a Just ohe. Xity
" all flesh," as the apostle ;^gues, " is" not x]\y,sfhne flesh."*
,how much less need All snol-< i^e the sarne.V , Why n'ot'say -
of all ''^ife''€;Ven as much, ('\cept that it^ fdlv uotjNJl fee UM)*-
transparent ? Therefore , the a<lditional word/ dropped m,
the responsibility to be assumed by thc' trajp.'^lato^s, While 7 ''
Mr- Coristable i*; its author ! ' - * ^/ ". '< -^V
I have shown al^io that •' ioui \ \^ really the prihiafy
meaning of both the- Greek and Hebre-w- words in Scripture, ,
and yet how closely vonnocted tife ^ s^^ro'odary meaning of
" life " is. The v^ ire certainly ii^^l^^^^ ''contradictory,*'
. however little it is possible 'S,
.Mr. C may^urge, indeed,, that
after tl^jBm, vary tjiie translation
escape from the "difficulties attefi
y\
.0
please, ii* Arder to ^
npon.'im J[a,(pncsi), eoi^-
fitruction eif>it. Jle.does adduce Afatt. ft;vi. 'in^ liO, and I-.uke
'if
, *\ .
« ■ Sin
B
■4..
l-
11 .
11
e
,t .
r
e
I.
,1
I
% :
\
e
I '■
%.^
I
"i *
7 •
o
V' ^ «
e.
«« «:
f
"■«>
'■0\
SOUL AND SELF.
'77
■ _ - •\i
at 19-2S M eramples where psuche ^stands fof life a«d
sonUnd where he claims it |jmst at leifst be u'nifiirmlyjrM,.
• ,, ® , 7"' ^'T^f'^y =<*■> that* s to,*o latter passag^itis
clea lyunpossjble Did any oiocveraddrpsssuchin toper
.. sonabtyas h,s " life," and bid it "take ita'-easef' X? T^
to .8 the rendering Mr. Constable demands r- The same
^rformuy of rendering won.d i„ other places gi* stiU moTe
^^'■^^'^^-^i' '"'l "'• «' ^--Jy «>ticed„wher.
;.:, .w.pd and "spinfare the same word. The rISle S«.
wonld apply.is in short not without many an e.ocptln the!'
e.oept.ons being determined by the conation '^ tuf S
word .s found. In JIatt. xvi.o,,, 2a.Alfo?d and others who
a^e mScently orthodo.v, render the last verse as Mr'lcV
would do, Without the Icaw idea of i^s being « forbidden by
L*inLut' ^?''""^'^'-^>W-hich the parallel pai!
sage in Luke ix. 2o seems evidently to show to be the true
«n^,thpt ■' soul " is here, as .,o, often in the. Old TestaLiT '
tU synonyn, of .«// "His soul" in Hatt. li ool^ter
■„ preted by the passage fn Luke to be " himself "The te«
of ,h,s world or the next. He must be as a man of th^
' Z ; , , ""' * '°^*' '— <•'- ; >"* 1 do not see how it
could be bettor expre..sed in Engfish than It is in the way
rendenng of p.suche by life and soul, a rondcrin. whieh w^uld
bootjj, madmissible, if i, required a^meani^g- for theZ^d
.wh.ch ^-as „ot thoroughly.cstablished eWh^re ■ '
Mr^ ConstaWo has produced some pass-ages to show that
■ m aTtlr T ' r- ^''"'"^ '" ^^y ^'"^ anticipaUnt
■ y* ,^ 't", f ''J«' has been already sonwwhat l>etbre us it
wiU be welljio cansiderUonr here' ' ^ .- '
' Lef^flAg^'i'f ''■','' ''"""^•°'' "^^ "^^Ss forward
Himmar ,o which",i,„„d; he sa,: :<h: 1^ 1,^""™'
With tKp<o T,. • • T . ■•' Hebrew Scriptures.
^With^he.e hejom. Joshnat« dostnuMioM of "all tho souls"
h
*
4 -I
e:^;."".
>>■
*.
y-
1 1
, /
I;
m
. ' ■■«■•.■
fl^^^
I
s a
\:-\.
■«.
78
FACTS AND' THEORIES AS TO A FUTgKIv STATE.
-1^1
in; the cities of Canaan (!), and the phrases ** my soul shall
live " (Cren. xii. 13),aDd ^*let iny soul die" (Numb, xxiii. 10)-
Heiu^ges also Jol>'s soul choosing death (vii. 1.5), and Elihus
. words (xxxiii. 22) : "his soul tlraweth near to the grave.''
' Alsothfit "in the H3rd j^salm, >vo are expressly told that the
souls e\vn of Ciod's perjiple are exposed to death ; mid in
another psrl^Im (Ixxviii. 50), that the soul is not '• spared from
, death " ^ "W'hile t1\e final end oi; the i^ipkeij in hell . . . . is de-
"scribed as the death of the wnful so.iil (Ezek. xviii, *|()).
I- Again as to the ^Tew Testament, he contends that Mark
iii. 4 ^pnld read, '*t<)> save a soul or to kill hf and tjo Luke ,
ix. 54r^6, Acts |;v. 2^),,Rom.\xi. ;?. He urges Rev. xvi. 3,
"jevery living soitl died in the sea; "" ami adds, |* Once more >*
Johff telU us that aliijSouls, -vvhether of ihc right erms or. tl\iv^
p wicked, jyfter death <v>/////i«i' irithotiflifc \u\i\\ the resurrec-
tfbn. In Re\%x.v. 4, fie tells us that, in th« |»rophetic vision,
of the, future with vvhieh he was favored, he saw ^ the souls
of them that were |yi^e^ded " in aliKbi'i HtaA . He goes on
• in'verse 5 to speak i^. nfhe'r S',nl.-<. Tie tells us.jthat these
litter did not live again til) after a certain. j»eriod. Hence
we gather of the former that they hnU be+'u ji^ist'M^to life,
" i.'ei, had been without life, iir a con<liMon of .TcSrLKtill the
resurrection." iff
Mr. Constable's qwh- canon of interpretatif»n i, is. simple . •
enough,* "that the, word psuchc has evidently, wjieu 'Sj>oken
of as a cotistitiunt part, oi" huiiian nature, o//<: mi'ifartn
' m€(tnhi(f2^. This, he si^'s, is 'ilitj'.'" So that jn the, last quo-
tatioii theajMKtle Juhniells ijs, " I saw thc/Z/v-v of them that .^
were beheaded.'' etc.. " and thev.'" the lives, '• li\'('d/' He saW ■;
.' these lives, to use Mr, C* laniruage. " in aliviuirstate," 8o
y ih Rev.^ xvi. H. '• every' '^"'''"y ^'J'f — tlw ;word 'living!' '^
makes thing.s still plainer, Mr. V. thinks — " died in the. .sea.''
So Job spoke pf his life choosing tb-afti. Kliliu of its goiirg
tqi the grave, Abraham o^i is life living, and BalajXin of its ^".
dying; while )ie that kille'i tW^life of amanwasto be put,.
• to death, etc. This^ is all ordinaj-y and «piite intelligible,,
^ TRn^lisH :t'>^^lr. C-onstable. mimI whi<h (»ught.1o i-ommeiu^^';
A 1
%.'
SOtJL AX I> SELF.
-}'v" ■
y
* '
-,
^
**
' ■ ' ■ e
'. ' n ■
A 1
Its ".^
79
•^Howisittlwl.,1,., .loes not «ee th.;, impossibility of sa«h
rendermg., «„.l or, tho other hand ,l,a\ tWe is a iLtim^
difflellt f •"?" *"""■• W.ysh«„Id he have more
^Mio: '" T"' '" ""■^^""'""linS •fo.hua', destroying,
, .all.the s„„)s ,„ Canaap, 6r every "hying soul " dying i|
, , ^esea, «,an ,f it had ],eeA a newsppper i:ragn.ph L tf:
^h.pwreek. a„d •' not a son) saved - y Wonid this mgget
■: to h,„,, a., sj^ilar- language in «oript„re seems to do how
. . ^ro„g_o„r thoughts arc about the '■ salv«io„ " of "souls" ?
■■ "trte a „™7 "■ Tn ""'* '■°™'""'' t^'^'^tipn into :
Mfve.a soul or to kill Jt,". actually iutTOduein" the "it"
.. J^-here there i, none, t*.hri„g in ,i,c killing of a°so„Un he
, most sirikjpg way !vtV,,yi;s,,„,,d not b^ 'l^ '"there t
. . car, only argue upoh^is. pXip,c of unlfonnity" of meaning "
•The 'souls of yftsrHeheaded-.in Rev. ^^. preseflfs
b«t,htt e. mpre ,r,ffiA,!ty;for the reviving of the e souir s
*-P<-e«M«f^a -resurreclii,;." ' If«is ,Serefo^ir» i"
stance p^,!.^.u,e ,f ^„1 »f a „,anj-,r'tl,e man him,,.K which
I havealrealfy.relerWa to. Tlfs^completes the list of New
i^stamont. passages. . ■ ^^ -^^^w
r The fir.a frotii the. 04,1 testai^eiit (Lev. :«xiv. 17 1^) T
have alre:^y n.on-ea tp. The ,exp.<;sion here an^ll
where, as Gen. x;.M. 21, Dent. xix. CW, xxii 26 Xe.^^
14, is invariahlv ".v./////^/ the sonf" C 1 i ' *
>. ™i -, ''""«/vi'»<^ f^oui, aHd we have seen its
force. Tl,e veWHs nfct ,h^ true wor.l for killing, nor wouffl
here lie sense in speaking of killing ,he ///i^^ofT person be
■^:;^^' ''V'-'f — ',. ,*i„g 4r and'Xg tht
l.fe #^,tj.e hfp wouM he al, i„suR>rabl,. expression.
It 18 scarcely. „ce<lful again .»„ spealc of /oshua "Mv
«oul *all livc.'Met my soul ,1:,...'^^. ,o -lelive Xir s!Ll
iron, death," "Itc sp,^ed not theh^^oul fron. death.' "tri .
»
-^
n- 4 .
\ - ■ ■■ -■ 1
\ I ■
I ^ -5-
"JC
80
PACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTUKE STATE.
!.
I i-'
■'i ! -
aoul that sinneth, it shall die," are all similar expressions
to those we have noticed in Revelation.* Xor does Ezek.
xviii, 27 speak of punishment in hell, although commonly
taken in that way, but of\Divine government in the world.
Again, Job's soul choonhy/ doatli presents no difficulty :
how it should show that If dies, much more "becomes 'extinct,
Mr. Constable shoukl explain. In Job x.xxili. 22, were the .
common rendering cr.iTeet, the vivid poetry would soarcely
require so narrow an interpretation. Ti\xtshfti'hftth''M ppt
the "grave " : it is the" pit," as in Vers. 18^ 2^, 28^ 30,t th«
abyss, darker and itiorcd read than the grav'^.
This then is his whole argument. At the Very best super-
ficial, it is in mlilin- ciftse.s inconsi stent and _&elAdestrU'jtivc in ._
the extreme. His IJ^Hure is not Ironi want of will nor of
,^ mental ability : it is t^he failure of el^rog to overthrow truth,
and, thank Go,4, whatever the ddvocjite, f?Ul it must.
I
i
J L
CHAKfER VIII.
ERE reins
TTu: FAI
There renfiain yet 8om,e things to point out beforei the
harmony of Scripture doctrine" as to spirit and RQul- is prop-
erly before us. Tvpes indeed of the dlfFcrencc and relation-
ship between these two essential parts of man'-; being ai^e to
be found, I doubt not, in the human race .at Iar<>e.- ]^tan
and woman, in their characteristic', differfendes, ^»em to
pre^nt'very much the peculiar fi'.aturcs pf spirit' and soul ;
the one predominant hi mcntsl artivlty, the other in emo-
tional ; the woman formed /V th<' man, and each the ^eoin,-
- ., . ^ ■ ■ - - . . ' _^,
♦ Examples will bo f.rni'l withf ul oily U.riu-ulty in t.he01<l TcstaxnAit.
8ef> for in-^tfinrp L^r. xi. 1;). .Tosh, xxili. 11, Eslli. iv. 1.1,'ix. .'H/Jab xYiii.
4, xxxii. ::, J>s;i. f-v; is, Na.. v. 14, xlvi.' 'ZJaY. iii. 11. ,. -
t Oi-'" corruptiort,' (...< li.v'-.-^s.arijV of the body in^foly ; but '' pit'' is
ntore oai^Ij and tfio triy» uuku) ■ j, )\ofo.
I
_i L
:«f
, I .
• ■ 1
THE PAtL,
81
plemept of the other, made; for mutual support and re-
lationsliip, " '
The aaalo-y Way be traced further than this, however,
and gro ws^ si^ificance as we contemplate It. The man wa?
seduced thr&ujrh thfe woman, his judgment not astray, but
led captive bvhls affection.^. " Adam was not deceived;'
says the apostlV (1 Tim, ifi. 14), " but the woman being
deceived was iiLthe tr&nfegression." " The serpent be-
(juiled me," says %? ,woman. " The woman gave me of
the tree " (not beguiled me), sayjj Adam. Thus, as the man
was led by the womaVand fell by her, so was he, it is plain,
led by the a ffections of|he soid, agd with the soul the spirit
fell." « ■
It is always so. W\x^\x\\i^ language of the day, though
not of Scripture— the head\s seduced by the heart. " How-
can yo -believe,'; asks the LoW Himself, '-.who receive honor
one of another, and seek nolMhe honor \^iifeh eAeth from
God only ? •' Ami again— "tlkt they all might be damhed,
which believed nat the truth, iut " [mark the reason] « had
plefasure in unrighteousness " !|2 Thess. ii. 12). And so
.again, when therje is real ttmtn|to God, ''with the hecurt;^
not the head," « man believlth unto- Kighteousness"
(Rom. X. 10}. . V ' . ; iJb . ; '.' ^
Thus, though the spirit be ^% WWli astray as the ^oul, it is
thrmfjh the soul, as.wfeli a;^ \yifc|.it, itns sej^uced andl"^
fa^en. And the Avort| of ^GodjlinVts" own pCTfeet andwiS
derful way, ever ^eeps^n mijiid tlio Vistinction^ It proclaii^
.the iact that in-fallen man Iho spir!|t haa^5^eMecl its 8i%re^
matjy to the soul, ^nd that tluvft«atA-ur' ma^ is ^' s^^swaf "
or soul-led (^n^/«<>?) (r^^QKJI. 14).\ Imthe believer^ And"
. especially in thp f btoielcsH stat<v of%uclivthe;,,8|Jirlt ag#iii :
recovers ij. supremacy' >' ^^pirlt and iiriul and l)Ody '' ^
again in4he dlvi,i^e,j()riln-.„., """''' ';" ; :'' ' - ,•, "." '- .;-';;: r^y
Xor are tlu-se ^^''a^^'. I'l^-i'^^ ><':>ntaiy, expfei^sii^^
s(Wi|^ th1n<^ i^ ox|i^e^^se<T li^various,ways m the language ^
. Script ure. T us tjie v^;//, ;^ tli^^^^^^^t wal siate, is ideh-
•■ttfi0d^rwi>M,tO<f^th tluV:|iOUl; .T^lW
W^\
82 FACTS ANI> THEORIES AS TO A FUTUftS^TATE.
4" 4
i*^
times " will " in our oommon vorslon (l*(i:i. xx\ ij. ]:i, xli. 2,
Ezek. xvi. 27). . " Let hef go whither she mHI," is (in Beut,
xxi. 14) " let her go to hf^yacmi:' " Aha, s<) AvoiiU we have
it" (Psa. XXXV. l^f)), is "ahjij o/^'a>?/^/;' A^nd the^ ^xpres-
,. sioo, "binding tho soul Avilh li^>l)on<],*'"/? ^./ with a vow,
•. ' repeated ten timesin Kumh. xxx,, shows, how intimately a\ ill
and soul aro eonneeted together.' Thljl^ft is even so that
"the hfsf o"f thJ-llesl^ and tho li(,-^f df*'*iln\vt'S, and the pride
•of life" eharaeterize the worhHfor (iod, and man, alas ! is
but the creature oflUshl v impt»l.s( — ''f^ficnsual,' if " not liaving
4he Spirit '(Jude V,^. ''' y - ■ ,
On the other hand, that 'the spirit sh/iuld hav«' supremacy,
and so give the will ( F say not. in inde]>e««le?iee of tlie soul,
' but a-s enlightening and guiding it ), i^ evident i'nmi the chief, '||'
place.it grts. In<hid the old nature ha^ its synonym of
"ilesli,'' front the opjiosltc^tendent-j- of bviij-jr gnided bythe
soul, whieh is A) nearly eonneeted wltl\ tlie l)ody. * ■But into
tliis it is not niy ]t!'o,\Inee m)W to enter. ' -.
Still I would jioint out how, in 'p('rfe<t aec<yr4:wice with all
this, as thus sin is In a s])e(*ial senve '■ thq sin of the soul"
(Mic. vi. 7), so alf^nemcnt U said to be made, in the same
way, " for the soul.^' Tlie .expression is tijrec limeH found
(Exod. xxx. 15, Lev. wiJ. 1 ),• Xumb. \kxi. Tn)). Ami I
. speak of it to sho\v tlie b},e.ssod'hann<tny c/f >eriptUFc on
this as ori..uyfry other point. Moreowr. as /./■ the sduI
.atonement is n^t'ded, so //y it atmiemewt was made, ''' »t
it plea.se(r^the;Lo^a to bniij^e him; lie hath |)i^ kimfo
grief j wherf thou .'halt ni;ike his soul an olFerifig for sin, lie
: fchall see^liis seed, lie j'hall prolong his days, and rhopleasurt* -
" Pf the Lor<Pf^h^n j)roh.i)er in his han'd. lie shall see ^f'-tho
A tr^vailof his .soi// and b- satisfied " (Tsa. liii. ID, 11).
S6 complet^^_^so uiuibrn^ js the. testimony of the Word,
man's UiiLATlONSHIP Xo GOD.
83
.2,
lye
08-
'VV,
•ill
ml
do
is
' CHAPTER IX.-' ;' '.' .'..-''
' ; MIAX'S RHLATioNSUIP TO G06.
-"[■'. ■ ' ■'■ ' ■ ■ <.
■ OXE last consideration l.etbrc wo ^loso this Action. It is
very piam that, as di.sting.iiHhod from the boasts, man is in
• >cMpture rooo-nizo.l jis i„ a pJjicif of relationship with God •
and this by creatioii, iK.t riMleinptioo merely. A<lam as the
■ ;>voTk of (JodH 1 in;^ouie s^H as*the genojilo-y Jn
^fcirf^^ boars uitru^, 'Hlii^- son of- (locL'^ The ai>ostle eon-
hrmvit by <}uoti%irom the heathen poet, - we are also
: : Hia^ftspring "t <Acts xvii. U^). Now, although sin has so
^ far destroyed tF«. meaning oi^this as to umke it an nrmvailin-
,^^pba. to the Jips <^v ,^d ungodly meft, ^t, the basi^
,o|.relatlowship.li^istSr^pit<v .,« those "afid otter
^^rd8 assure «R And ibis is a relationship* whiMi Jlainlyno
\ '^^«*:^'<^*>^*^^^'^^^^^ Ms very nature denies it; aiid thi^^^h a
■\ dfetinction of the v^ry gi^t^JitoHt, iniportan(H/evidently^
■ ^ Man is fit^ef^iVraeqiwtnt:^^^ an,V int^-rcOiHrso with God^
and in tte >^fe binmttv arid in this I triay say alone a
. moral a«id»ciaAmtable being. He mav '^ n<.t' «n<iorstand "
and so he may b('<.ome ^vrthe beasts tiiat pedsh but he is
not^owe. fc,Ms.t«ahitest di-radtitiori even h^ is a witness
^ o£ fei^ noblier origiii, |^,r a beast eannot <legrade itself \nd
^wit^ ail this |>erflo,.. ^pHeity t^r oyU, n^iy, with all'tlre ac-
'? ?15^''' ' '^"^^ ^"^ ''''^^*^^' '"I'inisolf of relation.
. . ^^'Luke^ii. ^8 : w^r^.it:^;^Hl^ tg "Mecivm son., d., Jim " th^^^•
. r. nc>l m the ori^mrU. . That , i- n.u.t ho uncler.r<.„d i^'plain froHs
.«-eli<iue3t.Km-- S.th V i.-ag tK..:-:,^..^;.,.,..,- Adam/ 'a> [ J^^^^'
tWhicIf >fr.>I.i!fi'» Would fratisla'o 'fM;««.» ; / - -°
]
a^
i 'i
l!<l>
g4 FACTS AND TllEORIKS AS TO A FIJTUUK STATE.
ship to the Infinite and Eternal, which, npite of himself,
warns him of his responsibility, and links him by his hopes
or by bis fears, or both, with that life l,eyon(l death, m which,
notwithstanding the seemb.g protest of all his senses, he
almost nniversally believes. , • , *v.
In thus asserting with the inspired historian, and with the
apostle, man's <listinet place in nature as a/- son of God,'
I do not at all forget the Lords words to those- who made
this very thing their plea. When they had pat forth their .
claim, '' We be nbt-bornof loriiication • we have oiu; Father »
even God," I perfectly remember that His answer is, " It
God were vour Father, ye^would love ine. . . , ye arc of
your father the devil "(John viii. 12, 14 ).-But thi< language
is in no wise contradictory of the other, as of course it could
not be. For the Lord says tlie same as to their being Abra- -'
ham's^children. an.l that c-.'rtain!^ they nxr.- by natural gen-
eration however little morally such. It js of their moral
condition then He is speaking. Tlu- devii was not their
father physically of course. Tiic Lords words tlieu do not
touch the question of their bcin-: physi.-.illy Cicxl's offspring,
as the apostle asserts. -
Bat we are not only said to bi- the offspring of God, it is
precisely pointed out that He is the FathcM- /in contrast with .
the flesh) of ou».7?«>//.s. •• Furthermore we have bad fathers
of our/e.sA, who corrected u.s and we gave them reverence :
shall wo not much rather be-in siiV.ieetion to the Father erf
.sy>iW7.s, and live •?" (Heb, xii. '•>.(
Who can deny with any appearance oj .>ucce.s:v that we
have here the development, by an iuspired writer, of what
the creation of man, as given »u Geu. ii., irapiie^ ? We have
RQen the bodily frame formed of the dust of the grc.imd, and
though God wrought in a special wiy to fashion it, as He
dicl not with the beast, yet He does not claim to be the
" Father of our Jksh. But we have seen also that man be.
came a " livnng sonl,'^ not in that way, nor as brought forth ^
of the earth at all, buC by the inbreathing oFGod, into hira. mm
This is not said of ih.- b.'.-tst : :inil. pben(*m' linl .-us the lan-^
^
<( ,
/
J-
7^
MAN'S RELATIONSHIP TO CiOD.
S5
^
goage is, it is only therefor^ the more, instead of the less,
significant. . If Gb4 did not- want to convey to us an idea
of what would be literally expressed by it, He must have
intended to conveiy the thought of some corresponding spir- ,
ituai reality.
And what can this be, but that the spiritual part which"
animates and controls the bodily organism is something
front Himself and akin to Himself in a way that the body is
not? ,
Here then the apostle develops this thoughi. He. is not
the Father, though the Creator, of our flesh. It is not the
bare fact of our creaturehood that constitutes urf Hisj chil-
■vdren. The beasts are His creatiuos also, but are not this.
He is the. Father of «nii- .^/.irifs, not our llesh; nay, not .
merely of our spirit^, but of .^nV<7.s,— of all this class of
beings Crf;aturcs ti[i|^h t-hese nro,, they are yet in a rela-
tionship to Him tbat^p lower creatures can be. Thus we
see why the angels j[vo 'sous ot (io'l' (Job i. G; xxxviii.
7), as ''Spirits', ",. and man trio, he is a • spirit ' and a
<(
son.
Note too how c:ix(|i'ul the language is. Man has a living
feoul and is one : and/this too by the inbreathing of God.
Yet is God not srad f^ be t^e Father of his soul but of his
spirit. How tl4is harmonizes with the spirit being the dis-
tinct speciality f)l' maa^filone in all this lower world ! Had
it said, " Fathct- of soiraf^ . or had the beast, as men contend,
a spirit. God wouUl hav6 lieen represeuled as Father of the
beasts of the field. But the language is precise, as all
Scripture is, and in harmwiy with Scripture and with nature
But this is nSpKfc whole of what the Word states." As".
He is the Fatherj||||ii He '-the God of the spfrits of all*
?csvii. 16); "all.flcsh " being of course
ther places •• allmen," but charac-
fonly his lowest part. So we find
flesh " (Numb. xfj.
h«re what it is iiig^m
terized by what in h
fGen. vi. 12) that beforcTtoct ftood" all flesh had corrupted his
laikelli. ♦>,^'\'ill flesh shall see
#
'^
86
FACTS ANf) THKoUlks As TO A FOTU RE .STATE.
/
%
the salvation of (iofl:" of course in orther case all mankind,
and only these. ^~ ' . •
In this expression then, "the God of the j<pirits ol all
tlesh," we f?ee airain God in relationship with the spirit of
man. The beast has no (Jod that vm\ 1k> called his God;
ami man, for-ettin- God.. and living to \x\m^i>\\\ j.eeomes a
beast. The outv.nrd presentation of thi»s you may find m
Nebuchadnezzar lindin.u' his portion with the beasts (Dan.
iv.) : the moral of it is in l*sa. xliv., •^.Mari bcinu in honor and
inderstandint; not is like the beasts thai perish." Their
ihing'is the fruit of there bcin^' n<» i)roy)er link , with
, such as man has.
.bus then we have in a very striking way, and as <fon-
.^nini,' all that has gone before, man'.>^ link with (Jod to be
Ids spirit,— relationshij.. moral character, responsibility, and
even his perpetuity of beiii-jc. all b(»und up with Jliis.
Let us now gatiier up the Scripture statements upon the
subject we have t)een examining:—
1. The 1-odv is not the whole man. for he is often said to
be in it or aW'nt from it. cl)lh.-l u-ith it or um-lothed.
Thus for fait hihe body is the <lothing of the man, and his
-tabernacle;" whidi supposed jpir inhabitant. Paul has a
vision of umitterable rhinirs, :iVid d.x-s not know whether
he was in the body or oUt of the bo<ly at the time he. saw
them. ^
2 -In the languaije of sense man is iihMiiiii<'d with the
body; for faitlifwith what dwt'lls in it. The Lord lay in
■Joseph's tomt.. yet cohfessedJyUis divine natur- did not lie
there.
8. Man is spirit and soul and Ixtdy. ,
4, Spirit is not an universal principle floating in tlie at.
mosphere, but a sep.-trate entity in everNymdiviaual. " spirit
of man." "spirits of nu']i." It was formed within him by the
Lord, and all hiV knowledge is ascribed tr, iU This spirit
the beast has not, ^^
f). The soul is not the body, but in the body. Beasts
have and are living souls, an-J* man is trailed a soul to distin-
■■:.■ »■
^
giiisli ritm Sroui
called '♦ spirits.'
spirit unci the l»o<ly,
tion with it; the neat.
\
nip Tp ooD.
_j^iiii:nijL;eiit'ereatureK, Who are
the link alsj> between the
of th(> latter while in connec-
Ifection, nay, of appetite, lasts, etc. ,
6. It thus -characterizes the nian himself, so as to be i den- ,
tified with him, soul unl person i)eing used as. the samt^r
thinj,'', while in the intermediate disfllivbodied state the gen-
eral tepn tor hiii is that he is a spirit. ^ . "
7.' Ai^ain the soul is that throu«;h which man was swduced
and fell, and whidi characterises the natural man as led by
it. ;it is thu.s specially eonnectpd in- Scriptui'e with will and
lu^t, with sin and with afonemeut. ;. ^ „.----. -^--
8. By the possession of a spirit distinj^uishinjx liim from
•beast man is in relationship witliQod, the Father and God
of si)ii'its, and is a moi^l, responsible beinjjj, made l\>r eternity ■
in contrast witli the > beasts that perish." '
^' To tiie \l\\v and t"V tln^ testimony ; if they !:p.eak not ac
cording to thi>i-Word, it isl)ecau8e tliereis no light ki thera.'V
y:-: ■■ y:.ypyyry---'::y.\::y':,y ■'X,yy' *■. -,
■:--y- . .7'^-'-:,-^- ./■■-■• ■,•-: -r r\; /:*/^...^ -.A: ■.-' \'r' ■• ■' ■'-;,.... ^^ ■■V -■•■.•»■-;:■;■ '-vr
1 - V ■■ , ■ -r .■;/..■■■ ■■* . ■* ,., , ■■- .;f,,. .■_•.'■ - '■ ■ ■ ,•..•■ •.-.■, ■ fi' ■".i.-- -.■*•
,..■■•-•"-.». ^ \ •■■.,'':.' ^ ■• .■■.:..V': '.:v ■•■'■:■■•.■"--- \"-'- • ■■• - ■..•■■■. .■■••-■'-/..■ ■•■
^■. ■■.■'-. '' ■,-•■• ■: ■ /■••■■ ■■ ■.■■■ ;■■.(. '.■- "■ ' ■ . . ■■ ■'. ■ *"■■..-• ■ ' w. -■.■■,.■•'■
• ••• •■.:■■'-■ - '...•.,,'■.. • ;■;./..•,'■.■ ■,;-;-y^'*.- ■ ■ ; * ■ • " .. .; ,. - ■. ' ■■ '•o;;-
^■'- ■.-. ■■• ^ ; • .- ,r .-':■,.-■ /;-:-;;.^. :7- -..;.:. ■••(■ ,.^ -".--/;.-.' -v- .-. V" .. 'i - ..:•■•■...,.>:
■' .,■ •■■ ':.- -l-y : ■ - ■ .:,^-<'---/-, ■■•■■■-. ■■ -■■. . V; ■ • ■■ . - ' ' ■■■ . - ^- '•:, . .X ^U^.'- ^",;
. :/• ■■ .'--,/... ^ :■*-; . '. ' ,h: \ ■" .. ', Z' . ^ ' . ... ■ . .- ' , '. . ■ " ■ .'r""
/.- ^ :• .^ ..••'• V ■■/■-■■'■--<'■: ^ • n/W ■■ . .:■•.■ •->■.'::■ ... -vV" .- " ■ ■■■'..■■■'
'•./...■■- . . - . . ■■ '■ •.'■;■ t ■-.. . . '••.,.■ . - , . ♦ ■, . • . ■,--.,,- ■■'■ ■ ■
■^'r-: ■•■■ - ■• . ■ '■■ ■ ■-' - '. ■•■ .f ■-■■■ V -■ .;.,,'-. ..;■■■ „■, .-. . ' y . »- .■■■■:■■"
■;/ ■ ■ • ■: .■.: .■ y-■^■■ • :';V^ ■ '■■ ■ y. . ■•■ . '. . - .•■■:■ ■ ' • ■ - /
'•'■■■'':•. •.:/•.■■ ■- ■".'-.' "-y-K-- '■;■■:'■■'■ -i' '■■■■' v'~ -,■-'•'-'''■''-.'■■-■.'■' ." "' « ':• ■ . ',-'■. y?
■ ' ' ■ y ' ■ yyy-'y "■■■\"' .■ ■■•..:"■'■-■•■■■■;: '' ."■-'■'■ ^- -,'."-'-.y ^* '' .■,;•"■ •' \;,; ^ ." ; :•■
■'- .■ -'■ ■ ' ^ ,v -, , . ■ ■ , \ . " ./ ..■'■-'. ■"■/'■' "'«'■"'■"- ' I. .-■''' ' ^ .'• '
'y : -' ■-. -- ■■■■■V" ' • .'— ■':y-----.-y- ■ '" .■•".■■■. "- >■. ' •' .'■■•:;•■,"■':.■■.; .:. . - '■ . •• ■ '^ . ,:•■■
.^:";-" '■■.'.-'■■-'■ •...■■■•'■ .\'. ■■:■"-■■::.,.•'■;' -7-''. ?" ..-■■: :-t" ■,.;'■■• ■.,..■,.■':-,•■ '.-':-;.■.: '•. ''. ;■ /.,■'-'-
.^■. .■■■•■.:: ■■-- •. - \i-- ■ • '■ - •■•. •- .. ../.■■ ... .• ■• ■. - ..■■.■.; ■■ ■ ,.. -. , .
■■.■.-;■ \ .:^- - • Y,;-..: •■.;.... ■ ■, ■•■ ■.;■.. ■ ^ , .■ ' .-,■■ .-• : ;•■. v' . , ,. . ..'.- ^ ,,■ ; „■ .
7 " ■■ 'I- ...-..,■■- : V -'■■.'. . ■■■■:■•■■.:.■■■.,.■.,"■-■• ■ .. > ■,'.,'•.., v^ ■■ ", 1. .,:.:' .-■■■..
■,:• :• "■-■■■^ ■ ,■■-.■. :.. ■</.-■ .'■■.• ■' „'■ . :*, ^ ■ ■■ ■ ' ' ■ > - •• .. • .-::■ 'y^^ ■' . v ::■■ <<■ ^ ';.. ' ' ' .■■ '■■
■ ■ V .'■.-.■.'.. ■'.'. ,t .:'-■,' . . ' . T ■ ' " . ,, ,! ' -■ •■•■*" n
■' .- : - . . ■:
■ - ,." '.J ■■ - ^.■' .'-.;•■■■■ ^" ■..■■.-.■■-■-■■ .■■■;.■ .« < ■ "^ * ■ -J' . ■-'.-•'- .. • - ■ % -*
X -• ■ • ■ •■- • . ■* . „'■ . ....... ■■-■-..-■- ■_■■■»... •■■
' ■ " . ; ■ ■."■■. . ■ , ■!" "■■■■■'"'■-"■.■■■ . '. - • "> I , - ■ ■ ■■■■-■■■' .-''■■• .■..-■■ ■" " ^ ■
- * ■ • ■ . ■ ■.■■-,■■■.-■ - ..- . - ■ ■ ■ 1 '^ ■ 1.' . - . ^ '■...■ . ■ ,- -— . . , :,- ■
- ■ - - . .'-.,.-■. -■ - . . ■-• . ■ ^ ^ ■ . -..-..., . •■ - ■ - :■ -' W, .-. ■ f -
:-. ■' .,.■..-■---»■ ■.' ■ ,.:■•■■: , ^:, : ■ -• .. ■ - -.._.. ■ - , , , *t ■.- ... ^^^ .
--.-■-^ -■ ■■'.■ -.■:■;;.■■:, -.;.■:.■ ..-,.- .-■■. .-- ■ ■.-. ^ ■. ^^^ ■.-■,- -r., -, " y^..^^-, ^ :■■,., ,A. ;.; -.4- ,.,.,^; . ,■-/■.-,.■
■. ." ■ .^ \ -'-■■:.-■■■ .\- . -:..\ ::r -.%;--'■■''. z----^:^-^ ■..•.. •.;-:.■ :r,v^- ^ - ■:-■;" -
\ ■ : ■■ ', y- . ■ ■ ■■■: ■ ." ■yy\-:'^y.ri: ■ •''■..■:■. ■ . ■ :■::■ • '-v,-^ •; .:>. . -. ■
^^^^^^^*
.■.■.-■ .. -^ ., ;* ■; . ■ ■: : - ;, .■; . ••■■..■ '.,: .-■ , .■ ^ . ■ -.:. .'.v^ •. . -■
^^^H^i - *
y--'-'''' ' ■..■::;;'„,".. ;^ "•.-■■■.;" ■*. ■::'-i"^ -■ 'y- ■;■'■--- .r. y: - y,\::'y:''i - ,,, .y_:y -../■yy- ', -''y^ '_■■• y
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^k.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^L^
_■'■■*■'
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^M^--*^:;- .
■■-'■■
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^PP^*^ V
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H^^: ---..*
■'.; *'-'■
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^■^' ..-t^^-.
'■." ' ' -
■■■■■■■■■■■■■^■■■■■MHi^^^^^^::.^
■: ■ ■ - . ... . . .... ■,-■.■.'■■ i ,. *■.-.. ■■..': ...:.■ . ...... -,. ■-■-,■.. ..»...,..-.... . ■ ■•?»..-
^^^^^^^^^^r'
../.;. . ., . ■■ .:y : :■/ y-'.y'.\ ■ ^:' ■■.■■■'':.•.■'.■■■ ■^•' ;■:■■■■■■■■.;. ■ "^T \ ^ ■■■■■- ' '''■ yy. - ' 'M~y'-
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ '.,.'
. •■" " ■' ■ -- . -• - ■■ ■ "'-■■•,'■ "..>^"'.: . , , ;. .- .'- ■ ■■ • . ..■■.« .,.•-•. . ■ ... ■ . .; .
^^^^^^^r
■ ' . ■ : - '. 4..- '' .. .- > -. , '--■'■. .. ■ ■-■,.■
■ - ■ ~ ■■■-■• ',. '■-■'.'' ■-'.■• ..'■:-'■■■■ f ' ''\*y . - ,■ -. .-' '.; '.•-.-.' ? ■
"^ : ■ - ■ - " .■;;■ ".-■"-■ -■■ ' ■ ■ '. ' , ■ "■ ■ ■•' y , . .,/■■;..■." ;"- -;-■:; ' '■■"■■ ■ -v
^T' -'' ^.'.y ■ 'v- ■.' .. *^''' '■"■. 1^''-" ■ *"'■.- x"' '■■
'■\.-.. ■■■ ■■■ ■ * ■ ■ 'y ■ .;:■•.■ ' ■■•■■.:.■• " ■■■-■' ■'. .■^■."■■. . :■■■■' ■ ' : -■ '■ ■■■■■■ '- ■'."■■'• ■■ .-yy 'y-y. ■':h ■.•;../: ..,-' r-^p- 'y y
■'"'■■.■■■'.,'■;. :,.- ' y . y ■■■ . V . .'■.' "'-^'^ y^-: y': yyy -yy' ■!■ . '■-.- ■■"."■ ■-■■:^:. .■*- -■:-v-
- -^ "■ •■ ■■■ ;- • -./■.:-:- .■.:■...-• -v;:: c'- .r- ■.. .'■7/ ::75n^ -.^"^■•* .n --'-■.^■-■: -■.-,:■.:
■ ■" ' : ■ . -■ ■-.■;.' .. ^^■■..■ ■-■■ ■ -.-■■■-.-■■ ■ -. ■.:•■■ =-;=^,;\ ■:■ ,-:. ■..."-■, -. «;■■«■■•.■
• , . : . ■ ■ .... ., - .-. ... ■ ••;•■. ., .■ ■ „,,.:■:: ■■.-■'.■ ." V.-..,.;'- ■ ■■■ - ■■ .■; '■^■:, ■"■ I'-'
-y- ■' ''": , J ■■ -■• ' . ' ■..:•■■■■''■;■..;:.■■•■"';" ".'•'■ •'.-i ■;.:/■ ' ../.^A" 'i ."■..".'■■■■'";;:■ ■..","■■.■.-•.,;.■.-;■■
-r- -- : ■■ ■ .■ ■ ..• .:■■-■ ;.-...■:>. ■•, . ■ '■■ ;:■ ;■ -- ■ ■,. ■,,:.'- \---"\ .5—.-*^ ■■■--.,:-.: ^ v ' •» '
\- ■■- -. - .-■.'■ ■'■■■■ — .■•- -:.«■:.-., -.-..-'^ ■„ ..... ..-.■■■.. \ 7,-.- :,;, ■•■.... ^ ■■"y-y--y
... . ;> .. -. -. ■ .■ ' :--'' . :; :-.^ ■■>,'■ vV,..,.' ,%■... - -, -■ ... - -,.\ . ■
■:■■■.■•■•'■■■".■-. •;.., ^' ■..■■-. : ■.- •■.;■■,./. ■^■■.,.. '^-7 '; ^. ■■\:,. ■■ -i^..'^:^: ■■*:A:''''^V»:"
■. ■■ , ■■ " ■ ■' . ■ :- -r/; .-■;-..;.,■..;,::■■.,..:..: ..X. :-'-. .. y'-dk:-:' .i|
^^ . ;.-- ■■ ^■•: :-:■;■ V ;:X-- -i-'^-'^^.-:*. ■ A- ^v.^--v:yi4:^i|
- ■ ■ * \ V J^ . iW" ■ ■■-^^m
• '. ■
.■
. "■ ■•\ ■ v.- '-- . *■ «■ '^^m,
■:y :-%:-
♦
■ N
V 9
0'
^
€»
! " .
W
.«»
(>;.)
BrltlBb'
Woods,
•»-i;-
Oak.
\
«>:?■
W
131 . •
■■■•'..■ ■ - ■ ■ • ■ ,' .<D • ;■ ■■ .
The closer tlie annular^riiigs are together the better as a \^
rule will the timber be. ^s:. *;
Planks cut from a log will always warp away froiij^the Warpiog.
centre of the original tree, V, - ,^ r-
Theplahlf cut exactly through the centre will shrink
but not warpi„
-The chief British woods used in the R.C.D., are'oak, ash,
elm and beech. ^ , . .« .
Oak is thQ stroiij^est, toughest and most lasting. It, how-
*ever, contains an acid, which corrodes iron in contact with
■ .it, ^ ■:-■. /
Ash' is tough and remarkably elastic. It is used for ** Aah
shafts, handspikes, felloes, &c. It does not stand weather
well, and is very liable to suffer from worm. ■ .,
/ Elip h a very cross-grained tbugh wood, therefore it does
"wt splinter; li is also very durable under constant Wet.
Beqch is a hard, Btt'on*^ wood, but does not stand ex-
losure.' ■ . """ -; ■^^''.- " ■. : ^- .
^ The following foreig^n .woods are tised: ^
* African oak, is stronj^er, heavier and ftarker than Eng- African Oak.,
lislioak, for which it is 'iise^ as a substitute. " .
Sabicu, is exceedingly strong, heavy and durable. ^ It is
used for parts where rubbing action may be expected and
wei<yhtis no object, sucli as tlie blocks in a rear chock carri-
* age, bollards, &c. It is grown in the West Indies. ,
(^ f eak, an gast Indian'lmd Afi'ican timber. It possesses
<rvekt str^gth, toughness and durability,' but splinters
"readily. " * .„ ■ . " ' '' ■ *^ '. ■ ' V".
It contains an essential t)il that keeps off insects. . v- ;
- It is used far work for foreign stations- ^ ^ , 4^ ' " , f;D^
JJahogany, is of two kinds, " Honduras," from Central Mabogany.
brica, and "Spanish,'\froih Cuba and other West In-
ian Islands. ' ; ^ *.
It is strong in all 'dii'ections, andlceeps its shape under ** . ^
toying ciB^mlstances, as to heat and moisture. '' . •
Ij^onduras IS ligli^er and inferior to Spanish.
I*ine is soft, light gind elastic, and is of several kinds. Pine.
4>-/
Blm.
Beech.
■>" ■ ■
Foreign
Woods.
Sabiou.
Teak.
i) -. •
f
1^^, .*_
-M»-
#■■
'&:
/\.
Demi.
■•• -r. -. : ■ ' 132' . ". ' •- ■'-
Pine proper, from the Scotch fir grown in Korwny,
Sweden and Noftb America, 'it is red, yellow or wbitc.
Yellow alone is used for the interior fittings of waggons.^
\ : " Deal" is eithej- white or yellow. It. is the produce of
.^ the ScJotch^fir, and is iwl Jor ammunition boxes and the
boarding of waggons.. * • \
^ Larch, a fitrong.and durable but knotty timber. It is Ur«b
I • only used " uphers," or small trees for ladders, &c.
Deal, sawn up, is classed as, ''■ planks,?' "deals," atid
;- " . " battens," according to width, yiz. : if, and 7 in.
'the contepts olf -a log are computed, if of oak, elm, or Meaaureioent
/ foreign wood, by square measure ; if of ash or beech, by
: rounS measure; bectause in these the outer layers are
sounder and better than the inner. ^. _ .. " '• x
. . ^ :■ :'. .-:"■ ■ :V ..,--■-- . • - ■ (m^i girth in ,feet. )
Round measupejt Qmfta^ | -- yr"^' " ^ ^^
length in feet =^: content^ in Gsbic feet>
* Square hieasure^ Mean widtji X mm de^h % length,
(in feet in each case) = contents in cubU^
Stoning /timber is expelling, asmr^ may be, .the ggaaoning.
natural moisture in, its "pores; tWs js;dofte>Ither natural^
or .artificially. . ^'• <#' ^ , '' ' /^
"in natural seasoning, the 'iyofija 4s cji^^^^
posed io the air, sheltered from rain mid bigli wind. The
time reqpired in En^Ian^ is one; jear for each inch in ■
thickness. „ " . t •
^ Artificial 8<3asoning is done by sut/p/iting the tmiber^m
a chambei' to a current of hot-air or stenfp, ^ ^1^
, . ^TTiis is a mu(;h quicker process b»t ii^^m^kes the vTooc
; more brittle And less durable than if naturally mmmeA,
■i K,
/■
#
/
^l
^iBJA'Ufe.
.^:Jro|n is received %" .<l)bf radt ' in the form (#igirdfir ;X,
*i^T, angle t, round, sqiiare, flat, and plate iijon, It is
.Usted in various ways, as to its power of being^ent. i-nto
. :-various shapes, both ~wheh hot%id wj^^n cold. % .
' ' .Round, square and flat is bar iron 6f tliat sectiori.
W
/Iron.
^
"1"
:>.* ./
■Al- ^J-
IS.-
'W
v.s
» —
\
«
\
iZ
,x
, '\"
\#
* i
I' //
7 Plat<
' tain an
with 01
FIa((
120° w
^ Bptli
fibre o1
«• (Engl is
Mall
-tain ire
a sort' (
Stee,
tested
Thei
— cally k
:C.
(1) T.
Zi
Ci
C2)T
\ 2:
• >
(3)Z
L
'", The
the til
nxeitet
Th(
«heini
tlio ed
cal ta
Lfct
... '"'V ■ "^' ".
■:■>■. ■ ._ 1 ,
■u
4v^
-.l^"
133
•V .
\-:
i
; N
\.' i
Plate iron lias to stancl bending when cold, tliroiigli cer-
tain angles, according to its tliickife&a and whether it is bent
with or across the graini, * V '
Plate of any tliickness mnst stand bending, when hot,
120^ with grain, and^OO' across it. /
Both bar and plate iron must stand a strain with the
fibre of 22 tpns (English) per square jnch, and of 18 tons
(English) against the fibred ' '^
Malleable cast iron is a term applied to castings of cer-
•tain irQn, which, by an after process of annealing, bccoilie
a sort' of Bteeh lUs very tough, and reftises to weld.
SteeJ is received as " blister," "shear," or' cast steel, and
tested practically as to its qjiialities. |p ^ \
There are tin-fee principal alloys made use of, all techni
cally known as njtetal^
Mallea'
cast iro
Steel.
Metal.
For pipe boxes and sheaves of blocks.
This is the hardest, as it contain$ most
tin.
/
For rollers.
Copper," 86.8
(l)'Tin, 12.4
Zinc, .8
Copper, 86.5
(2) Tin, 10.83
^ 'Zinc, 2.68
} Copper, 84.2 Tl. ' " " . - ,' . ■
Tin, 7.9 fFor bearings and nuts of al^yatmg
^^^Zinc,' '5.24 [ screws, &c. ' .
Lead, ; 2.62 J 'j • ' '
The usual method of preparing the alloy is to melt all;,
the tin, zinc and load, with a small, propoftion of popper,
^nd cast this into ingots. These ingots are broken up and
melted, and the rest of the copper added.
, Lkathek, Ropej &c.
The leather used is tanned with oak bark> and not by j^^^^^^^^
cheuiicals. To prov« tliisi, cut a small piece and moisten
the edge ; u bliick rnark «low(i centre of edgedeiioted chemi-
cal tanning ; a bfowu «aloar sliews oak tanning.
Well tunn^'l leaih*3r UiUtiii not crack when doubled" up.
Liiiii]m mua Ud j/^VIo/fl^ally dubbed, being first well Preservotiop.
cleaM. ff hi \m, emjf jhm months. If in store, once
in two y«ar0. ...
^
■:i ,•
'■'■-Iff
. .-. Ir 1 - '
■ - ,1 ' „ ..
i
'■-,''
1
li ■
'
If
,
> . ,
feafe
^:
■ '■ ■ :^
^^
^L^
1^
l^^ll^^
i
t •.■:»-...: :■/,.•:,, :■ ...-■x'^;- -...-. ■ '■'ir:-y-': .■■;,:::■' ^*:,,/v„
" *^..^' ■-„;'': ■'^■^' ""-""''"'■''■' ": t:
iV. "■"■"" ■■..',.
V. ' '' '
It . " n "tw; V
'" '■■\- -■■ '-\- - •>■ ■ ■ .;." --"■■ : " .. ".- .1 .,,,," .1
Bul)l
4 quart
/ most 118
The
oxen 01
bellovvE
backs,"
skin, fi
A re
ber ot
Rope i
cordin]
the cir
The
tons it
cirCiiir
, Rop
Hamb
(tarre(
GOA
it.
The
..:■■« " tti
■^;
«,. /
134
\
/
Rope.
Dubbing consists of, train oil, ono quart ; neatsfoot oil, Dubbing.
,^ /.. 4 quarts; olive; oil, 2 quarts; tallo\y, 13 lbs. This is a ;
/ , most useful receipt. A
The chief descriptions of leather are : '* Hides," fVom
oxen or cows; " strapback," for strapping ; " bellows," for
bellows of forges (these are dressed in oil;) "mill band
backs," for bands of machinery. - Also " basils," from sheep
skin, for the inside strapping of boxes.
Rope.
A rope is formed of tliree strands, eacl> strand of a num-
ber ot yarns, and each yarn of a number of fibres of hemp.
Rope is either white or tarred^ and of different sizes, ac-
Icording to the number of yarns. The size is expressed by ^^
the circumference in inches.
The strength of rope when new, i. «., the number of Strength,
tons it will bear, is found approximately by squaring the
circumference and dividing by 6.
Rope is issued in coil^ of 113 latlioms, marline and
Hambro' line (lighter natures), in skeifts, and spun yarn
(tarred yarn) in lbs. \
Government rope has a coloured thread running through
it. '■- ■ ■ ' '. ■ ■' '
The following are the principal ropes and tlieir uses :
12 incii, white, slings of sheers.
9 " " straps of sheers.
6 « " main tackle of sheers, guys and slings.
5 " " gun falls (heavy.) ^ #
4 « " light gun falls. • ;■#"'/ ■ '\
3 w «^ ^ heavy giJn tackles iind drag rope^L^
/2i ** ' . " "lig^i* ^ : **i ^ "•
4i " tarred, guys of , derricks, slings. ^ •
'* 4/* V *"' parbuckle ropes, lashingft, '4
a " " " atraps, la * ■ '
ff)
'■*■■
..;,; ■
1-
\ .
. N;' .. ■. .1
\
" :
♦
">
#"
» -'
Hf
2"
s
" fiiff-lackM* lashings."
" " lever ropes, lashings. „
'/
\\
* „ "
.,*«■■' -.
♦
',-^. -
•P,
»
# \.
..■*9,
'■ 4 ''
A^iie:
. :-.. ''■^'
%l
135
* Paint. * .
.Lead paint is used for woodwork, as it gives a better
body thati zinc.
For irorf carriages PuHbrcJ's black is used, painted over
Ju field carriages with lead. .
All new articles receive three coats. '
Iron must be cleaned before painting.
Hard stopping is used to stop "shakes"; is made by
mixing dry white lead with gold size, 1 lb. of former to 1
gill of latter. . It is better than putty for large cracks.
Putty for cracks is made of 1 cwlj. of ccrmiuon whitening
with 2J gals, raw linseed oil. " • %^ v
Varnish, made of equal parts of boi^ oiT^nd copal
varnish ; is used for the heads of side aiffti for rifled ord-
nance, «&c. «r
Ordinary composition is iwade of lamp-black 24 lbs.,
litharge 13 oz,, boiled linseed oil 7^ lbs., beeswax U oz.
To preserve bright iron work, mix 3 Iba. tallow and 1
lb. white zinc, and it will preserve bright -iron trom rust.
Paiot.
Hard stop-
ping.
Putty.
Varnish.
Water proof
compositioa.
To preserve
bright iron
work.
J
{• %
i
^ ^ ■:
U:
••>■*-«♦'■
- .■; •. fX' ' ■
.
': % 'i
% ^
. .'
^^f;f^/ ;/'•
■/
/ • , ■■■(-.■ ' , » ' , i
"
■ ■* * .
■;V^..
' ■ • '■ ',
.■ •■// -' •■..•. ■-■■'.■ ■ ' . ■
■ t'f
■' •
1 ^ ' '
**■
■j
r
^_ ____ .___^__
- '■
*
U\ .
. . ■:: ■■, r-..i.:r ■■:■
*' t
r
1 ■ -i
■ ■,'■'. /
■ r''
■ '
^'
^ -
- • ■•■.-.- . „ ' . ''• ' ■■ ■','■' . •■
*
1 / t
'■ ^ '
. -
■.•,-;fr. i ••■ ■' ; ••■■
:■■ h:
'■
'<!,
— t •
"■ ■
1
]
i.- .'
'«■
,"•
\
■ , ■*
■
I
p;' ■
■*''.'
,#
it J
4
*l ■
1, -,■
11
«
* ' "
V
1,
■■1
■
■
HH
^^r A
^
^^^^^1
■
^^^^^^H
^^^- i^'-
"
^^^^^^^^^1
^^^^^1
^^^^^^^^^^^^1
^p" -> « .
,1
1
^^^^1
■
HH
^^^^^H
^ ■ ■«,.<<« , ■
■■1 ■ ■ \ - .
^^^^1
■
^ ^
"
i
^^^^^H
r .; _ ^: - -? .
\ } ■ ^ ■;
.
<^ ' '»^^^^|
1
^
^^
' 9
,-yS-
%
. .
J
I
^ ■
. ■ ■' '■
■■'-,.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
'
w
; ■ .i» '■ ■■
■1 . ■'
^
.- ■ ■ .
: .
M
w
*■
■%■
-[■—: 4k ■
J
f
* '
A
w
— ;
^^ ' ■ m
^
1
"
. 1
^^^H
^
J
■
■
V
t
*
\
• .
\.
t
■ . 'i^
^
1
(
(
1
^
}
F
r
«
• .
'/
f -
<
■ -i '
■•
.
/
f
lP
"l*
■ f
'
/
.
<;
- ".
■■ '"
n*
.■■■V''
J
'■ ';
■-»
" ■
»
»
»
^
1
—■;■-
•
■ .
■ ■.
r
«
;-;• .;
-
■„!.. — ■-.-_
*
______
-■■ -j
1-
-
■>■■■
4
;,
r 'iir
■#"
>
■■'%
■;--
,^^
siaSi
___
^^^^^
^ij^
^■.., V;._:
^^H
^^
^^^
^^^
^^
^
-P^
B
AMociatioii for Infonratton and Inwos ltoiMi««iiMnt
llOOWayne Avenue. Suite 1100
Silver Spring. Maryland 2091O
301/587-8202
I
i
iiiilii
' »
Centimeter
12 3- 4*5 67 89 10 11 12 13 14 15 mm
|i| ii | i |ii |i|i |i | i|i | i ] i ^ i | i^i|il| i | i ^i|ii|i ^ l| i yl|ii/ l | ii |i |i i|l^^ ^ ^
Inthes *
lU
13.2
1.1 I
^ Lfi 120
■t
H
L25 1 u 1 1.6
V-
,m
MONUFRCTURED TO flllM STRNDRRDS
- <• " '- ,
BY RPPLIED IMRGE. INC.
> ■ v^
w
is FACTS ANP THIlOBIJb^S AS "TO A f UTURE ^TATB.
I
PART II.-DEATH AXD THE LXTERMEDIATE STATE."
CHAPTER X.
DEATU.
/
We have already got a long way towards the settlement
of the question as to what death is according to Scripture.
I say according to Scripture, for it is remarkable how little
the class of writers we are speaking of make it really a ques-
tion to be settled by Scripture 'at all. They generally
assume that we know all about it, that the word speaks for
itself, and that our experience of it should settle the matter.
So Mr. Roberts speaks : — " The popular theory will not
allow that a dead man is really dead. . . It is incorrect in
orthodox language to say that the man is dead. . . In real-
ity, therefore, the word ' death,' as popularly used, has lost
its original meaning."
And thus he defines f6r us what death is. "In order to
understand death, we must have a definite conception of,j,
life. Of this we do know something, since it is a matter df
positive experience. All iee hacc to do is to bring our ktioio
ledge to hrar^ but this is what the majority of people have
great difficulty in doing. Their minds are so occupied with
established theories, that.,thoy are blind to facts under their
immediate cognizance. Thrjpwing metaphysics aside, what
is life as knoxm ixpcrlmentally ? It is the aggregate result
of certain organic processes. Respiration, circulation of the
blood, digestion", etc., combine to generate? and sustain vital-
ity, and to impart activity to the various faculties Of which
>v
/
to
df >
no*
,ve
ith ,
eir
lat
ult
ihe
)al-
ich
>v
DEATH.
m
we ar«j i^omposed. (!) Apart from this busy organism life
is unmiitiifested, whether as regards man or beast,"*
The " experience " itself is more than qucstloMuble. Most
people Avould imagine that instead of ''organic processes"
l/eneratin'j life, life itself was necessary iii order to the
organic processes. Mr. Roberts has somewhat misread
the facts here, and his definition of life consequelitly fails.
Physiologists do not believe it to be quite so simple a matter-
•''No rigid dcfifiition of life appears to be at present possi-
ble," says a late writer ; but again, — '• we are compelled to
come to the conclusion that life is truly the cause and not
the consequence of organization."! Much less then is it the
consequence of " organic processes." /
But our business is not with physiology but with Scripture.
Mr. Roberts plainly has no need of it in this matter. Only
take for granted that tlie body is the whole man, and you
need no revelation to tell you what death is. As regards
the body death is plainly the cessation of all practical exist-
ence. And if the body be the whole man, the dust that lies
in the tomb, death is for him of course the ^xtia|^k)n of
beinf'. " Apart- from this busy organism lifel if^unmani- '
fested " : that is all we need say. Revelation th'ere is no
need of: we have only to apply the knowledge w^e already
have. - "C
• Mr. Constable's argument as to death is mainly founded
upon the views of human nature which we have already ex-
amined, and upon those of Hades, which we hope shortly to
examine. But he has a chapter «pon death itself, of whi^li
it only needs to gtve a brief outline, as explanatory of the
final argument with which he closes it.
His propositions are — that '' death, Avhich God inflicted
upon the human race for Adam's sln^ was a great calamity
for. all who should eAdure it," that this death has passed
upon all men without one exception, and "not part of it>
* Twelve LeciureH;^
t Manual of Zoology, by Prbl. Nioholson, pp. 1,5. 'Jd ed. (^Amt-r. i,
1872.
* .».
•I
'5*
90 FACTS AXD THEOKIES AS TO A FUTUKE STATE.
but all of it ■' upon every one alike (if it <lid not, God's
Word would fail, and we have no security for anything);
that nothing was said about the dliration of the death
threatened, that being left open for God to sliow His grace: ■
"death might continue in some or in all, for a short time, or
a longer time, or forever: " that death began for Adam from
the very day he disol>eyed, and reigns over believers and un-
believers alike till the day of resurrection. liis argument
closes thus: ""
• " If death reigns until the poric^ of resurrection, and if Jeath
during this period is exactly the same thing to the just and to
tlie unjust, it fallows beyond any question thibt l)otli just and un- ^
just are then wliolly and altogether dead. For.no ou(^ contends
that during Ihis ptrioil the just are iu a conditipu of ujisery ;
neither does any one euntund that the unjust are in a condition
of bliss : but that condition which is neither one of .b^^r of
misery must be a condition of death or n«n-existen,c^j^^Bpis is
the one condition that can be common to the redcom^TriPu the •
lost."* " ;f
Mr. Constable's logic and his memory have .surely failed
him here. Think of the i-ashness and fli|*pancy of assertion
which would pledge the whole truth of God upon the posi- ^
tion that all men must die, and have died, exactly according
to the threatening to Athim, in the very facre of the fact
that neitlier f2noch u6r Elijah died, an<l that.tliose alive at
'Christ's coming never will ! " We shall ni>t wkX sleep," says
th<; apostle. So God's truthfulness js gon(^ for ^[r. Con-
stable !
I need not answer this, 1 am i^ure. That not eyen atone-
ment could righteously set aside the exaction of the penalty
from even one of those subie(!t to it, shows how little therOi
is meaning in atonement tor his sotd. But his argument
fails signally and entirely upon (juite another ground than
this. ;
For why should non-exUteiu'C Ije "the one condition"
upon which death should be the Hanui to just and unjust ?
* Hades, p. 79.
■>^ i,\
DEATH.
i'r
m
(»r.'iiit<Ml tluT uni <l«'!ul :irrk('. Ko oikv «U'nioH it. On lh<'
Kii|»|M>sitiou th;it, death is tin- ^mnUTinij; of tlic link lietwecii
soitl and body (and so it is), wliy cannot just and unjust
alike 1)0 in f/iit oondition without thi'^ <|U('Stion 6}' happiness
«>r misery being raist'(Vl)y it at all ?
His argument is laborious nonentity. T4) state it i» to
expose it, * Yet it iinnislies ]\[r. C'onstabh' with all the jus-
tifi(!ation he has; for the trlumpli over ortiiO(h)xy which tills
the next chapter. 1 <lo not purpose following him in it,
because we have to do with Scripiure simply liere. I would
say, however, that, while every expression of those he quotes
from caniiot l)e justiiied, yet aft.er all they are more in the
spirit of Christianity than 'are his own: For with them
" Christ, has abolished •^eath,"' — for him, it w»)uld seem, not.
For just and unjust alike, alike for Jew or Cliristian,* under
law or mider gospel, as to what deatli is itself there is no
difference. There is jio '• williuLj rather ,to. be absent from
f '' '
the body and jiresent with the Lord '" ; no " desire to depart
and be with Christ which is far better." Of course sjicli
texts are owned to be in Scripture, whatever explanation
they may be susceptil)le of, but the spirit of them is not in
liis heart. For him death Is still an enemy, a curse, a pen-
alty which no atonement has ettaeed or lessened. "Death
is after all the king'of terrors," says ]Mr. Constable : has he
never read of One who cftme that "• thi'ou<ih death lie migiit
destroy him that ha<l the power of death, that is, the devil,
and deliver them who through fear of death were all their
lifetime subject to bondage " ? ■
We have alreadv seen reason to believe that death is not
extinction; that the living soul in man is not extinct, when
it ceases to be any longer life to the body," We cannot
therefore argue from the effect of death upon the body, as
to what it is upon the spirit or the soul. We have seen
that the word of God does on the one side use the popular
language, the language of sense, and identify man with his
body. This is seen in the class of texts of which Annihila-
tionists are so fond.' The man is the flesh and blood we see
1)2 FACTS AN1> THEOUIES AS TO A FUTUKK STATE.
and touch. A dead body is a dead man We all speak so,
" unconscious wholly of being exposed to the cTiarge of mate-
■ rialism for doing so. Our daily speech in this way might
convict us in the profounder wisdom of another generation,
of disbclioviug equally with Annihilationists themselves, in
* the existenoe of an immortal soul. Yet we really do believe
it in spite of that,, and even the attacks of Annihilationists
hare not, a.s vet .at aiiv rate, made us a whit inore cautious.
We quote even '' Dust tliou art," and believe it, and yet do
not believe that Nve are (ill dust. And we fihd on the other
side, and vise as frool v, a nrimber of texts which Annihilation-
isra cannot teach us how to use, which speak of man being
" in the bodv," " /// the llcsh." " at home in the bodv,"' " ab-
l*cnt from the l)o<ly,' " out of" it, aiid yet believe that the
body is the man too, in spite of that. ' v
y Let us now fairly put 'the question apart from any partial
.answer it m;iy have gotten in this w.iy : Is the Scripture
^teaching of deatli extinction r-^is it "ceasing to exist," or,
as they delight to quote from Job x. 19, to '• be as though
me had not been " P
You put seed into the ground, and, in the Scripture lan-
gudge, '' it is not quickened exi^cjH it die'''' (1 Cor. xv. 36).
Does the living germ become extinct in order %o bring fortli
the harvest 'i Are the '• oiganur i)roces«gs'' extinguistie.l m/iVi
Where would the harvest be if they were ? Yet this is in
Scripture twice over spoken of as " death." And, if you
reflect a Utile, the analogy to the death of man is nparer
than it seems. There is that pf the seed which is cast off
.as refuse,, and decays. The germ within "puts off its
tabernacle," but, so far froni becoming extinguished in the
process, springs up into tlje plant thereon. Is there no
lesson in tliat ? no type V no analogy commending the use
of the strong word " death '' in this case ? Would it ever
have occurred to. Mr. Roberts or to any of his brethren,
that " except a do'rn of wheat fall into the ground and die,
it abideth alone, but if it die, it bringeth forth much
fruit"? — Does th e grain of wheat becom e extinct in order
:.y-.i\K-^-:
•■'\.
, -J
DEATH,
m
to .bring forth fruit ? They have never ( at least, that I can
find) attemptf^cl to illustrate their doctrine by it, that
death js the cessation of existencej the extinction of organic
processes.* ^ ",■'"'
The death of man is spoken of, moreover, in language
which is not douolfiil. I have fully admitted already, and
without hesitation, that there are a large class of passages
which (identifying rnan with his body) speak in the ordinary
popular phraseology about it. Passages too there are,
which will be oxaminod in the sequel, \thich may present
•difHbulty in harmonizing them with the language of other
parts. But, on the other hand, the clear full light of the
New Testament affords us. in many simple and intelligible
statements, abundant satisfaction as to what death is.
Sotne of these I shall now proceed to examine, together
'with the arguments of tiie class of writers to whom I am
replying. ^
1. As we have seen, the apostle Peter styles d^th the
" putting off of his tabernacle " (2 Pet i. 14). T^e language
of Paul is sinmlar, and if comment be needed, may supply
it : " if the earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved "
(2 Cor. V. 1)./
The language of Annlhilationists upon these expressions
shows their perplexity. Mr. Ham says on the latter passage,
"Man, the one compound beinp:, is compared to an 'earthly
house ' or ' tabernacle,' which will be dissolved." Similarly
Mr. Constable, " We doubt very much if he speaks here
* Mr. Roberts lias .tried to answer this. He asks, " Where is the liv-
ing germ, wlien the harvest is brought forth 1 Can Mr. Grant find it ? "
Most certainly; for the stalk of corn is but the development of that
very germ.
His account of the matter is curious enough. With him " the vegeta-
ting process" is an " invasion " of the vitality of the grain, which
destroys it: a parasitic life, in short, froi^'hich the sprouting comes!
And in this way he finds it a "distinct and .striking illustration of"
death being extinction. Upon his view of it no doubt it is so. But
then it is rather a new theory, that the living germ is killed by the
vegetating process!
/'-<
.^.
n
JL.j^T'Zir JT8s:irSij3^t^. . *
H
FACT!? AND TUF0KIE8 AS TO A FUTrilE STATE.
only itf thchodii, Wc think lio spoaks of our mtite jmsent
hiiii'i^ which is not Ixuly only, Init body animated hy soul.
Ot .tins entire being (k'atli is the dissolution."
This is i)lainly incorrect. TliQ apostle distin'ijcuishcs
between the tabernacle and the one who dwells in it : "for
we Avhich are IX this tabernacle," he says a little fiirtlipr on.
The tabernacle was to be dissolved, not the inhabitant; and
the man is identified with the latter rather than the for-
mer. ^
'1. Another exjjression for death in the same i)assage (2
Cor. V. 4) is " beinjr unclothed": "no^-that wewould.be
Uficiot/icK'" \ r .
p]ven Dr. Field, materialist as he is,\sj)eaks here of "a dis-
embodied state." ]\[r. Dobnev on the contrary maintains
that " Scripture reco<;nizc« no j perfect l>/ disembodied state."
I ask, if there be not something to be disembodied, how
can you use the expression at all 'i Can one talk of" disem-
bodied hrcath '' or " (lisembodicd fife'.'* " ^^
The j>utting off of clothing, if that is a figure of disen?
bodiment, as it is, is simple, enough, but only when we
recognize a part, and that the higher ]>art, of man, to be
somethingothat is not the body, but is hi it, as the living
soul is. Mr, lloberts indeed talks, as is common witli him
when in a ditKculty, of the "inevitable fictions of speech."
**The exigencies of mortal speech,'' he; says, " require us to
speak of the |)eison as an entity separate from all that com-
j)Oses liiiii, and irheu Jhjai'e i^ aJded^ as in thin amc, the
effect i.i ;/rea/li/ hi }(jJite)i((7^ 4ittd (i theory like Mr. Grant's
,;^ . Would it not have been wisdom to have in<pnred tchtj the
use of the figure should so greatly heighten the effect, as he
admits it does, and whether the countenance it gives is not
more than merely " apparent " ? Surely the use of a figure
for a mere abstract jiersonalify, and a figure Avhich makes
the alistraction decidedly the higher thing, — nay, which
goes so fiir as to speak of the ^<' abstraction " as " putting oft*"
ihat which is llie reality, or being " unclothed " with it> —
DEATH.
95
i «»
>»
is Boraowhat overbold. But what difficulty wijl not the wit
and will of tnau comhincd surmolmt? i^"' "'^
Mr. Constahle, in lilt* comment on the passage, sihiply
refers this expression to the " liadcs state." Witli this we
are content, and sliall soon 'nuiuire wliat is that state. But
plauily liere <leath is not cessation of existence, what^er
(which for tlie present I leave open) becomes of sold or
spirit afterwards.
3. In the text in 2 Peter (i. !'>) before referred to, (jlcatli
is called '' decease," literally exodus, "♦leparture" : " j\.ller
rny departure."
Nowhere llu; man departs; where, is not the question
yet. The hkih departs, lie leaves the earthly house of
tbis tabernjKtle. Say, if you })lease, and if you can jjjather it
from the Bible, that after dying ho becomes extinct or un-
consciotis. That you must prove, if you can, from elsv^where.
Death is not it : does not infer or imply it. It is«| " de-
-parture." ^ f
4. And to tliis agrees the expression used again in 2 Cor.
V. (verse 8), "absent from the body."
People contend, I know (and it is their only hope), that l
this does not refer to death at all. ISfr. D(d)ney thus
attempts to pai:ij»hrase it l)y'" absent from tluA body,"
"this gross corporeal investiture" (investiture of whatV).
Mr. Ham ■ with al»senco "from our natural body,'' "our
present mortal and corruptible nature." Ellis and Itead
speak in tbe same way of the "body" here denoting a
"state of corruption and mortality," " this corruptible body
or nature." Roberts says, •' Wbat absence from the body
was it that Paul desired ^ Xot disembodinu'nt, for be says
in verse 4 of the same (chapter, ' Not that we Avould be un-
clothed.'" Mr. Constable seems on th-e other hand to allow
that " absence from the ]>ody " applies to tht^ death state
while he will not allow that "presence with the Lord"
similarly ai)plies to it, but to resurrection,, the two ])eing
brought in tliis way tog(^ther because between it and dying
*•-*'
U
thei-e
IS
nothing
but a
blank.
((
.'\-
This "
[the
resurrection
\
■■■'■ *■ ■ ■ . \
'■:/■ . 1
^
y
FACTS AND Til LORIES AK TO A FUTlltK STATE;
State], he says, " We have no doubt, is the ' pr<;sciice with the
I.6r(J' which Paul here bpoaks of, and not the intermediate
state, as Calvin and others dn-uin. For Paul had jnst ex-
pressed himself that this uiiclothed con<li4i(rn was //o^his .
desire or wish. He could not, with any consistency with
Ihis just uttered declaration, say that he should view it with
;a good satisfaction."
Yet the "willing rather "' ^/^a,>^, according to Mr. Con-
|8iahle"8 own view of it, include the intcrinetliato state, if
only as the way to tli-c' other, '' irlll'ni»j fitth- r to himhscnt
fi-o)n the boih/ aiuX to' Itc present with the Lord." Is not ■
that " desire" Ibr the unclothed stale ! And that these twp
things he desires are not successive, but contemporaneous
^cijnditions, is manifest also. For, wlicn bo^.says, " trJiiU we
are at home in the body we are absent froui tlie Lord," these
states, he m'dst adpiit, go togethvr : how then can it be -
doubted thatnhe two things he desires, being the opposite
of these conditions, go together also V
Mr. Roberts and others therefore with better judgment
concede this ; but then they have the vjuitc^as hopeless task
to achieve, of making " absent from the body " also moan
resurrection. They all coincide in opposing the apostle's
''not that we would be unclothed" to the simple and nat-
ural interpretation of his desire to be absent from the body,
as if the two were contradictory. But thjs is by no means
the case. He does say that what he f/rofinul for was, not
to be unclothed, but clothed upon, lie groaned for resur-
rection, ti:ue, and the unclothed state was not in itself what
he or any man desired. " Still, knowing that to be absent
from the body was to be present with the Lord, he was after
all " willing rather " to be absent. Death had no terror for
him, but the' reverse. To make ' absent from the body "
apply just to the time w'hen the br>dy will have its fulness
of bliss, is only to make incomi)reh<'nsible what is very sim-
ple.*. " In the body " never has the meaning they at tribute
* Roberts .substitute.s
sti tutf's " anbnid body " for *' body " iii the 'above
en with ^reat naivflc'' rf>itiark><. tliuf " Mr. fjrnnt him-
■ntpnce, and then
UK ATM.
07
to it, and that thoy havo to a<M wohIk to make it suit thfir
tl'oughts, iK a {.lain proof that their thoughtH are foieigii tcr.
Scripture.
And wlien the apostle, speakiiii; of his yftion of the third
heavens, says h.; cannot- tell whetJier at that; time he was
"in the hody or out of the l»o<ly," we have the exact expres-
sion in a way whicli no wonder tliey shrink iiom as they do. '
, -l*anl could nof iniatjine lie had j.ossihly had his glorious
body when ca,M;rl,t up theie, an<l lost it afterwards. Yet
he snpi>oKes he nli^dlt have been conscious of unutterable
thinjrs when '-out of tlie l,o.ly.' If so, why may not one
(as this chapter teaches) he - absent from the bQ<ly and yet
present with the Lord"'?
I slmll have aL^aiii to speak of this, when we come to con-
sider tlie question of consciousness in the disembodied state.
U IS sufficient for us here that such a state exists, if words
have meaning,'. Death is tliat disembodiment, the putting
off the tabernacle of tl»^r)a^', being unclothed, departing,
a!id being absent from IJP
>-3loieover, we liave already seen that Matt. x. 28 asserts,
that the death of the bo<ly is not the death of the soul.
Our Lord. bids us "fear not tliem wliicli* kill tlie body, but
are not able to kill tlie soul; but ratlier fear Ilim who is
able to destroy both soul andjbody in hell."
Mr. Hudson allows that this tciclus that death is not the
extinction of the soul, nor involves it. Mr. Dobney follows
on the same side. INIr. Ham wavers, admitting that it is im-
plf^"that the soul is distinct, from the body,"- but at the
same time suggesting that " soul " here may be- merely
" life." Ellis and Rea<l interpret it to mean that " wicked men
can only destroy the present being of tlie righteous^ and that
God could raise them up again." Miles Grant interprets
"killing the soul " to mean ." taking the life to come." Sim-
ilarly Roberts makes "soul" to be "a life in relation to
.^ self would not acktunvlcdgo the senleufe, thus deprived of its piquancy :
yot this 18 the form which eml i mlies the facts.' — So that the language —
UM'd bj' the apostle does hot, as he admits, " embody (///.«?) facts."
^
i^-
9»
VAtTS AN!) TIIKOKIKS Af< TO A FLTUKK STATE.
those who are Christ's, which cannot he touched by mortal
man, however they may treat the body, and the poor mortal
life belonging to it." * While others say, that " the dead in
Adam are not tksfnn/ni," because " in consoqucnce of the
provision made in Christ for the resurrection of x;very human
being from the Adaraic death, those who can kill the
body (take this lifr), only suspend our being till the resnr-
rection."
But the text beibre us will not bend t»» any of these criti-
cisms. If soul be life merely, those who kill the body
destroy i(. Such a phrase moreover as "killing fife" does
nbt, arid could not, exist at all, as I have before said : be-
cause "killing" is in itself ''taking ///;," and you could not
speak of taking the life of theV//('. "Life to come," or
the believei-'s life, jmnchr does itot moan; another word,
zoe, is invariably usrd for it. And the contrast between
suspension of life for the present an<l utter, destruction of it
is not what the j)ass:ige makes, but between a killing which
affects the body only, an<l the destruction which will over-
take holh bo<ly aji<l sf)iil in h<**l. 1 am only i-i*peating here
what I have said before, and what Mr. Hudson, destruc-
tionist as he is, has sai«l l)efore me. Vroof ig conclusive,
that when man dies his soul is not touched by it. If it is
cons,cious is another thing, and presently to be examined.
And what destruction of body and soul in hell is, I do not
inquire yet. Suffice it just now, that when we ^ut off the
body at death, the soul still lives.t
__.. _A. .- ,_,: -_ ^— .:,-^' '-
* He ikJw states that jjsuche liere means "the abstract power of
life^^^ich is in the liancls of 0(1(1;' hut there is nothin? at all about
this in the passage. Tie further brings in Matt, xvi 25, " He that loses
his life for my sake ". to sliow tliat \^f^\^c^\(i tJierf. eannot be immortal
goal, in which we agree. I liave before cansidered llio passage.
t Mr. Edw. White, in his •' Life ia Christ " fj). %), while agreeing with
this, considers it the ir-ult of redemption only, and quotes in proof
1 Cor. XV. 17-10: 'If Cliiisl be not raised. . . they also ^bich hav*^
fallen asleep in Christ hnvo rinuc to nothing'" nitmXovTo ! for thus h»
k
I .
-*fr
(
f
k
I .
\
COMHCIHlllUNUsk AVrKH llUAtfl.
99
*•%■
-^
AxmAP^^KR XL
COXHClOirSN'KSS AFTKR IlKATH.
1.
Thk queHtion of yonwciousne.ss may now. be taken u|
Of course every proof of it is proof also of existence. But
many who allow that the soul' ^jv'.s/.<j after death, will not
allow that it iy conscious. Thus Mr Hudson regards "the
soul as an entity not destroyed V>y the death of the body,
however <lependent it nuv)'"1)e upon embbdiraent for the
purposes of active existence." So with others,>whom 1
need not liere quote. TIkj thing <;ontended for is what is
unknown to^ (while professedly })ased on) Scripture — "the
^ii^ep of tlie souh"
mit you never tind in Scriptuf-e tl>e sonl sleeping. The
man sleeps, but always as identitie<l with the body. It is
a mode of speech found in slater Greek, outside the New
Testament/ It is never the soul that is in (juestion. So
Matt, xxj^ii. 52, ' '^nany hodicii of the saints which slept
arose." /Again John xi. 11, " our friepd Lazarus sleepeth;
but I go that 1 may awake him out of sleep,"— ri. e., by
raif-ing the dead. So Stephen fell asleep, and devout men
carried him to burial, — i. e., his body. So "David fell
asleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and A'^/y- ronimtlony
Again irt 1 Cor. vii. 39, "if her husband be dead (asleep) she
is at liberty to be married to whom she will' There it is
no question of 'Soul or spirit. Again, cli. xl. 30, "many
sleep " ; he is thinking of it as chastening, not the.joy of
explains the toria in the lblU)\vin<f vtMse : ' If in thin lift: ortlt/ we have
, hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.' "
,t deny that iiTto^XovTo means " gone to nothing." " Are perished "
^ as in the Auth. vers., is the propw rendering," and does not r/ifer to ma-
''^ terial destruction, any more than " if in this life only " does. To die
with a false hdpe is to perish, but not in the annihilation sense. For
— the me a ning of a , ii6\\vfit, see ehap s . xx.. xxi.
'•^.^,cf3
^«»
I h '
*r
*■
f
<3>
-.r_
|f-i
i' "
\\ '
i; ■■
■ '
[ -'
I
11
t;.
i
t
100 VA<n.S ANUTUKOHIKH ASTO A FUTURK^TATE. ,
presence with the Lord, which the hoiiI had. Again, ch. Xv.
6, " some are i'aHeir asleep."— fnllen out of tht- rank of wit-
nesses. Ch. XV. IS, "then t\ey also that are fallen asleep
in Chrir»t are iierished.' Ver. 20 :, " Christ is risen from
the dead and become -tlie fii-st-fruits of them that slept." .
There again the resurrection of the hody is in question.
So nhvays, if death be lo«ked at as qhastening, sorrowed
over as' we do over the breathless corpse, if it be simple'
history of the outward fact, or if resurrection be in question,
it is here that we find the phrase which people have blun-
' dered over, perfectJy simi)le,- intelligible and beautiful, as
we gaze upon the inanimate form, and brusii away our
te^i:s at" the thought, " our bro'ther shall rise again.''
Mn Constable, as usual with him, contlMuls for the iden-
jtifie?ition of man with his bo<ly, and absolutely ignores the
Scriptures which identify man with his soul or si>irit. He
can therefore from his point of view ssay : '• If people will
say, it is only the body that sleeps, then they must allow
that the body by Itself is man. If they siiy that man has
both body and soul, and that these united constitute man,
^then theyinust allow thai botli body and soul sleep." On
the sanie principle we must affirm that when Paul >vas
, caught up to the third heavens, inasmuch as it was the man.
Paul, who was caught uj^ and man is body, soul and spirit,
tWerefore that about whifh he was ignorant was whether he,
hvdtf, soul' and spirit, had been " out of the body" or not.
Mr.' Constable chooses to ignore, it seems, this wluJe class
of texts. No wonder, then, if he lose his balance and fall
into error. It ix not only his, it is conmion to materialists
, of every class. We have before considered this, however,
and need not repeat again what has been said in our very
first chapter. |> . ' '
. .Mr. Constable's argument as to 1 Thess. iv. 18 goes beyond
.the question of the api.lication of the figure. He argues
that the apostle here virtually tlenies the commonly held
doctrine of the intermediate state. N.
i " If thoso h<' wrot.' to inounH'd for sopiii-ation, if Paul comfort-
;. r -
'I.
,__j.:
* m
'■. i
, -.f •.
* -"i
I
■1*-
CONHClOUSPfKSS AFTEK DKA.TH.
lot
«d them with the prospect of reunion, if he pointed to the resur-
rection aa the consoUng prospect when- their longed-for reunion
would be ttcoonipLLshed, th»m by every fair infereuco he did not*
beheve or teach that there avouM be uni/ reunion before the resur-
rectiony
If the premises were true the inference might be a fair
one. But the grief of the The.ssah)riiaus was not the mere
personal grief of separation, and the apostle's comfort for
them is not the mere P^ospec^of reunion. It is, that "we
which are alive j^ll remain t®ie cpming of the Lord shall
not; prevent ipT'^cecle) them which are asleep ; for ....
the dead in C^Fist sh^ll rise jirsC' The thought of the
Thessalouian saints was this, that if Christ were to come,
as they believed He soon might, the dead in Christ would
be shutout of the joy of welcoming and being 'with Him ,
then by the fact of tlieir death. The apostle assures them
the livino- would have no i)recedenco over the dead in thia> .
reSpect: the dead hi Christ would be raised even before the
change of tlie living, and together they would be caught up
to meet the Lord and be with Him. Thus the intermediate
state was not at all in question. JIoio could it be for those
ALIVK till the coming of the Lorc^? How could living peo-
ple be united with dead ones in an intermediate state ?
Abundance of inspired testimony there is that death is
not, for the soul, a state of unconsciousness. The passages
»re well known, and need only to be cleared from the
objections which have been raised to their apparently very
simple meaning.
The conceptions of the Pharisees upon tTiis point are
acknowledged on all hands, and the familiar Story of Laza-
rus and the rich man in the lOtli of Luke is confessedly in
full accordance with them ; yet they would forbid us to be-
lieve this to be anything more than accommodation to the
superstitions of those whom the Lord addressed. Mr.
Roberts indeed very naturally suggests that "it maybe
'asked. Why did Christ parabolically employ a belief that
was fictitious, and thus give it His apparent sanction ? " To
31
9
■rK. ■"■
V
i!^:l
! I' ■ i
102 FACTS .VN1> THKOUIK. AS TO A FUTDHK «TATK. .
.Uich he answer. 0.aHe''wu»uotu^nga.^^^^^^^
once ; <W/(!) ''^ %*^ f^ir i.t^ tZ'ction of
man'^ testimony. • • nu^aia ^^^^
thit "to tlu3m it, w:i:s not given to knr,w tl.e niNsttrRS oi
that to. tncm o ihcrefoie lU' si><'l<^' »" P**'^'
tlLv iiUod to iustilv tl>o thing lie- I'K^a'ls toi. 1 '>'
wi aeU, ),ul .,ot for Ui. "uvkius; .,.>.a.,les (.» h. a-lmUj,
3 t!./ .^'--■■-. " Tl- "."-oaucins slavery n, o a ,,a>.
..St' <>nlyint.•oaua«g^vha.,u-^...• ce-t.uv -.tr.ct.o.^
hj Mosaic Unv,,c,-mi,te.l; a„.l if iU-l '^"^-V ^";^';^^.
al introauclion of a custom that ohta.no.l wa, not sane
1,,: it, . i.i>o .ho in..-,,,,„c,ion of -what ^f;^^^^:
.avi'asM,pa-stition,,r„„Wton,Lasheo«ns,to [...pauatc
t 'Hus .^a ailVcveuce whicl> upsets all his eouelus.ons.
'*■ But d,en. he asks, - Ate wo to n.ako a l-a'- « .a™-,. - y
and throw aw.v l>lahi tostin.onyV Are we t.. tw.st anjl,
t^late what is de!.r to ntak.it agree with what .e>,.,nlr .s
meant by what is aaraitte.Uy obscure .' ,.,„■„,. lass
I,,U.e 1 this is the comn.on r,.fu;.-e ol writers ot .h.s clas ■
M I , bney, it is a-ue. scn.s to a,l,ni, all we elaun about ..
■ o„,„,otr.aUv,since he conteu.ls that '• Scr,,,ture reco-
"^r^rfoeUy aisenO,oaiea s..er He,.ob.O.^ a,n^^
it therefore to the linal s.a.e. 15ul ''-'^"'^'^J^^^,
Lord .hows an t.ngo.dy n>a„ in a sla.e ot « - ^•'«*''-™
death. Uow Ion-,' it wouhl last is not n.tunated. It .s t.ue
: Se .as no ho„e for bin,. He eouhl „ot '""? '^;^, •
With tl,o l.rospec t of restoration. . . . enjoyn.ent. But « both.
-^ ^ ■■
r
,;5r^
-yi
%.
cojSsciouskess after death.
103
er-
ad
of
ro-
. It
3lu-
ion
ivill
I'm,
of
ara-
not
LMl-
the
>ur<(-
nits)
par-
ions,
t, the
sano-
once,
lato"
IS.
lount, ^
t aiu|.
ink is
class,
out it.
rocou'
ipplios
" Our
58 after
is true
self up
whether
that torment should endure forever, or would ultimately de-
stroy him, the parable does not intimate. It teaches a
-rriblc and hojicless state for the'wicked after death, and
tMtJsall." ' . ;
Edwcin Burnham also seems to admit the doctrine of con-
scious e^ence after death. Speaking of eternal punish-
ment ho sW"!So far as this tpicstion is concerned, man
may be conscdf^ or unconscious hi death until the final
j^l(lgmen^ 'riicrefore the parable of the rich man and Laz-
arus proves n(/.:.ing to the point of eternal torment, for that
parable n-f(>rs to .•••w/*-: frajisarfini,. hei-ori: the judgment."
But then he adds, '• The same maybe said of all those .
Scriptures which to some sj;em to teach that the dead are in
a conscious state.'' • r\'
For the rest, all seem to agree whh Mr. Hastings: "Of
couri^Q the ]>nr<M'. of -the ricli man and Lazarus is not" reck-
oned as teaching the doctruie; for all "laws of criticism
forbid that parables be ma<le use of to teach doctrines."
Unfortunately for those, however, who speak thus, they
themselves are' forced to admit that, parable or not, it is
'« founded upon " what Mi-, lloberts calls " a theoretic fact,"
i.e., the belief of the PhariseGST-^that^ the^object of it,
moreover, is really to lift the veil from the other world will .
be plain if we consider the connection with the rest of the
chapter. For the Lord had been speaking in the first part
of it of man as an unlaithfnl steward under sentenc.e of dis-
missal, but with the goods of his Divine Master yet in his
hand. He had thereupon exhorted theiKi : "Make to your-
selves friends of the mammon of unrighteousnesSj that when
>% fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations."
Thereupon* the l^harisees, who wer^ covetous, derided Him,*
and to them He pr:eaches -^this (parable, if^ you please) to
sliow how what w:y ighly esteemed among men was abom-
ination in the siglit of (^o.^ The point is here : "Thou in
thy lifetime reofiivedst tl^y good thhigs," and now "thou art
tormented.'' No crime is charged but this, his failure as to
the unrighteous mammop. He could not serve God and
•■ ' • • .,-. C- • . ■. '
(;
104 FACTS ANDTH«:OKIKS AS.TO A FUTURE STATE.
mammon. He had served mammon and not God. And,
"he he,,av ho had neglected .as lKM;ne^om h.^ga^
into Abrahan.V i.osom, l.c wa. tormontoa. How Uu^ ^
dressed it.r.lfto<-<.votousPhansoos IS .as.ly seen. And the
state deseribed is of a man in.mediately ^'^^^^"^
ment, bef;^re the res.nrection (>nd tl>o ^judgment, vvith ,
bpethreit Btill on earth to be preaclied to. ^ „
You may call it parable, if you wdl. The state of the
dead is the very thing it is designed to c.dorce; and th^
rcpresentatVon of it is acknowledged to be based on Phari-
saic sentiments. ,, T^^-1
II ik Singular, however, how the terms nsed by our Lord
are miarrelled with. If literally construed, Mr. Roberts
urtres* " it upsets the belief it is cp.oted to prove, and su -
fititutU the traditipn of the Pharisees, which Jesus was pa -
V abolically using. ' If ^a literal narrative, it clashes with Ui.
popular theory of the death state ia the lollowmg particu-
lars. We read, ver.\21, that the harjar d.ed, and AV as
oumiED-hot his imnlat^rial soul, but he, his bodily sdf^
bythe/angels into Al\raham's bosom; the rich man also
died, and 'vas buried ; and xn hell, where he had been buried
(hell, hades and grave being synonymous) he lilted up li.s
■ eyes;' etc. He also tells us lhat -immnteiial souls could
easily have got over the great gulf fixed ; and that if the
popular view were correc-t, a^splrit might have been sent
to the five brethren without one needing to rise Irom the
dead. , , , .,
This is, no doubt, said in serious earnest, although it may
not seem so. But it is a siK^cimen of the blinding delusion
under which these men lie. Think of a man telling us, tha
it was the tradition of the rharisces, that men were carried
'hodily afler death into Abraham's bosom ; that hades or
4iell and the grave were synonymous! and that meii were
tormented in the grave! Tf this parable, teaches literally
the traditions of the Pharisees, this is what he ^ays it
* teaches. _
.■■^
I
! '
^' Twelve Lo<>tiirP!<.
*
1
)
'
»
■/ I
*
'i "
' :Mz:-:
CONSC lOUSiN ESS AFTEll DEATU.
105 1
,^.
1
-I
..I
S
i
■J
• But I purBue this no tiarther than to ask where the parable
Htatesthat the beggar'^ " bodily self" was carriad into
Abraham's bosom V Of course, if there is no other 8elf
than a bodili/ one, all is plain. But that is as little the doc-
trine of the Bible as it was of the Pharisees. As to hades,
and what it is, we may see shortly : But would it not be
rather foolish, even in a parable, to put it that " hi the grave
he lifted up his eyes, being in torment " ? To such straits
are men reduced who refuse the f^cripture doctrine of the
soul's consciousness after .loath. We may well thank God
for making it so plain.
Figuratlce, no «loubt, the
language
is. " Abraham's
bosom" is not literal, any more than the gulf over which
souls cannot pass. Nor do we contend for souls absent
from the body having eyes or tongu^^s or fingers. Mr. Rob-
erts asks in view of this; how, if Ave "feel at liberty to
admit thenon-actuality of these things spoken of as apparent-
ly real," can we |)e " so sure about the reality of the other
])a^ts that apparently favor (our) theory of the death state ?"
I a/swer : first, because it is addressed to Pharisees, ariA
founded (as Mr. R. himself acknowledges) on their belief,
whichjthe Lord thus takes up and adopts without a word of
/jirotest, without one hint of its being the gross and heathen-
ish delusion jNIr. R. would have it.
Secondly, because figures, as it would seem, must neces-
sarily be used in speaking of a state so far removed from any-
thing of which we have experience. That is, words, phrases,
and ideas, borrowed from things around us must be taken
and adapted to these imseen things.
Thirdly, if the object were only to represent a final award
in resurrection no reasoh can be given for not picturing that
award directly, as is done elsewhere, instead of representing
it under the figiire of a fabulous death state. - The perfect-
ness of the representation Avould surely suffer by so unnatu-
ral a proceeding.
The figures are not difficult at least to read intelligently,
for one who is as to this point of doctrine a Pharisee, as we
V'
l.i
¥r'
n
i f.
i\
■\i
p\
IOC FAtTS AND THLOKIES AS TO A FUTUKE STATE.
shall see Paftl the apostle was, and as we may confess our
selves without shame to' be. And thus are conveyed to u»
thoughts that it seems in no other way could we have so
" vividly presented. The meanintr is only no clear, that thoSe
who oppose it are driven to the wildest e.vpedients to escape
from its plain speaking.
Thus Dr. Loask transcends even Mr. Roberts in grotesque
effrontery. lie says* as to Lazarus' being cairied into
Abraham's bosom : " Fact it cannot be. Otherwise you
have the extraordinary thought of angels carrying a dead
man, a loui/tsonu corjpse, to the bosom of Al»raham " ! 1
Shall we add the still more extraordinary thought of this
''loathsuine corpse" being "comforted" in this strange
resting place ! and of the rich man Avan ting to sciid it to his
five brethren, etc. But, says Dr. L., "this parable is un-
equalled for the vividness of its imagery " I And he adds,
after the usual fashion : "The word translated ' hell' here is
hades, the Greek etpuvalent of the Hebrew 67hc>/ and of the
English i)rar>;' etc. , Vivid imagery indeed ! ^^^
Ao-ain, " Surely soVuM- and serious thought must convince
any onts that tlie conversation between the rich man and
Abraham must be parabolic, for Abraham himself was
dead. (I) If Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are consciously
alive, our Lord's argument to convince the Saddiicdes of
resurrection loses its point. God is not the God of the dead
but of the living: th< refoir these honored saints shall Vist'
from the dead some day; that is the argument, and it ,i>
irresistilde."
* Dr. Leask has scarcely read the passage attentively
enough, or he would have seen that if God said at the bns/i,
"I AM the God of Abraham, ■ mdlle is not the God of the
(lead, Abraham must have been in some sense livhig then;
or it would have been"! ?^r^s• Abraham's (iod, while he
lived, and I ^r/'/ /^r, when he lives again." ^^
There is one other argument the doctor gives, which has
somewhat more in it: that ^^ neither j-cwards nor punish.
* The Rich Man and Lazarus. -
I
ik
i' t:
4'
4.
CONSCIOUSNESS AFTER DEATH.
107
this
ments are given till after judgment," which Mr. Constable
has (Enlarged somewhat more upon, and therefore I leave it
to look at it with him. Those then are Dr. Leask's reasons
for turning aside the application of this parable from the
death state altogether, and applying it to the setting aside of
Israel and the bringing in of the Gentiles by the gospel.
This, to convict "covetous " Pharisees of their liability to
be excluded from "y?ye/'/a.9i(m.7' habitations"! * , j
General Goodwy^* attempts to show that the Lord in
his parabolic teachings did '* </r/o/9« some of the prevalent
[false] conceptions, and proved by the unerring wisdom of
His mod^of treatment^ their fictitious origin and constitu-
tion." He adduces the first four parables of the kingdom
of heaven in Matt, xiii, in proof of this position. But he
neither does, nor can, show, that the Lord incorporated any
prevalent errors with His teaching there or anywhere crse.
The Lord gives us on the contrary what is simple and recog-
nizable truth as to the form 1\he kingdom should assume in
the period of His absence. For the kingdom exists now, and
T he' condition of it of which He speaks exists also. The " pop-
ular ideas" Gen. Goodwyn seems to refer to are but misani"
prehensions of these very parables, and not errors He adopts
in anywise. Let him put his finger if he can upon one
error the Lord teaches there or elsewhere.
Now hero, if the consciousness of the dead is error, the
Lord does teach it, and without the least warning of its
being such. The two inconsistencies the General thinks to be
.in the parable are not there: viz., either the " ^««? condi-
tion of punishment ■' being " before the day of judgment," or
dead people being '' in the body." Very strangely does he
add • " Thus were these traditional and palpably erroneous
views woven into the Divine discourse, serving the purpose
of exp>osing the conceit of mere human theology " .' Were
' these things " traditional " ? Certainly not, at least, the
thought of being in the body after death ; or can he produce
the tradition? 'Grantini; thoy wore -traditional," and also
C,
* Truth :iii<l Tia<lifion.
\l
:■: ^
108 FA< TS AN1> TIIKOUIKS AS TO A FrTi:KK STATK.
"palpably erroneous," if their error were not jialpablcin the
tradition themRelves, how could the Lord's adopting them
make them become so? Surely the relisoning is as pitiable
as much of what we have elsewhere had upon the same
side^
But he still goes on:
" This parable of the rich man and Lazanis is a supplement
to that at the beginning? of the el)Hi)t."r. of thf rich man and his
steward, both being designed to enforce ihv piercing tmth, that
'that which is highly esteemed among men is an abomination m
the sight of God,' ver. 15, tlie connecting link between the two.
In regard to the first parable, human cmft had instituted the
idea that a welcome to the ' (>vorlasting habitations ' was to be
secured by means of the friendship of 'unrighteous mammon,'
or worldly riches ; palpably in opposition to the principle of ver.
15; but by mentioning the incident of the unjust steward, the
^ Lord showed that, though man might commend bis act, it is
divinely deemed unrighteous still.'"
And this is exposition of Scripture! ^- Me- placed the rich
man in the flame, and the begL'ar in Abrahnm's bosom.
thereby proving that a, position in the kingdom of heaven
could not be purchased by ' unrighteous mammon.' "
Doubtless it could not ; but was it not just h\- not having .
made himself frimd^ of the' unrighteous mammon that
placed the rich'man in the tlame V Who can deny or doubt
it? And who can suppose that solemn exhortation. ' T say
unto you, make to yourselves friends of the mammon of un-
righteousness," with the questions following: "If, there-
fore, ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, »
who will commit to your trust the true riches," etc., to be the
,. adoption of error? If General Goodwyn cannot reconcile ,
this with the gospel, he is ignorant of the blessed fact, that
the gospel in no wise sets aside the eternal principles of
right and wrong, but reaffirms them all. True, riches will -
i not purchase heaven, nor could aught save the Redeemer's
b IftH Rfid work. True, eternal life is God's gift, not man's
purchase or his work. Vet shall '■ they that have done good
come forth unto the resurrection of life, and they that have ^
■i H,
mm
'w*'
(HJNH(:iOUS5fi:SS aftkii dkath.
109
done evil unto the resurrection of damnation." That "we
are His workmanship, created iu Christ Jesus wito r/ood
works'' is the connecting trutli that puts all in its place and
explains all.
I need not then repeat what I have said already as to the
scope of these parables, nor follow the argument further
with General Goodwyn. We shall only finally examine
Mr. Constable's treatment of this sul»ject in his volume dn
Hades, already -so largely quoted.
He, too, asserts that 'in the words of Christ, hades is
identified with the grave, and the dead in hades are repre-
sented as alive and speaking." This we reserve for future
consideration. He begins the argument with a /significant
Statement that, if this parable "could be truly shown to
teach their [the non-extinction] views, the only effect would
be that of establishing a contradiction between one part of
Scripture and another, or of ajfbrdhui reason to think th^_^
this parable of Lazarus, drspife the authdrittj of mannscriptd;'
formed no part of the original Gospel of St. Luke." (!)
He begins by asserting, what I shall not question at all,
that this story is a parable. He contends that on this
account *' the entire tale may be fictitious." But, while
talking as usual freely ^f Platortism, he ignores the fact so
fully allowed by others, and so impossible to be denied, that
it adopts (and, the argument is, sanctions) the belief of the
Pharisees. This plainly puts it on ground different alto-
gether from those Mr. C. appeals to, wherein "the trees
engage in political discourse," etc. Even this i^ort of
representation we never find the Lord using in His parables,
that I am aware. But ceiflLly He never^opted the su-
perstition^ He condemned, nor made the ti^cutions of men
the basis of His^wn authoritati"^e teachin^f. This plain dig-
tinction Mr. Constable seems never to have thought of, and
of course has not noticed it. In reality it takes the ground
from underneath his feet. Not only is the argument quite
unanswerable, that the Lord eotdd not have employed false -
hood ja.8,the vehicle of truth (and without even a hint as to
■i'i ■
1^
i'i
h-M
i ;■■
110 FACTS A KD THEORIES AS TO A FUTrRE STATI.
its being false), but that also the very moral of the tale !•
this, "And 1 say unto you, Make to yourHelves friends of
the mammon of unrighteousness : that when ye fail, they
may receive you into everlasting habitations. ' This is the
rich man's condemnation : his riches were his accusers now,
and not his friends. lie had received his goo<l things, taken
his portion in a world that passeth away. Now he was tor-
mented. And observe how precisely the language accords
with this: it is '* when ye fail " — that is, of course, f/ie ; not
when you are raised as Mr. Constable must read it ; no, but
that "WHEN YE FAIL, they may receive you into evi»--
lasting habitations." The precise doctrine is there, given in
plain words and not parable at all, and illustrating and con-
firming the parable. ,
We might leave Mr. Constables argument h(!re, but there
is one other point, insisted on already both by Leask and
Goodwyn, to which we must reply before we dose. ,Mr.
Constable supposes —
" that Christ, for the jnirpose of his parable, nntedatcs it. What
will really^happea to such men us Div^ and La/arus when they
axe raised up at the resurrection, Ho ^apposes to happen to them
in Hades before the resurrection ; and He consequently supposes
them to be aUvo in this Had^ state, and capable of, feeling,
speech, etc. . . In His expianation of parable upon parable He
has Himself explained that it is m)t until the ' tiioo of t^e harvest,'
until ' the end of the world 'or age, that His people are gathered
into His bam and shine as the sun, .vhile the wicked are sent as
taxes to the burning. Over *ind over He has told us that Gehenna,
and not Etades, is the place of torment. . , . We are therefore not
merdy justified, 'but absolutely required by Scripture to hold
that our Lord iq. this parable antedates it in timr-, a liberty which
the nature and character of parabolical di.sconrse fully entitled
Him to do." ' -~i
Now the passage ^^eJiave just quoted from the chapter
before us^ and manifestly connected with t\ e parable in
question, affirms th^ Opposite of this: '' that when ye fail.
they may receive you into everlasting habitations." This
shows that lit death we are received, and that there is no
-f^
ti
CONSClOUaNESS AFTER DEATH.
Ill
1« it
s of
they
I the -/
-f^
antedatiug. Doubtless it is after the judgment, <,t works,
and therefore after resurrection, that the exact recompense
is given, the exact measure of punishment is meted out.
m in the meanwliile the suirits of the lost are - spirits m
vruoa'' (1 l^'t. iii. 19), witK no uncertahity as to their
being lost, any more than he who, "ab^M.t from the body,
is "present with the Lord," is uncertain of his own salva-
tion. Even now are we privileged to know the latter it
really ours (1 John v. 18). And " the angels who sinned
referred to by the apostle Peter, though -reserved unto
mdgment" are yet " delivered into chains ot darkness,
while waiting for it ('2 Peter ii. 4). Similarly the " host of
the high ones" and "the kings of the earth "shall be
gathered together as prisoners are gathered in the pit, and
shall be shut up in the prison," ath'r a whole millennium
"to be visited" and Judged. (See Isa. xxiv. 21-23, and
compare Kev. xix. l9-xx. 3, etc.) - .
Then it is a false application Mr. Constable makes of the
parables of the tares and/wheat . For these " tar^s " are^men
alixe " in the field," the world, when the Lord comes, and not
dead men at all. So exactly with the '' wheat." The Lord
is speaking of the clearing of the field in the day of harvest,
and not at all of resurrection eten. Nay more, the very
parable itself is deciuw arjamst his whole argument. For
the tares gathered and cast in the tire are so dealt with when
the Eord appears, before the millennium, and therefore a
thousand years before the resurrection and judgment of the
wicked at the great white throne. Let any one compare
Rev. xix., XX., and sec if it be not so.
Again the Lord does say that there is torment in Gehenna ;
but he does not say, that in Hades there is none. The
Scripture Mr. Constable refers to is conclusively against
him. The plain.and simple impression which any one would
receive from the first hearing of the parable, becomes only
the more indisputably correct, the more we examme it.
Thei-*^ is the harmony and consistency of truth innt, and
this the arguments of its opposers only the more bring out.
iif*
.i!|
.:!i
I - .
HL' FAITS AM» THi;uKIK.>> Af TO A FUTUUK STATE.
^.
t
B^A*
^^i-
#
■i;.,
m
} :
-• 1 ■ ■
Mi
CHAPTEli XII.
cons<mi)i:h.\ess aftek dkatji. ... 2.
'••«.'#
T\
We liave seeu then the LoiUatKiiniuj^ the doctrine of the
Pharisees as to conscious existence ip happiness or misery
in the intermediate state. Xi^a shall now pa.ss on to a passage
M'hich sliows how lar the discijjle»Jf the Lord had imbfbed
the Pharisaic, or let us rather b^N-, the Scripture doctrine,
with whidi the Pharisaic was identical. Foe we read that
when, alter His resurrection, they were gathered together,
" Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them, and saith mito
Ihem, Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and
affrighted, atuf i<iij>jn>ff d tliot tiny had .s( r/l a sj,ir'd. And
He siilp'unto thein, Why are ye troubled, and why do
thoughts arise in your hearts 'i Behold my hands a||il ms
feet, that it is I myself: handle ub and see; tor
e see me have " (L
h^th not llesli and bones, as ye
anything^
spirit thei
gardener,
taken IliniJ
Noi,V,^l|cre it is i)lain they recognized tlK» form of the
Lord, fqli^gk^ none of the appearances to them do we find
^"'*' tet^makc them think otherwise it was a
^|f !Mag€alene had KUj>jK)8ed Him the
Fon the^|feLy^.to Emmaus just before had
i^ordinaryTiian. Moreover, they had just,
come among the other disciples, and .foinid them "saying/
The-^Lord is risen indee<l, and hath appeared mito Simon."
Then, while they Avere gjiving their own account, "Jesus
Himself stood in the midst," It was this sudden appear-
ance,^the <loor being shut, that staggered tliem. They did ,
not doubt who it was, nor, luid they doubted, would hamlltn(f
Him have'given them that knowledge. The Loj-d does not '
n e ed to nam e Himself, nor do it. — He does not say, " It in I,
.7f'«»/.s," but "it is T, wry.sv//;" using that common languaifc
:4
1 .-i
'';Vl
^.
■<$
T.%
w-
'J
I
^
spirits/' But thiH is, not tlu^ questiou, but whether it w»8
Ho Himself in bodilv i)iest'nce, or as a Hpirit. The whok?
, circumstauces and tlie Loril'#» wonls assure us crt this.
* Upon the autliorlty of "some ancient 31SS.^ of Luke,^
Uoherts would substitute " /^'/<////«.s//t(/ " i'or pneUnm in ver|
37, and then, without /<//// authority, make y>yit'«//ta mean!
phantasma in the liOth verse. Having thus oonverted*
" spirit " into " piumloin,'' hv wouUl mako the whole a ques-
tion of " reality or of spet-tral illusion."
But Mr. 11. can find no* such meaning for "pneuma" in
,>>Ahe New Testament or in t\ie Greek language anywhere,
as "phantom" or "'•^)ectral illusion/' and he must know he.
cannot. Hence his anxiety to import " phantasma " into
ver. 37, a reading unanimously rejected by every editor of
the Greek that I am acciuaiiited with, and disproved by the
fact of its being nnquestioiiably jmeiima in the 39th : for if
their thought had been that it was a mere illusion that they
saw, the Lord would not have answered it by saying, "a
spirit,^'' etc.
It was not with them then a question of illusion or reality,
but of bodily w spiritual inesence. Mr. R. objects that the
Lord says, "It is I niyself," i^nd that His spirit, according
to the common belief, wouhl have been Hlniself. But all
ilepends upon the point of view. To those who had had Him
*as th^living man among them, the mere visit of Hisdepart-
> ed spirit would not have been " Himself," for it is no question
of, .m e taphysical accuracy, but of heart, to which th e Lor<i
responds. They saw Him, did not believe that it could be
t^
\ 4
jii
1%
&>
ir
^ r^V:J\''i'-
■li'^'^'^-
•■,«;(. V."
■«>■„■■>■
kr
•fil
114 FACTS AND THE()B1E« AS.TO A FUTURE STATE.
alivins mau'come among them in that mysterious way,
therefore thought they saw a spirit; to which He answer,
by bidding' them prove that He had tlesh and bones. Ihus
it was not what wouUl have been the evidence ot the tri-
ulhph of death i.verHim, but what their hearts would call
BurCere then it is very plain tha|, the disciples ot the
Lord were us to this point Pharisees, or Platonists, it you
will. And:,4t is as plaui that, instead of checking their
thou^'hts /is superstitious fancies, He ^appeals instead to
the bodilessness of a >' spirit," and His"6wn Hesh and bones.
Xor-is there - parable" to justify (as tli^y say elsi^where) the
empl6vnu..nt of fictitious speecli." The fav(,rite. arguments
fall here like broken arrows from the panoply of truth.
How common a um- of ,th« word " spirit " this is, we may
see by ll»e in.spired statement of the Jewish views m Acts
xxiii 8- '"For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrec-
tion, 'neifhr ^i^A „n,' .y>(,v7 ; but the Pharisees confess
holhr Thero a.j:ain the word " spirit" is takim as ordi-
narily applvin- (as our word "ghost /'which is equivalent,
docs* now)" to the spirits of men apart, froin the body.
Angels are given as another class. And thi' context con-
fifnTs this: for P:ml ht'iug called in (pieslion about the
resurrection of Jesus, iiad declared himself a Pharisee, a
believer in ivsurrectioii ; and hereupon the council was
divided, ''and then; arose a great cry; and the scribes that
were of the Pharisees' part arose and strove, saying, We
.find no evilin this man, but if a sp\nt or an awjd hath
spoken tohim, let us not fight ngi^nst God." Agahist this
passage Mr. Storrs' criticism on Luke xxiv. .'VJ falls pointless.
" Angels are spirits,' says he, " but have not a b.ody of flesh
and bones." " 'But in these two last rpiotc^d passages, and m
identified t>H(h th: Phansi'.o^' helief (the nature of which all
admit), angels are named as a separate class of beings from
^ these^spirits spok^i of,— " if a spirit or an angel." In a
Pharisee's mouth even our oi)ponents allow the meaning of
such words. And with their belief Paul links himself. For
'I
CONSCIOITSNESS AFTER DEATH.
115
having declared himself a Pharisee, and called in question
as to one point of a Pharisee's belief, the resurrection of the
dead, it is added as showing the points in which their faith
coincided with the Christian's : '^''for the Sadducees say that
there is no resurrection, neither ongel XOR spirit ; but the
Pharisees confes';, both." The language of the inspired
writer here shows his own consent with this doctrine : " the
Pharisees coiifeH.-i (or acknowledge) both. When 1 speak of
"acknowledging'' a thing, I plainly suppose it true, what is
acknowledged. And thus in these matters the Pharisaic
and the Christian faith are one.*
f I take tbo light this gives me, how plain and simple it
makes sugb passages as the Lord's words to the dying thief,
for instance : '' To-day "shalt thou be with me in Paradise.'"
Or Stephen's piayor in the midst of the stones of his ene-
mies : " Lord Jesus, receive my spii*it."t Or " the spirit
* Roberts says, " We prefer to let Mr, Grant" have the full benefit of -
this. His inference that Luke endorses their opinion is too unsubstantial
to call for serious arcjumentation." Be it sf». but many will judge
differently, and of the motive also for declining argument. Paul's " I
am a Pharisee," he passes OTer entirely.
t Would it be believed that in the " Bible v/h Tradition " it is asserted
the " grammar of the text charges the saying. Lord .Jesus receive my
spirit, upon the nicked .Jews, and aftef wards records what Stephen
said and did " (2d ed.. p. 98). This is from people who appeal aot
only to Greek and Hel)rew, but to Syriac, and what not ; and yet theV
assert what anV sfiutoiboy in Greek could contradict. For the words
translated " calling 'iii)on and saying " are in the singular- number, and
could not poss;'>JT apply to the Jew.s, or to any but Stephen himself,
' Z. Campbell (" Age of Gospel Light," p. 44) concurs with this :
" Now it seeni.s it was the same fJiey that ran upon kira, and calling
upon God. . . . But it may bo asked, why the Jews should say, Lord
Jesus, receive my spirit ? Only by mocking the confidence of Stephen
in the Saviour." .
In the 6th ed. of Ellis ari'i Head's book just referred to (" Bible vs.
TradHion," p. 90), they give anoth^p^-yeri^ion of the passage, equally re-
markable for learning ; speaking of the word translated " receive," they
say, " Dexia means the rifjht, cheir, hand, being understood ; meta
phorically it means assistance, aid, strength, courage, and is equal to
the expression . Cnrd J es us , stret igthen m y s pirit, or nerve me up to
"*%£**-.
•,!^
'1
H'
V:
116 FXOTS AN.. ™K0K.| ,VS TO A Ff XUBB SIATF..
sage that speakB (Heb. x,,. -J) "t ;,.,„„ection, which
rip h.r:h:;connecr,„„.. Mea,nv„-,>.. , , o s-e
"tp'^lT^t-a^occr, a —n, which has nat^y
— " .7 . .ommon Om-k w..r<l, r^^^r^ rightly iranslatpcl
endurance." Here a mmmon .u "^ .< nght (haml)/'
receive (a verb), is mistaken tor tl,. '"/;;',. ^;=^;,.,;., ;,, f.Uv the
Whether the wickedness ^-^P^^'-^'\^\,^l, ,,l Annihilationist
wickedness.I leave others to decule. l.u.
leader^. .. .,«rtr» the thief is ther'efore reserved
,„ thi.. Hi> remark, as to ^^'V^'""^ J . ,„ ,„ spe„k. irMSure
.h.l Steph«.-» prayer mean, thai " • -"^"J^^ ';, „^ ,„^„,„ .^t per.
to spirit or life for him, h,» J'-"-™" "^^ f;^' ' ., „„,.. than - hrea.h
toh." Here il is more convenient fo. ''^ '";»> „ .. ,„ „,„»-
■„iK"anntoa.„> '•"« "^ -^.^^rt ;:,r: Xwhere.l, an
i, to treasure up .hi, ^T"''' '"'I'^J:';^^,,, „.Rher •• life • nor
.. S;„-rtf,of jus. men, on .*' " '"^^.^j.^^.^,,, „,.„, t„ l,im,e,f
.. energy," but ■■ .».«..-- M^ « ;,";^ ^^_^ ,^^ ^„ „„„„,.., s„
,hatA>.mean,ng of sp., 1 ^.^^ ^^ of just men made perfect,"-n..-
'< we are come to. . .the«"iic. ,'L tV,^ heavenly citv, the New
,., the conneetion. - .■■ Mo"- ^-■-' ;;''':,\;' ,o the »enera,
.lerusalem. and to an innnmeraWe . ompan , ^^ ^^^,
,,.embly and chnroh of the «-"'''";•;',?,'";;;, ...'.peaks to us
to the «»««■««-« of iust men ™-<l« J'*;'. ,JX in which both the
„f that future, which is yet so mmeAM''''' f»^ J. , .. „,
chur"h of the firstborn finds tt, completeness, --i^^' ^^ ,,,„
"l*"*-^*'"'™f,.>t^t ndf" *em tbLh.ii be attained in
not be made perfect. For us ana i according to our ^'iew (a
the resurrection day •, and there ,s no anomaly acco g ^^ ^^^^^^^^ „
... ^ir.1. so poorly under^a^s^ahn^ ^ ^^^
by getting back again the horiy, tor ,...
old created and ordaii»ed
^
,i! ■
• ■}
H-
coNsoiousisrESS abteU death:
117
pas-
1
men ^
1
jrhich
1
•will
'
some
-1
iirally
bject.
y cor-
:-^:r
But if
imatic
inslatpd
!).•'
oily the
lationist
reserved
e thinks
treasure
that per-
" breath
to those
■re, is an
And Gofl
life ■' nor
> himself
n<l.') So
?ct,"— no-
, the New
le general
of all, and
eaks to us
I both the
men " of
nt us shall
ittained in
3ur view (a
perfected "
1 it was of
expression meaning * worth my while '], yet what I shall
choose I wot not. For I am in a strait betwixt two, having
a desire to depart and be with Christ, which is far better ;
nevertheless to abide in the flesli is more needful for you."
The passage is simple enough, and would scarcely seem to
need any explanation. But for the sake of distinctly review-
ing the objections made, I shall divide it into its parts, and
look at each part separately.
.^ (1.) In the first place, to the apostle, the object of his life
was Christ, and to die was gain. This is the plain meaning.
Nevertheless it is denied. "Do you ask," say Ellis and
Read, ".how then it would be gain (f» Paul to die? Paul
does not say it would be gain to him. Fill up the ellipsis
according to grammatical laws : ' For me to live will be
gain to the cause of Christ, for Christ will at all events be
magnified in my body, whether by my life or by my death.
And for me to die is gain to the cause of Christ, for Christ
will be magnified in my body, whether I die or live.' If
you insist that it would be gain to Paul to die, we reply,
He does not say so, and if it would bo gain to him person-
ally, then he would not. be in perplexity which to chdose."*
Mrl Hudson spe,aks similarly, though more cautiously. So
also Dr. Field.
But the interpreta^tion is not admissible. For the fuoi
yap (for to me) standing at the commencement of the sen-
tence is necessarily related to both clauses of it : " to me to
live is Christ, and (to me) to die is gain." Nor does he say,
" to me to live is gain to the cause of Christ " at all, but to
me to live is Christ, Christ is the object of my life. And
when he comes to speak of death being gain, he never says,
^'to the cause of Christ" at all, but '• (to me) to die is
gain." I need not comment upon the remark that " if it
would be gain to him personally, he would not be in per-
plexity which to choose." Of that people must judge for
themselves, and of the knowledge of Christian spirit which
' i\ shows. The apostle goes on to say :
'•*--■
* Bible vs. Tradition, pp. 13'.», 140.
I i
!■<
■ I 1
/ :
,18 F.CTS AKI. THee«.ES A« 10 A .".HE STATE.
■ (2.) .. Yet what I shall choo«e I wot not. for I am >n .
strait hetwixt t wo:" ^^ ^ ^ ^ ^^^^ ^ gai„ t„
IB it not pla.n that if ".»""^J^'' :( ,; ,,eath or life;
him, that he was in a -^^f'TT^ "hey were equally in-
„„ becaa»e, a« Kllis and Road -^^^ J^ ^^^^ „f \,ei„g i„
. .liUerent to him,"-.1.at would '« ^ ^^^ ,,;^ I.,,,,^ because
a »«ra,7 betwixt two equaily md.ffm^«^^ .
. itwasaauesr,onofchoos.n.l. ownmte^^^^^^
saints, as he go,s on to UU u^: ^ ^^.,,^^ ^^^^ _
have another version of .t. H'* m^ . ,^.,.,,
that Paul possessed an -™- /''^J;;,; ,w„ indifferent
thing was obviously -*«-,-,„' 1,^ '^Z^,^^^', and going
ones, and f ^-f"";!"" ',, ^? n" or death was one of .the
immediately to Christ, for ">""-, referable to life as
things that ho did not ^«-"; ;" ,'^>, P,,, „i„g was ' far
to decide his chou-e. Lut ; -"' ^ ,.,f better than-
..better.' Better '»'»" ^^''"V; J , TAr*/.'-"'/ toim/"
death ; therefore .fo-'A -«'■' ''^~ I'be apostle says.
ThisisremWkahlereason,n,cna,n . J^ ^^^ ,^^,
.■I am in a strait ''otwixt two • t ■; [ am in
between the two, ^^•'^<^» '.\^"r' ,,f "j^er ■ «-.^«-f/,*«.s "-
, and he with Christ, which « " ' ^^ ;,^ ;, „„,« „„«!-
tere is the rtrtTlih^^ de ^^ w:.,dd he his gain.and
/W/Vy"-" ^'''''.f ,rwweenA«"!<-" gai"='°<i ''*''•
: heknewit.thestrai -;^;;;: Viff.rentS« o/*^, b«t
?eS t^andMil^lATa.. and did not .now whi^to^
-"^ W was no third thing at all 't ": " f :.'': r:^
his strait on
si"t;-rt'ss:«"—
r*
CONSCIOUSNESS AFTEK DEATH.
119
n in a
;ain to
ir life;
tlly in-
;ing in
ecause
of the
quoted
I thing
8 thivti
liffereut
1 going
B of the
life as
tvas 'fal-
ter than
St le pays,
;ay these
u I am in -
says the
Kllis and*
1 Never-
ceive that
perplexity
to depart
ihfjpss " —
more m&d-
is gain, and
and other
either, but
w which to
Q>
a deafiTe to
the one
P
an
them, was just his difficulty on the other. And thus "de-
parting and being with Clirist ' is fixed to mean his dying ;
just as his '* abiding in the ilesh ' is fixed to mean his //y</J,v.
(3.) But here a great tumult is raise<l, and much knowledge
of Greek is endeavored to be shown in letting us know that
T it dyaXv.^yai, does not4nean " to depart " at all. So Messrs.
Hudson, Roberts, Ellis and Read, would all have it, " having
a desire for iiiE itmuiOTlNO and being with Christ,"' suj;
posing it to r(!fer to Christ's returning. The latter Writers
go on even to suppose that it was better for the Philippians
that Christ shonM not come, and that so Paul should abide
in the flesh. Umvevt r, .1 is at least a little unfortunate for
their theory, that the substantive ^^ analuais'" (dydXvdi'i)
derived from the verb " analuo " (ai-trAi oj) is used by Paul
in 2 Tim. iv. (5, undoubtedly for his death : " I am now ready
to be offered, and the time of nu/ DFiPAKTUiiE is at hand.
I have fought a good fight, I have" finished my course," etc.
If it be departure tliere, and death, why cannot it be so
where, as we have seen, the ('ontext fixes it down to apply
to dpath ? Anil it i^ true that it sometimes means "return,'
but not soolYenas ' depart," so that an Anuihilationist alone
could tell US" why it should be so translated here. The
leason being only in the exigencies of a theory, which must
bend Scripture to its need, or be convicted of open oppo-
sition to it.
Mr. Ro])erts is now willing, however, to accept the ordi-
nary rendering. He says, "This understanding of Paul's
words wotild not be affected by the act'ei)tanc(; of the
ciommon version . . . for to die and be with Christ are in-
stantly consecpiential incidents to the consciousness of the
man who dies." But that is not (juite all wo have to con-
sider. Is it just the same to the conisciousness of the man
that //fe.s" ? Would a fiction of this kind render attractive
in the eyes of such a one as Paul, does Mi*. Roberts think,
what in reality would be "to depart into forget fulness, and
be w^ith Christ when he woke up " ? The " gain " of dleath
would- be torgetfulness : "better by far" than present
needfiil for
V,. V:;-
I! t
120 KAiTS ASUTHKOKIRS ASTO A FITUHKST.VTK.
,tellow«hij. >vitb Christ. an-V joy in GoJ, himI .nagnifying
Christ bv t^ervii*' . such as"liis! . ,. , «
Mr. Constable is ot:^no mind with RuWrts m Um last
, . . view ofthe passage. "^^ To depart,'- he says, "means d^«^
I , less to die, and to be with Christ means doubUess the ^
. ^ ijlorified .tate at resurrection. They are spoken of here as
■ dosely co.u.ected, as in t^ict synchronal, frouaimt aoctrme of
' the sleep of the intermediate state which Paul so often
taiiirht [y] To depart frmnl life and die would be, he knew, to
' beillowod at once.by the trumpet calling him to, arise and
be with liis Lord ; for tifne A^^uld in the actual interval, how-
ever Ions, between dying and rising, be annihilat^a lor him
who slept." How strangely it sound, to hear the, aiftcrent
^ ' reports of that land oi' for i^et fulness, which these writers
give us at difterent times. Who would think that this was
■ JoVs place of<larkness and dn^order which his s6ulcontem- M
V plated^with so little desired yet Job too 1^-^^"
Redeemer live<l, ami expected to se. Him stand m the lattei
day upon the earth. If the quiet oblivion of sleep al«ne was
. belween him and that day, why not more of Paul's spirit as
to if' The light had' soml^how shone into that place of
glooin for Paul. .V<...^/^/ merely would have been the same ^
k for each, and not light nor darkness, but noneiitity . Mr.
^ Cbnstable lias not ^he solution of this enigma plamlj . How-
ever, I have ansxtef^d him before and independently.
But he adds-—
' . . witli Clirist ■ in ,. rfat,. <.( lif.', Wvolvs a cmtnuhctuu to one
„; . £una.unv.,„.l ,..>.*,.. ,.f Scnpture. lUh.y ,m, th.-u m*
ChrW, anJ s,v «im .s Uc now is, St. Juhu U.Us ,^ «l,n^^^^^^^
s„eUa,«KW«.,uia,-ln<ng? then. "''""'" '''''•»'^'»°',"tlor
, W,mld-In.n,v f.,llow tliut t1„.y w.mKl now possess the. fnlkst go J
■ ' Umt th,.Y conM-ivcr l.».k fo.- un.l obtaii/. Tl.c popular viow thai
: r ■ ;^;^ l,.in« tho stato of death are with Christ a.nA see Hun.
• ■ involves in taet the denial of the rcaK-reetlon as taUKht by Pan ,
:° toLhes;what J.e eonJemneg us heresy, that the resurrect.ou u
~^ past uh-eady. " 7
^-
COXSCIOUSKKSH AFTKH DKATU.
121
i
^ i
Now, without raising any debate as to the interpretation
of 1 John ill. 2, it is plain Mr. Constable confounds two
different things in this, viz., moral and physical likeness.
Does he really mean to say that seeing Christ in the inter-
mediate state would bring the body out of the grave and
glorify it ? So it would seem. We how<^ver l)elieve that
resurrection waits for the word of Christ to effect, and
that there can be no "perfection" for the sanit, short of
body, soul and spirit being united in blessing Nay, it may
well be, that we must put on this " image of the heavenly "
hi order even in t^ full sense to see Christ as He is. All
this consists perfectly with the thouglit of being with Christ
in the meanwhile in such a way as to awaken the desire of
the living saint in the fullest way. On the other hand non-
entity for the saint can call forth no such desire, save on the
supposition of an utter wretchedness in the present life such
as Paul knew nothing of, it isclear. Mr. Constable shows
this fully in what he has written elsewhere. " To one ca-
j)able of the vast gi:asping thought of immortality death is
indeed a thiny of terror . . .death is after all tlie king of
- terrors." And he is si)eaking of Christians here. Yet
when he comes to argue about Paul's words, this king of
terrors becomes more attractive even than companionship
with Christ on earth. Nonoetity is a sweet forgetfulness
which only hastens the day cJf glory ! Which is the true
-statement I must leave Mr. Constable to say. Where
speaks the man., and where the rontroversialist^ I will not
try to decide. But he is certainly self-contradicted,— hope-
lessly so.
■ I 'shall not again do more than refer to 2 Cor. v. Its " at
Home in the body ' and " absent from the Lord "-:-its
"absent from the body and present with the Lord" — speak
manifestly the same language as that we have just been con-
sidering. Those who tell us that in the resurrection state
we shall not be "at home in the body," and that we are
" absent from the body " when it has been raised in glory
or changed into the likenesH of Ch r istV glorious body, may
''W
i\:\
i\--
I
■
122 P.C->SAN..TK>.0>«.BAS-rO..«™'"'«*^"-
..hieh gives us « .^;0 ^^^^ .^ ^^^^ ,_.^^„^.„„, ,,„
been m ''™";1'-"" ; ^^ . _,, i^t conscious of unntterabl..
m«"»'«''^\*'°';;' ,'^,2;,..lerm iVom 11.0 u„see„,-Mose»
Ih-f T," ''?' TVrX unUion with the L..nl.
„„ ,ho Mount ot ru«U. ^^^^^ .^ ^,^,^^^^ ,,^,,,,,,1 ,, „„j
It is no ansnn, toi ojc ,im.i ^^^ j,^^^^ ^^^i
..vakencl to '^'I'f ,;;„, ;^;:!':„:::,;::h siecp: nn.lwhen
,l,cv that wove with 11'"' ^^^ ."-',■. „,„, „,c two men that
they weve .-."</.- they saw U.s glo v ■ "'^ t ^ ^^^^^^
•. -.1 1,;..," This iirovcs also tliat n "it .
rtood with hnn Itii. 1 ^1^^^^ , j,,.^, ,^gy
„,•«•«,-, even wakmg. /^^ \'^^,„ ,,,n,, j„sus." Thus it
behcMit: •■'^^"^■*''"'\^^'•"''^,"'^^^,o„^ ,A.ul how sim-
t,„s a real thin;, a,art from ^'^ y,,^,., ,,„,, Elias."
^,y deseribea, ■' two ^ ^'f,,^. ,™,,,n,^ Wore, and ,
bne of these a ■"^"V'^'''^^ '\-r " , h is ho.lv hnried, yet B.iU
o„c .till longer ■■.U.,«rled. •»"'*'' ,„^„ ,„ „„i,it-, of
a "man," neither ex.in... -'• f ^ ^ "' , ,„„ the aead
thought and of -y">;"™-.,^ ,;. .,..»,.« was nhnself
either, as some would a _;>^ ^ „, „„ aead."
the >-firBt-fru,ts.' and \ J"J ^.^^.^ „.s,oration to the
For it is no qnest.on hei o swnp ^ ^^^„
. earthly life >-. .,^ined.ns with U,^u ^^^^^^^^^
,he L<.rd had so restored, t^ ."• ' " ,,„, ,,cen. raised
^ of another ^r'"-. '" ""^^y "'" ,/" uib c B»t of this
. ;ti:r %::: Uid not^a^ ..en n.^ ;;;; <^°:
■ -■ ■ ti.is lalsifios lilt' whol<' argumpnt,
. Roberts, in his oornment u,ou -. ^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^.^.^,^ .^ ^^^,^
ilie fact of iboir ofiu„ n __ , ^
the rpal point. , .
->■■'■ 4.
OONHtUOUSHKSt^ AFFKU niBATH.
1*28
3 ar-
Rred. •
tion,
have
b, — a
rabli'
losca
t not,
' and
when
ti that
mere
they
hus it
\\' Bim-
EUas."
re/ and ,
ft still
:it7 of
:> dead
timself
dead."
to the
;, whom
^sednesR
n raised
of this
as Scrip-
irst-born.
associate
I though
arguinpnt,
n is simply
•HP evading
i
not in the Ukeness of Christ's glorious body,'^ yet appearing
•' in glory " {kv doi^i), let men make of it what they will ; en
tering moreover into th(i ' bright cloud " '(as Peter calls it
afterwards, " the excellent glory "), the Shechinah of the
Divine' l*res«'nce.t
1 confess I .h> not understand how it chu be plainer that
\^'« are here permitted to gaz;' upon one dei)arted, and to
Vrealize as tar as we can how a departed Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob still •' live unto llhn,' who, as the Lord tells us, •' is
not the God of the dead but of the living." We tims see
how to Iliia they live who to men are dead. We learn to
disthiguish between the language of sense and the language
of faith. We learn how really there is a dei)arthig and being
with Christ which is, comjiared with life on earth, far'better.
No arguiuent tliat Annihilatioriists can brhig against thin
passau^e will an ail for a moment. Their arguments have in
tact been already disposed of, as they either suppose on the
oi^hand that Moses was raised from the dead, which ^cripv ^
ture elsewhere (ujiifiites (C<lr. i» is, 1 Cor. .vv. '2:5, Key. i. 5), ^
or that it was only a "vision'" or appearance, 'which' the
passage it.self contrtites.; T may leave here then the question
(though there be other texts) of the o*>nsciousness of the
separate state, with tl>e full conviction of its complete, man-
ifest and divine answer. •'
* This is str;iunelyjak<'!i by Mr. Ilobcrts to W siiil of Ellas, and heiv
affain he argues upon a mere misconception.
The " fir-t begotten of the (b'ad, " applied to the Lord Jesus, will not
allow his interpretation of the lir*-fruits. It distinctfv asserts that
He was the lirst raised in the full meaning i j;jiesurrection. Enoch and
Elias were not begotten from tlie doid at all.
I" They (the disciplea) feared, as ^/i(;w '' (^i^e/Vai-b)— Mose^* and
•Klias— "entered into the cloud." ^
+ <'TeH the cixion to no man" is somewhat urged, but opixna ii
merely sojnethhig seen, and raises no .luestion of reality.
j1--S-38,^K?>?eg§W?-T?:
t'^T '^TliiiiiTi^r'- -■"'—'"■- ■ x-'--"-
124
riCiSANUmiiOKU^ASTOAKUTUB^aTAI.. _
•>»
( !1
OIlAPTKli Xlll.
On.TE.-TlON^KKOM niKOLUTHSTAME^T.
I NOW proceed to consider the objections which are made
to the v3 Lave expressed, grounded upon the supposed
; at\ chin.' of ,„a„;passag.s of Scripture t.ts^a po^
Lrthy of a. ten.ion, how.ever, at the outset, that ,»^e pas
Ta^ arc with few. and slight exceptions, all fom^-.n the
Old Telt^ment, and especially in three book^ Which fie near
?„g„0,errtl,e' n.iddlo of it (united really, I doubt not, .n _
many respects) Job, I'sabns, and Eccles.astes ^^
'"7o how this I mention from Mr. Roberts' V-ook »" t^" ,
texts upon which he relies to >-'°'-" '"--«, ^Vwe h^^
and the intermediate state. From pp.40 ..Oof h.s Iwe^ve
ecturcs ■• (4th edit., I ^"'^'^^^^^'^J'^Z^
P»a xxt 3- x.vii. -29; Ixxxix. 48; Ixxvni. 50, Kzck. xv i.
r Ja"iv 4; Psa.oxnv.3,4; ciii. 14,16; G™. n 7 ; n>.
ta xvii"27; Uom.vii. l-^'; Jas. i. 10; .Tob. xiv. 12 ; Ecc .
U'lto; aen.x.vv.8; xxxv. 29; xlix. .iB ; I 2b; Deut.
• ^ :■ to* xxiv. 29; 1 Sam. xxv. 1; 1 Kmgs n. 1, A
lo U- i'. 29, 4 1 Kinis xi. 4:1 ; U.b. xi. l^i;/ohn«.
r;:V^ \ Thes. iv.' 13; KcUx. 10; .lob '»• < .^"; ^ » i
■ Psa. Ixxxviii. .1, 10, 12; c.xv. 1. ; x.xxi.x. .., 12, 1.5 , cxlvi. -i ,
He then proceeds ,0 cite the passages com.nonly urged
..ainst bisviXs us folh.ws; Luke NX,u.4.J; «■• 19^ •
Acts vii. .Ml; -i Co.. V. ><; Phil. i. 2S; Matt. xv.i. 3; xxn.
V- xviii 10; I'rov. xii. 28 : Matt, x, i8. .
► Tlius lV,rA» ««» views, out of over fifty passages pro-
du nine belong to the New Testament '^^^''^
o the- Old. While out of the passages wluch he thmks
" " ■ ■ ■• hU views (though s canty ui
mi^'ht be adduced as 'i:/'/'"St his .
Lumber), „> "t of ^. are from the New Testament.
M
ob.Vkctions fkom tiik om» tkhtamknt.
12ft
%
"■f^-^:*
in
But the dispi<)|»ortion is greater even than this, when the
real value to the writer of ihe texts <iuoted im kept in view.
Thus even Mr. UobertH can make but little of JaH. i. 9, 10 :
" As the flower of the grass he shall pass away ; " or of
chap. iv. 14: "What is your life? it is even a rapor."
The other passages are, that in Paul ( /. '.'., in hisjlesh) dwelt
no good thing; as to David, tliat he was dead and buried,
and not ascended into the heavens; that Abraham and
others died in faitli, not liaving received the promises; that
Lazarus was sleeping, or in plain language, dead; and
filially, that" those that sleep in Jesus shall God bring with
Him. ^
Really does it not seem a <pie'stion between the Old Tes-
1 anient and the New? *
^t is not that; but still there is a tale that these quota-
tions tell, the moral of which will be found in 2 Tim. i.. 10;
where the a])ostle tells us, that Christ •' has abolished death',
audi l)rought lifean»l incorruption (not immortality) to light
by the (lOSi'KL."
That means that these writers are groping for light amid
the shadows of a dispensation where was yet upon this subject
comparative darkness. They look at death as it existed be-
fore Christ had for the believer abolished it. they look at
life there where as yet it had not been " brought to light."
\o wonder if they stumble in the darkness they have
t'hosen. . .
lloberts lepresents the "logic" of the application of this
passage lotlliis (piestioTi to be : "" Life and incorruptibility are
brought to light In'tlie gospel ; therefore don't go to 'the
Old Testament for light on death an.l corruptibility."
It is very strange that lu« should think he needs light on
the latter point, ibr that '• .leath is death " seems to liim an
axiom that settles all. Nay, ''life'" also, and what it iS,
is 'a matter of positive ...7^^ //<//'•*'.'" It is the "aggregate
result of certain organic processes,'f he tells us. He only
■IOCS to Scripture to contirm this, which after all We should
li:i\e known without.
-it
ft » ■■ *
"I1
\
mffmmml^
'■■K
12« FACTS \SU THKOltlKS xa Tl) A PUTUHB HtATK.
But the abolition of <leafh is clearly connected with the
•bringing life to light by ^e gospel, und it is clear that the
Old'Testament Htateiuents niuHt in some way correspond to
this. Mr. Roberts indeed would have it that the gospel
simply makes known- '' the >ray of life." But Scripture is
more accursite than he supposes it to be, and less plastic
than it rtmlly seems as if he would like to have it. If " life "
is })n)Ughtto light by the gospel, as in any and every sense
it is, how could death «ven ije known fully in the Old Testa-
ment? Take Paul an<l Job, as 1 have befofe said, and com-
pare their utterances as t« death,— is there no difterence ?
is there no light conu) for PauJ into that land of glooiAand
darkness which Job contemplates':' Surely there is. \ni
this is the story Mr. Roberts' cltati<jns tell.
X, Another p:issat,^e furnislies us with a further poirit about
that old economy he ui^^mIs to tnow : Huit >»y the hanging
of the veil before the holy i)laces, " the ijoly Ghost this
signified, that the way int^o the holiest was not yet mqnifest-
eij^ while, the first tabernstcle was yet standing" (lleb. ix. 8).
Mr. Roberts wants to kn«)W why the aninhilationists sl^buld
have their attention drawn to thi.s. " It is the very ^hing,"
he asserts, "that prov(!S their ease. Mr. Grant contends
that Abraham, Moses, and ^thousands besi<le thptti went^.
into the holiest (that is, the heavenly state) as sootb as thei/
, ff/ct/, ' WHILK Tin: I'lUST TAJiKKXACXE WA.S YKT ST4NDiNG.'
The ' i)oor anuihilatiouists,', on_j lie con tnuy^ acJ3ept the
declaration" that the way was not yet maniteste(l| ^hile the
ohU'CKnomy existed, aiwl that, as Jesus said, ' Nd man had
as(;eu<U.Ml int < . heaven." " But tKe fact of Abraham and other
saints going to heaven ajhrdcafh, does not imply that the
way there was made manifest in the Old Testament, i. e., of
course to men bej'o/'c they died. Nor do the Lord's words
which he (juotes (John iii. 13) at all imi)ly even that Enoch
and Elias had not "ascended into heaven.'^ Plainly they
had, and therefore Mr. R.'s interpretation of them is convicted
oi' untruth. But the l-.ord is speaking, as the context de-
cisively shows, of availabk witnc^es of ''heaoenly things"
7
OHJEO'ilONS PKOM TlIK OLD TKSTAMKNT.
127.
om and
. Xnd
/
T
It was no question of Enoch and Elias, who were not there
to tell what they might know, still less of tho condition of
the departed lU-ad, luit of there being no other aceesHible
witness of heavenly things, except Himself, tho Son of
Man, and yvX{6 Mr ir tu ovfmyu^ "subsisting in iicaveu."
" If I have told you of earthly things, and ye believe not,
how shall ye bwlieve if I tell^you of heavenly things V And
no man [evidently, none here to give witness] hath ascended
up to heaven, save lu who came dow^n from heaven, eve.i
the Son of' Man who is in heaven.' To make tjiis clash
with Enoch and Eiias;havnig gone .there is surely a mere
t^trainhifj of the words, and just as mueh so to infer from it
llie condition of the righteous dead.
Doubtless Mr. Roberts Mould reinforce this^ untenable
position by a (juotation which (hose, with liim often dwell
up|n,to the eftect that '< David ^s uot ascended into the
lieiivens."* That too is freely granted. It is what the Lord
says of Himself when risen, and yet He lyul been \n l*aradise
with the jiardoned thief This will come up again in the
next chapter, but I may say here, that Ihe departure of tht;
spirit to Ood is never reckoned "ascension.',' We «iay
inquire why shortly, but the fact may suflice for the present.
The passage in Hebrews does m>< then '• recoil with sin-
gular force against '\ the orthodox "position." It in no wise
teaches that the s{«nis of the Old Testament did not go to
heaven (//?o- death, but that therc^ wasno revelation yet of
their going there, no promise of it yet to living men. It sim-
ply means that the dispensation dealt witl^ earthly and not
heavenly promises. Thus if the faith of a Job carried him
on to a di*y on which that Redeemer who he knew lived,
•should be seen by his eyes, it is to His stan<ling r/joa,^ tC
earth in the latter day he looks. If Sheol,t the land of
darkness, lay between, certainly for him that was not honveu.
N^r can Mr. Roberts lind such a thought.' He does not
— "^ Acts W.'M. "'
t-TJiP 0I«1 iVstanienl word Xw hailes, Xht' unseen world. See Nejf
( lia^)ter..' '
m
/ (
u\'
ill
«l-
II
< I
^ !
i
K'
1-28 FACTS ANU TIIKOUUW ASTO A FUTUKK ST.VTK.
indeed look for it, I Avell know. The "heavenly promises;'
are for him promises merely of a "heavenly >^(atc," as he
might say, on earth. This is again the darkness of the
former dispensatioTi imported into, the full light of the Chris-
tian one.' I cannot discuss it liero, nor, liappily, need I for
the mass of those who may read this.
^But such then as Job's was the Old Ti'st anient hope.
Outside the present scene tlM>re was little light, death a deep,
dark " bhadow," well-nigh imi.onetrabje, resurrection Jind
restoration to a scene of earthly blessedness the tangible,
plain thing. Scattered I»ints there were, indeed, of other
things. Enoch liad of old gone, to God, j\nd not seen death.
Elijah m a later day had followed him. A little gleam of
light liad broken in there. But still that was not the reve-
lation of the heavenly places and a portion there for those
who believed. Nor was death abolished, or life and incor-
ruption brought to light.
Still they were not annihllationists; as Pharisaism, \yhich
the people followed, shows. Something? thej^ did know:
and with all their darkness were wiser than those who have
■ now turned from the light which lias come, back into it.
This even necromancy witnessed. Ileathcriish as of course
it was, yet its practice testifi(?s to the belief which lay at
the foundation of it. And the bringijig up of Samuelt is an
Old Testament confirmation of that belief too strong for any
cavils of questioners to set aside. .
T^rue, in.leed, the departed spirit pf a saint was not at the
mercy of a witch to summon into pr^ence. And the ap-
pearance of the prophet threw ?the woman herself into
astonishment; but so God permitted Saul to get his answer
♦ Some (lifflculty will be fouii<l perhaps in rfconcilin? Ih'h. xi. 13-lH
" with this. T fully admit that this jtass^ge shows that individualH had
hope beyond the proper Old TeRtamont revelation. TJow they got this
" we hope yet to inquire. But that certainly t)o rmolatioti of it is given
in the Old Testament itself, I can only onro again v.M-y simply affirm.
Let my readers sean'li and see.
f 1 Sam. xxviii.
i ■ «: i
m
T-rt-
. ■■ 't
n|
~t;..
)mi8e8
," as ho
? of the :
le Chris-
LV(l I for
it hope.*
I a (leei),
ion Jind
tangible,
of other
!n death.
;leam of
the reve-
br those
id incor-
tn, Avhich
d know:
tvho have
[ito it.
of course
ich lay at
uelt is an
ig for any
not at the
id the ap-
rself into
lis answer
b. xi. 13-1«
viclualft hail
l^ipy got this
f it is given
inply aflRrni.
OBJECTIONS FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT. 129
of doom. The language of the histoiuan should be plain to
any one who believes in the full inspiration of • Scripture,
that the woman saw Samuel, and that Samuel spoke to Saul.
Mr. Roberts may raise questions which our inability to an-
swer would not show were valid as arguments against *the
hispifed words. But if, as he suggests, the nature of the
apparition was that it was "the spectral impression of
Samuel in the woman's brain reflected from that of Saul,"
how did this " spectral impression " sj^eak to-A.Saul ? Mr.
Roberts would answer evidently " through the woman " •
but not so says Scripture. It is his own invention, as the
spectral impression is. MoreoVer his difficulty as to Samuel
appearing in his clothes, as that of others, that he is seen as
an old man, we may answer by saying that we know too
little of spiritual appearances even to apprehend them as
difficulties. Nor does it seem one that Saul himself should not
have seen the spirit of Samuel, any more than that ElishaV
servant did not see the horses and cliariots of fire around
Dothan (2 Kings vi. 17). How many similar questions
might Mr. R. ask about these, and find, or give, as little
answer ! ' .
Then as to the "bringing /<y>,'' which Mr. R. considers
should be, according to our views, rather " bringing down^''
this is his mistake, and we shall look at it in the next chap-
ter. While ".to-morrow shall thou and thy sons be with
me;' means merely in the death state, or in sheol, as a
Hebrew might have expressed it.
I onlj^ dwell upon this to show that all was wo« dark,
even here, as to immortality. People may talk, as some do,
Of resurrection, but there is none, and the- thought of it
would only complicate the difficulties of the case.
•Without further preface I turn to the passages which
they adduce as decisive of the point we are upon, that the
dead are non-existent, or at least unconscious till the resut-
rection.
We naturally begin with Genesis, but here the passages
produced have been already examined, save xviii. 27 ; xxv.
'0F:-:
n
».'
i,!.
■ i I
130 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
8; XXXV. 29; xlix. 33; 1. 26. The reader may refer to
these (except the first) for himself, as they are the mere
chronicle of the deaths of the patriarchs, " soher and literal,"
as we quite believe, and as is the fashion of Scripture gener-
ally, and with "no heaven-going rhapsody," as Mr. Roberts
tells us. There could hardly T)e, as I have already shown.
Deut. xxxiv. 5, G ; Josh. xxiv. 2f); 1 Sam. xxt. 1; 1 Kings
ii. 1, 2, Lfl^nd xi. 43, all come 'under the same category.
It is sufficient for Mr. R. that he^ finds a text ii^ which it is
said such a person '' died," to find a proof text'in it for ex-
tinction; and if it should add, that he was " buried," then
all dispute about the matter should be ended forever. For
it seems none but materialists ever speak of people dy-
ing or being buried, or if so Mr. Roberts has not heard
of it.
Abraham's lowly confession, "who am but dust and
ashes" (Gen. xviii. 27), which he takes to imply the lowest
materialism, may perhaps be left to speak for itself Of
course that spirit of liian, which sometimes Mr. Roberts
reckons part of him, sometimes the highest part, is here none
whatever, or else it too is " dust." He joins with this Paul's
"in me, that is in mj flesh,'' equally to imply that PalHwas
nothing hut flesh. On the further expression in the same
r chapter, "with the ttihid, I mynelf nervQ the law of God,
but with the flesh the law of sin," he does not comment.
Outside oil/ Job and its kindred books two passages
remain. One is Ezek. xvili. 4 : " the soul . that sinneth it
, shall die." Hercj as I have before noticed, the soiil is put
^ for the personality of man. " The soul that sins shall die."
Not a son for a father's sins, or a father for a son's, but
' every one for hift>wn. This use of the word does not, as
Mr. R. imagines, conflict with its proper force when used,
as it has been proved Scripttire doe/» use it, for the immortal
part of man. The other uses are all secondary to and
founded on this, of which I have at large si)oken.
The other passage is Isa. xxxviii. 18, 19. It introdueeB
us to that class of texts to which belong the quotations
«MW»M;»'-MH.MIiW.~»,»..,.~-v.^^ ,
the histprica. book t^T\ "^ "" "'« '»'• While
'«vi.e hiatonan. at ' rj^-t*'/'- '»f-,e of the
more directly the words if 7,, '^ P'-oP'"^'" are still
through theLonhelto tto ' : "'™^»> '"''l™««d
Soripture whL t^plf ^0^^-,,^ j.-""" of the
siastes and the Sono- of ^^i f^airus, Proverbs, Eccle-
Of eo„r.,e I <u, ^:c^:ir^;::'^-!"-^ -!„...
that account. Every wor.l T i i "^ inspired on
by the Holy Ghos Vmle/f^o ; j ""V'^ "^"'""^ ^"^ -
what is profitable uu^Zm ^tn T 1 """''''- """
for instance we do find Znt, ' , .'™ '^"'^' '"' '" Jo^
the more adopt /,/. saying ",^^0 """^•''*''' ''' '° ""' ""y
They are carefnlly reg^Xd for :':S'? ^'•^^'^
-Butwedonotsay''itrswritte,."„f tT^ div.ne p,„j,<,se.
His hand and to,L a^ 1 "tl ^l^h '^,"'"°'''''""°«''
His face. Th,t was wT^at SW m ' , "'" ""^ H'"" »»
So in like mater Xn the L T ' '""'""""' " ''^ ^"'"»-
have not spoken of" e tl ' thi" .f^' '" "^"'''' '■™°''^" ^^
vant Job," it is plain we can "• ''" " "'"'*' '"' '"^ '"'-
-ymgs, as diviL truTh eX '"tTT'''^ »J°P' '"«>
Job's Awn sayings, spite o f t ' ' "" '™ "«•»« '<>
prosscVwe find thai too , r""""";'''*'™ '" ''" -
himself rather than God '7eh\. IVoT'Vt "^''\"''^''
maiffcho hart ransacked th. 1 , "'^pcncnce ofa
t'-'tligs he " s dt i t :- 'wh-Vf *■• •■Winess,a„d
vain and weary course We k'l It '" ''"'' '""•"''"« ''"at
«pite of his wisdom and ,h''' ^'as Solomon's career
own conclusion nZ U, t T"' ™"3°'''>tedly to be his
lie
so well knew. Won T , °f "'<'.* """yof the world
. , , '^"''''l't.V0t 1.0 believed, that this man's
h» r
132 FACTS AND TnEOKIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
"sayings," penned by himself for our instruction in the word
of God, have been taken by materialists as the sayings of
divine truth, to sottle it that men are " beasts, ' that " a man
k has ko preeminence above a beast " V
The Psalms indeed are of a different character. They are
much more really prophetic in character,-nay, in one sense,
fully so. Still their 'prophecy has 'the peculiarity, in which
they resemble the. others, of its being the projection of hu-
man thoughts and feelings uppn the page, which, under the
control of the Spirit of . God, become the foreshadows of -
anothei: day and scene. Thus David muses upon his own
- sufferings until his thoughts find vent in words, which guided
of God become, full of a deeper meaning than any application
to Bavjd could exhaust— proplietic utterances of Another,
more than royal, Sufferer. But that is very different from
direct: revelation. It leaves the utterer to speak of things as
from tis own point of view he sees them, even while giving
them this deeper 'significance.
M^. Roberts has surely somewhat mistaken what is said
on this' head, when he asserts that it makes these books *' in
• fact of no greater value than a newpapor report." On £he
contrary it makes them of the .very greatest value. \
Is it not this, that all the difficult problems as to the "world
and himself also, problems which man's heart ponders only
thoroughly to lose its way in, should be allowed once for
all to find expression in the presence of God, whore alone
they can find their perfect answer ? Man's voice j)crmitted .
Mf titter itself fhuSj—its questions, doubts, objections, rea-
sonings ^before One lot uijinteresled, wTio con-descends to
take the place of listener,* and does not decide a case beforb
he hears it : is not this worthy of God to give us ? is this of
4l^o more value than a newspaper report ?• I speak for myself
only when I say, that to me it is of tlKs profoundest interest,
and of the',deepest value. - / , ^. .. •
This applies of course mainly to the books before us, Job,
Ecclesiastes, and (in much smaller measure) to the Psalms'.
Now, as to the facts alleged bj' IVJn R. ag.iinst it. The qu<5-
\ t
u:
. OBJECTIONS FliOM THE OLD TESTAMENT. 133
■ ^ t ^."i"- /*' ""*'' ''™" ""«"■ " «""«»■" " to the book
m the Ne . Tesi.,„c„t, he give, in p.oof of Job a. a whole
Jobt 21, rofelredtoinl Tim. vi. 7. (n) ...
i. 21 22 ; xlii. 1-7, referred to i'a J.„. v: U.
,_ «'•. ". referred toin Rev. iii. 7p.)
XEtiv. lU.TOfcrrod to in Rom. ii. 11 ; Epli ,1 9. OoLfli ">K
sli. Jl. refcrro,Ud ia Rom. xi. ^ ' /^P"' "^^ •°<^'^ ^■
Of these refewJnces it will be seen that Jas. v. 11 merely
speaks o Job s patience and'the end of ahe Lord. 1 xTm vf
17 ^a Key. .,,,7 are ver/ dotfbtfi.l asallusions al ailf Kom'
XL 3o refers to G^l's answer to Job, which of course 000^0
quesfons a. His^iee ; while the three passage rRru
Go: 'sL ""' ?"'• "'■ '' '"^^ """"« t° -hat ElihZ;'
01 God snot accepting persons, but are the expression of so
^™p!e a.™t„ that it scaree„„eeds to consiAth:: tZ ■
But ElilmlAnsfilf moreover is not one of the three friends
conv,cted o, faLsehood Uy Jehovah, but one who is utdt
g^ve Job h,s a„.swer, after they anS he both have left off
then !v*v' '■'•'■""''"' ,"'™ """ ■"' "" """^ New Testament
rtere ,s one more or less doubtful inference to Job's own
woM.,, and th,s one .notation of the words of Eliphaz,!^
'Of ."-A - ,t V"''"'"'' *''•' "'^^ '° "«-"^ o-" -''ft"--"
ut th,s Mr. K„l,„rts says : " The speakeris Eliphaz, whose
of them „T T'""'''"' '"'"•'^ '■'^''" ^o-gl^ ^is application
a'vT '"/°'V «^f *»^ ^v^ng" But this is not true.
. Go 1 s own wor,ls n.ake the express distinction between^Tob
the ,V t: "■"■'•'^' """• """"--^ '"'> " spoken OF Hm
the th,ng*th.,t w.a.,. right,, they had nol done so." AU of
them, Job ,nc nded, had erred in the interpretation of GodV
dealings, ,f that were, all; and on *haf account, first Elihu
m: jlt:;^^::^-."^-''":' ^'-° «°^ Himself sp e aJ
: ■If-'l
-,'*•'
1 •.■■■■■
1- . ■
;"''-:'■'■
V ;■ :
t' ■'■
■ ■" *■
t
ly.
I trA
not;
' *'^'*1 spoken :rightly o/^ <?o.Z/ and his friends had '
•^.
V
**
"i \-
I ! ' I
184 FACTS AND TDEOKIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE. .. .
' tet Eliphaz for all that could say many a true thing, truth
/ ihat doubtless he had learnt of God, and could utter as
. rem HiuM and one sucl. saying the Holy Ghost gives us
; certia,id .i;ron:.h the n.oulh of Paul. This »«ld not cc.t. y ., ,
the things which the same Eliphaz had spoken wh.ch were
'*''E^?n ivf^-.- Roberts allows.^there is not the same direct
recognition of Eeclesiastes." He think, that '' a remark of
Paul's in 1 Tim. vi. 7 looks like a quotation of Eccl. v. lo.
It may refer to it, but it is one of those self-evident,, how-
. ever solemn, truths, that nc^ed no inspired authority to assure
us of them. The passage has ali'eady been made to^serve
as a reference to Job, and in Bagster's list is again referred, . •
though doubtingly, to Psa.xlix. 17. Iloberts adds, " Never- ,
theless the book stands on its own foundation, as the product
of a man to whom God gave wisdom," etc. The mspiration
of the book is noUt all in question, but its character and pur- «
pose. The matter of Solomon's wisdom has been- alreadxJ
«■' discussed * ' ' ' <^ . . -"
As to the Psalms, they are iitidoubtedly divine, but that
is not the question. While inspired fully, their utterance,
' as Already s'ai<l, is so. far lik^ the rest, that the pomt of view .
' is that of a man upon earth, the horizon earthly the thoughts
and feelings in accordance with this.. Granted, fully grant-
ed, that the divine is in the human everywhere, it is none
tile less man's song or man's sorrow, human utterance out ^
of a human heart, with only exceptional direct sayings ot
Proverbs again is moSt evidently, human, however perfect
• and divine in, its authority, as it- surely is. ?lr. Roberts
Votes Heb. xii. 5 against this, halving the passage cUed
' from J>rov.SlL II, 12, bg leaoing out ver. 6. He can thus
'apply the passage as if the apostle meant by merely quotiiig,
« My son, despise not," to show that God in that exhortation
^ is -spcakmg ^tous as nnto children," and therefore that
Proverbs' was cZ^Vec^ God's voice. The very form of the
exhortation slioujfliave taught him better, for it is not my
* ••
ath
as
us
ere
:ect
of '
L5." ■
ow-
mre
jrve
red, ^
ver-
luct
,tion
pur-
iadx7
that
view
icchts
rant-
none*
5 out
;8 of '
;rfect
berts
cited
thus
3ting,
ation
that
»f the
; ^ . OBffEClJqNS FKOM THB OLD TJiSTAM^NlV 135
son, despise not my ehast^^g," but the « chastening o/- ^A^e
Z^nl ; and the apostle's-proof that Scripture in that ex-
hortation speaks to us as unto sons is that - whom the Lord
loveth He chastcneth, and scourgeth every son whom He
reoeiveth."* Th(? real argument is concealed in the verse
Which he, for whatever reason, pleases to i<more
_^A11 the weight of what Job says is found in the following
expressions: that, had he died from the womb, he would "
, then liave been lying still and quiet, he would have slept
aiid been at rest, as an hidden untimely birth, there wherq
he wicked cease from troubling and the weary are at rest
(ch. 111. lo-1 . ) ; that he would have been as though he had
not been, m a land of darkness and the shadow of death
a land of darkness, as darknessV itself; and of the shadow of
death Without any order, and ^here the light is as darkness
: "^M, iV' ^"*^,*^''^*'!^^^ath man lieth down and riseth
not; till the heavens be no more they shall not awake nor be *
raised out ot their sleep (ch. xiv. lij). '
^ ^ow, as I have said, I am not concerned to prove the
^armony of allJob's uttefances with the actual revelations
of Scripture a^to the intermediate state. He might hav0
been.misfaken, and that in noway touch the question before
ns, or the perfect^ inspiration of the rec6rd in which his
. words are found. They are given .as Job'.s wordfc, that is'
all. vVs th(5 utterance of a saint of those old days, they con-
tain, no doubt, the assurance of the dimness and uncertainty
which then prevailed. Contrasted with Paul's language
they 8ho;v us death not yet abolished, " darkness" not yet
dispelled by li^^ht. Yet the words cannot be fairly pressed '
into the service of materialism. Take the very strongest v
expression, •; I sbouhl have been as though I had not be^n »
with iH3lat.on to the wot^d^and its sorrows, of which he was
^peaking. It was simple t^nith. .\o as to oppression : "there
the servant is free from his master." " He might have died
k*«i"„n?r''^'CT'' ^- ^ ^^'her th;.sonin whom he delighteth."
The (iuotatioum Hebrews i§ from the Septuagint, .
■ --if '
■ > .■
^
f
li:
136 FACTS ANDTHKORIES ASTO AFUTUUKSTATK.
under the lash, but dyipg, death set him free. " There the
wicked cease from troubling, and the weary are at rest.
" But, you say, although that may be as regards earthly
troubles yet if there were misery of another kind awaitmg
man after death, could he talk so complacently of the " weary
being at rest ? " , - / j.
Well, but to all that made Job weary, the grave would
be rest. And for au'-ht else. Job was ii saint of Go<l after
all and had confidence in God. He was not meditatmg
upon the portion of the wicked, but what his own would be ; .
and though in death a " land of darkness " stretched before
him into which his eye could little penetrate, he had some-
thing of the Psalmist's confidence in One who would be with
him there. The sorrows of the wicked are not at all
before him, but for himself the end of all present sorrows.
^T. Roberts may say, " There (in the f/rave) the weary
are at rest," but 'Job does nol say *' in the grave " ; and he
may think it " obvious " that he means "righteous and
wicked without distinction." I can only say to myself it is
very far from obvious. He was surely thinkini? of his own
sorrows, and as to the " wicked," what he says is. they " cease
from troubling." Mr. R. would give righteous and wicked ;
alike rest in 7io?ie7if!f!/ in the grave. But /•>• this " rest" ?
Who rests? Can a thing that is not, rest ? I think not, li
words have meaning. ' ..\ v. . •*
Moreover, ch. x.' 21, and xvi. 22 prove positively that it-
is in the track indicated Job's thoughts arc running. If
otherwise, then when he says that in dying he " goes whence -
he Bhall not return," he simply denies all resurrection. But
he is thinkmg of a return to the scene before him. It is not,
an abstract statement, but one very simply referring^d the
scene of mingled joy and sorrow, in the midst of which he
then was. And so Scripture often speaks. '' Enoch 7ca.s-
not " Is that extinction V Xo, « he w:>m translated, that he
should not see death." As to the w oild '• he was not," but
as to God he was, for" God took him.';*_ Just as with Abra-
M}eiK v."247 Heb. xx. 6. ''Infantk'that never sawjight;' spite of
. w-;ynJK(;TiuNH Puon fiiK dM» testament. 137
ham, l^ai;.una Jacob, who really diea; To men they died ; to
God they lived: "Forlle is not the ^od of the dead but
ot thchv in.i., for all liye unto'Him " (Lufce xx. 3^). People
inay say that that means " in the purpose o^lGod," but thenlf
they had ceased to be, lie coul.l not be their God, the rela-
. lonship between God and Hi^^ creature 'mv{.t end with the
heimroi the creature. That is simply and Vidently the
Lord 8 meanmg. If.to Una they are dead, they are no longer
Hm^creatures, nor He their God. The relationship's
Job's words, the», are no contradiction of what we have
seen elsewhere to bo l he reveule.l truth as to those departed.
lo wearmess such as his a place of '• rest," indeed, was the
, unseen world ; but " rest " is not extinction ; ancVif it were
a land of darkness " also, darkness tind nonentity are ab$o^
iutely contradictory thoughts,' * - •
> ^^^5*!^^d=^l^l^^
Mr. R/s protest, are beings that have begun t J live, a»cl h^T^^^^^t
.^rn Job's ^erence to these has no f^uhdation. Besides, tharH:
The statement that Enoch "was m.t " ho supposes to be a Hebrew .
n.ps.s: a rather vague hut scholarly h>oking expression to cot^ a
d.fficulty wuh. Will Mr. 11. define and illustrate it 7 But Paul [^
fill up the elhps.s. We need have no objection to the explanation as
Has not J therefore, ol course was not foand; yet even in tli«apos^
es vordsyou nu.st mentally supply " on earth," as we must conS^
hat he was found, 1 suppose, in hman. That is, we' must still keep
he objectionable limitation, which Mr. 11. refuses, and the apostle's
language only confirms us in it the more.^
■ It is .strange, therefore, that when we tip to David's words, " while
I have any being," and "Lefore I gHence, and be no more."
^nd explam them by the exactly parallel expression. Enoch ^
.o . hat Mr R should tells us, " The .fallacy of Ihls we have aS
pointed out," w he n '•" '>"• - • --'i - . . «"icauy
.. ,^^, , ho lias actually configued the truth of it. For
L n r.' !"'^r "''^"'' '^" '"^-^ not found on earth, xvhy should
n^he^psalm,stV.be no more'' me^ similarly "no more Lnd on
Ill
Jit:
138 'IPACTS AND tllEOlUES AS TO A FUTUBB StATE.
explained, and to ihem I need not return. 1 turn now to
JlccleBiastes.
And here all that they urge has been already virtually,
and, except one passage, actually answered. That one paH-
sage is found, ch. ix. 5, 6: "For the living know that
they shall die; but the dead know not anythimj, neither
have they any more a reward, for the memory of them is
forgotten ; also their love and their hatred and' their envy
• ; . is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for-
- ' ever in anything that is done under the sun."
Further on (ver. 10) in continuation : « Whatsoever thy
hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no
work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave ^
(sheol) whither thou goeet."
Now this is a very plain example of that way of speaking,
looking at things from a mere human stand-point, which I
have before: remarked upon. The writer's point of view is
mostevident. Nor was he capable, at the time he had these
thoughts, of any other; As to the dead actually, he " knew
not anything," fpf he knew not whether the spirit of man
-^^ went upward or not. This we have seenT He was not, there-
fore, capable of looking at anything, save from his stand-
point in the world. Otherwise clearly he could not have ^
said, '• Neither have they any more a reward. " That w^ould
dpny all resurrection and life to come", if taken absolutely.
But he was looking at the scene around, out of which, men
departed, and left no sign behind to indicate that they had
" been ; their memory was forgotten ; their love, hatred, envy,
which had once made them conspicuous actors in the scene,
had vanished ; and, ia relation <a i7, they knew nothing, their
if V wisdom anc;! knowledge had departed too. This does not
mean, as Roberts suggests, that they " lost their memories»"
or mat they became fools ; but they knew nothing of things
uuong place after their departure,* nor could their wisdomr
or Knowledge appear in it-any more. The closing sentence
Bnows c rfiarly.^o-what the former part applies: *V Neither '
77 . * Coinp. Job. xiT. 21.
.,1
^ OBJECTIONS FROM THE OLD TE8TAM1SNT. 139
have they any more a portion forever in anythmy that is
done iiniior the sun.''''
Therefore the moral is, Be'^sy now; work ceases in the
grave; wisdom for this busy «t;ene there is. none there; no
heart that deviseth ; no planning head. All true m its way.
But this was man's musings, not divine revelation of the
state of the dead at all, nor given as such. Had you asked
this man what he knew of that, he would have said, as he
did say, Who knows V* " Who knoweth the spirit of man
vthat goeth |pward ? » He saw the dust laid in the tomb,
and that was all he kne^n. The rest was conjecture, nothing
more.
But that;/ was only part of the preacher's utterances^ the
musings of his heart while vainly seekiilg to " 8ear<5ft out by
wisdom all things that are ulone under heaven " (ch. i. 13).
But the time came when he had to own his inability to do
so. To quote once more his lowly confession (ch. xi. 5) :
"As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit,! nor
how the bones do grow in the womb of • her that is with
child; even so thou knowest not the 'works of God who
maketh all." ,
Simple, but most important confession ! dnN^he dfirk side
of which all the passages are found upon whicW mate/ialists
rely; while on the other one pregnant sentence at Jfeast is
read, which, to do justice to the Old Testament preacher, we
should look at a little closer than we have done :
* " This," says'Mr. Roberts.-' is one of Mr. Grant's (we^fill not say
deliberate, but) staring [? startling] perversions of fact. Solomon (fid
not sa5', who knows, in reference to the state ^f the dead, but in refer-
ence to' (he spirit of man in its living operation"
This, it must be confessed, is' " startling. " Let my readers look at
the whole passage, ch. iii. 18-22,^^ decide.*
t Here the connectipn of the-'*' way of the spirit " with the growth
of the bones in the womb, confirms the application of the former ex-
pression io the human spirit. It is %hB dovble mystery of generation
that is Inferred to, still as ever unfathomable to' man's science. We
know not how the snti it, n or
spirit nor even the flfesh of man com e s into being.
And death is necessarily a mystery, as life is.
i
ii -
140 FACTS AND TU£0UI£8 AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
"Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was ; and
the spirit shall return to God who gave it."
. As we have seen, men seek to explain the "spirit " here '
to be merely the " breath," as they do that which the Lord ,
upon the cross commended to His Feather, and Stephen to
the Lord Himself Few simple minds will accept that con-
clusion. They will scarcely see the sense of the return of
. the breath to God, whereas, if it be indee<l tin* spirit, such a
statement becomes of the greatest possible importance. ' It
is what litis the veil from the life of" vanity/' and interprets
ils true significance. Tt is the answer to the doul»tful ques- ^""^
tioning of the former chapter. Having come to the end of
human wisdom in the matter, *> the way of the spirit" is
here revealed; It " returns to (to<1 who gave it." And thus
there is complete harmony with that "conclusion of ihe
whole matter," which the closing verses invite us to " hear,"
"Fear God and keep His commandments, for this is the*
whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into
judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or '
whether it be evil." »
Now if that be the conHusion of the whole matter, does
it look as if the matter from which ho drew tbe conchision
ended merely with the blank and silence of the grave?
Rather, does it not conclusively shAw. that that return of
the dust to the earth "as it was," is only what, brings tho
, 6pmt,-^not " as it was," but with the chanicter acquired in
^ its earthly tabernacle,— into the' presence of the God who
:. gave it I -^;^^^4^^ ---#^-;. .- .-. ./.. ; ;■ ' ' , , ^-'-p
• -;.Nor does this involve, as Mr. Roberts thinks, that the
1' judgment of even/ work h going on every day as fast as
people die." But we have seen that, while the jifdgment of - fe
every work does not come before resurrection, yet it is
when we "■ fal^\ that either we are *•' received into everlast-
ing habitations," or to the prison^honse in which already the
soul has the premonition of its doom. ,ns the rich man his in
hades. Ecclesiastes has no word of resurrection. Death,
the stamp of^ vanity upon everythmg, is what is dealt with, ~~
jS--
OBjECTIOtfS F1.0M inu OLD TESTAMEHT. UJ
«nd that which all men's reasoning ean so little avail t.
. penetrate „r un.Iewand, faith makes known „ ^11
beeonjaiirtiiire™";:;:: """"^"'"^ ^""' --'<"' "
I now pass on to consider the testimony of the Psalms
Some ,,a,»ages a,ld„ced by Mr. Koberis I may betntlt
with quoting. That " man is lite to vanitv hi .W,
^ha,,ow that pa.,.,eth away " ,P^. c..Uvr4tand Lt Cfo?
man, his days are as grass " (Psa Piii i^-a c. * , ,
those, which depict fhe br^vitTofm^t li^rrh 'tl
Go,r« , " V " ' '*■"" »"'• •'"■'"•■n'l thine for
Gods creatures to l» thus "subject to vanity •• quteirfe
, .-*p e,,vo of what ,-omes after dca.h, is a thing' for „chT
iorever, such words as these bse force Bnt if ia «, i-
being reaiiy ,„. p„ ^he poinUs, thctvre^k and ruin o^':^
first creation by death coming i„ «t ill Thi! ". Vk .
-lemnity to the brevity of I elnK^^JX '""
1 he other passages arc mostly of similar character to
those that we have already looked at. That is thTy speak
pLr Thur^TM'" ""'-■"» through whirhe
passes. Thus, while I hve, will I praise the Lord • 1 will
cxvi.2), before I go hence, and be nomore" {Psa iLx
13) are expressions ns; stronger th.an we have se™ to b«^
i^h':^r ':;:^^'r '"^^ •-"' ^« ^^-^ ~ ^^
taugu tiirheter^H rert:r 'irb^: " V^'
they should do so. • ' ^^ consistent,
, Or again, take Psa. cxivi: 3 t- "pnt „^* ' .
prince.,, nor in the son of ma!: Lho: h r Ts^X;''
or h„ h ,h , ,„^,,_ ,^ ^^^^_._^^^^ ^_^ h searth andt
rt^at very day h,s Mo,y„,, ,„,,„,,. j, ;,, „„^ ^J »°d J
^far as he context lc..,|.,l,i,..,h„„ghto--tlipe , i!la;e the
, pi''™""'ip"T'-osi„wi,ioh>;^™;^;x.;.fi"dH
1^1 .
1
142 FACTS AND TUKOBIB3 AS TO A FUT0BE STATE.
them had been made to hope, and which the death of hi.
patron might in a mom6nt frustrate and cut off?
■ rgain, tire is a somewhat diifcrent elass of passag^, as
Psa vi 5 • " F»r in death there is no remembrance oi Thee ,
. to^hlgrave (sheol) who shall give thanks?" And aga.n,
^sa iv 17) " The dead praise not the Lord, neither any
rr^dowtinto silence." Or again, that Passage m
Is^kh (xxxviii. 18, 19): "For the grave (sheol) c«mot
pit Thee, death cannot celebrate Thee, they that go
Cn into the pit cannot hope for Thy th.th; the Uvmg
the Uvlng, he shall praise Thee as I do this day : the father to -
the. children- shall make known Thy truth. ..„„..
kis may take a little deeper looking mto: but only be_
Wise we are so little accustomed to realise the po.nt of
le^ <Lm which tl,c pious Israelite beheld these thmgs^
Ttat 'congregation of the righteous" in wtech smners
: Totld not st^Sd, which the first psalm gives us, was what
TeTooked- for.. A day, as we say f l^--'r-»,,,Xi h
which righteousness shall reign, and the earth be filled w.th
Z knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea, th.8^
s what his feithanticifeateli what oursdoes; t"*^."-^ '
more exclu8iveJy,1ror his knowledge of heavenly thmgis was
ve,; dl». to'swell that great halleliJJah..bo.r«^ ™chas
the last five psalms give it us, and m a scene such ^-^bey
propUeally anticipate, that were. a godly Israehte s am-
Sr To celebrate His praises upon earth, to tram up
o^ldren for the service of His sanctuary, to go up to that
Cmple wh*re the glory of Jeh^ah visibly dwAtowas
""^Acl^" to M,r0mn7s th«b." say» Roberts. " the knowledge
-.- ~ of the SpSt of Go.1 i, • vo,y dim.' " This is neither truth nor cand«-^
Any one can see that it is not a question of the knowledge of 4.
^Wt of Ood at all, bnt of that of those through whom ^o^f'^
C peak. Plainly the full revelation of Christianity had ^otoom^
De^ih had not hoen abolished, nor life and incorruption brought U,
«!« Such knowledge .»u.t have been " dim." Still, if d.m, there «
1. "enthelr language, nor do we " treat *. Psalms^ he
, ;° va teb reathin gs of a pious Israelite," or " refuse Davd as a prophet.
QT " deny his testimony." ' ,
^
Me
■Ml.
OBJECTIONS FKOM TUE OLD TESTAJiENT.
143
^
>
B
1
).
O
is
le
»
With him connected with every thought of Jehovah b praise
You see it m that last quotation from Isaiah : 'the lather o
the chUdren shall make known Thy truth." Death would
cut short that declaration, and make those praises cease.
Death could not in that sense celebrate. " Who should give
Him thanks in the grave?" Nay, the living, the hvmg,
alone could do it. /• +u„
Beside which, inasmuch as length of days was one of the
blessmgs of the law, to be cut off in the midst of one s days,
as Hezekiah was threatened, argued with a Jew dmue wrath.
And this manifestly adds its gloom to the first and last pas-
sages. While the 115th psalm Is prophetic of ^J^ture *lay
when the earth will be purified by a judgment which will de-
stroy simiers out of it, and th^se, I have Me doubt, are re-
ferred to in |hem. . ' „„„,
But the Old Testament contains brighter and more assur-
ing passages than these, and with one of these we may close
t4 chapter : « The righteous perisheth and no man layeth
it to heart; and merciful men are taken away, none consul,
ering that thi righteous are taken away from the evil to
come. He shall enter into peace : they shall rest in t^eir
beds, each one walking in his uprightness" (Isa. Ivii. 1, 2).
Now as nonentity is " rest,'St may be " peace, too, to
Mr. Roberts. For we have seen the "king of terfors
■ sometimes putting on very attractive forms. But those who
camiot qmte give up Scripture language as "nmeanmg, nor
put bitter for sweet or darkness for light, will be unable to
'accept such a conclusion. As well might the "second
death " itself be everlastmg peace. „
*«.
. k '-^T.
ttHiWH
144 FACTS ANI» THE0BIE9 AS TO a'fI^'UE STATE.
CHAPTER XTV.
' i - ■ .
SHEOL, HADES AND PARADISE.
".We are now to consider what is indeed bnt a 8econd.ary
point, but one wBich will help to give completeness to this
sketch of the Scripture doctrine of the soul's immortality.
The word « hades - (M/, Autli. vers.) is found, as we have
already seen, in the story of Lazarus and the rich man. The
representative of the word in the Old Testament is sheol
" Paradise" is found in the Lord's reply to the dying thief,
^d- in 2 Cor. xii., where Paul tells us he knew a man m
Christ caught up into J'aradise.
The interpretation of these words by the materialistic
section of amiihilationi^J. writers is pretty uniform. Hades,
they say (and of course sheol), is the grave.* Paradise, for
most, the place of blessing on the restored earth ; necessa-
rily, therefore, having nothing to do with an intermediate
state, nor existing at present, for a man to be caught up mto.
Mr. Constable and others, no doubt,, dissent from this in
favor of its being a place in lieaven, in this more Scriptural
than those they hail as co-workers in this cause. •
To becrin with sheol. It is a word apparently derived
froifa shaal, "to ask," and is generally supposed. to derive
its meaning from the insatiate way in which death cOntmu-
ally "demands" its victims'. Some have, however, sug-
gested, what seems at least as prolKible, that it is defived
rather fronl^e " questioning " as to the dead, as in Job
xiv 10 : " man giveth up the ghost, and xffhere is he i
Sheol is acknowledged to be the equivalent of hades, and
. its significance seems, from the only probable derivation, to
be the ''unseen,"-^the invisible world,., as people sometimes
but still luides
♦ Rfr. CongUh^'docs not couleiid: f6r tln!» absolutely,
for him nas to do with the bo<ly. as we shafl see.
..'f
SHfiOj., HADES AND PARADISEV
145
say. It applies undoubtedly in ordinary Greek to the
region of departed spirits, an application with "which the
Pharisaic use coincides, as th« treatise ascribed to Josephus,
bears witness, whether, it be his or not: and to this the
Biblical use in Luke xvi. (even to the term " Abrahaip's
bosom ") exactly corresponds. Now we have seen that not
only was it impossible for the Lord to adopt without re-
mark a niej-e superstitious and pagan notion, but that Paul -
also professed himself a Pharisee on kindred points. From
this persuasion no denuniration of heathenism or oi Phari-
saism idHHJllJ force to tuni us. Neither the one nor the
other UPP^ untrue, and Pharisaism was "at least more
orthodi)X than the Sadduceism to which in many points the
annihilationist belief conforms. y
' That "hades" should have a wider application thai
is no wonder from what we have seen to be its meaning. ,
But although it might be used in other connections figura-
tively, \n relation to man it has one very uniform sense.
That sense is never the gra^•e, as they allege, although the
imagery of the grave may very naturally- be applied t^t.
It ^nevertheless demonstrably distinct and stands in the
sao^ relation to the soul as the grave to the body. The
common coupling together of " death and hades " illustrates
this, for" in such a conjunction as " death and hades delivered
up the dead that were in them " (Rev. xx. 18), death natur-
ally stands connected with the lifeless corpse, as hades (the
unseen) does with the soul or spirit. So similarly the quo-
tation as to the Lord in Acts ii. 27, " Thou wilt not leave
my soul in hades," refers to the soul, as *' neither wilt Thou
suffer Thy H^ly One to se^ corruption " does to the body :
' and the apostle Pqter distinguishes them accordingly in his
interpretation : '' his soul was not left in hades, neither Ms
^ ^/i- did see- corruption."
, This accounts for eight out of the eleven passages in which
hades is found in the* New Testahient. That in Matt. xvi.
18 can present no difficulty. It is borrowed very likely
I '
I
I
!l;lS AXD a?HEORiE& AS TO -A FJUTCTJifi STATE.
t
■ k-
* ....
146
' ■ » ■ ■ . ■ x» - ■■ .■
be^ rather "the gates. 6f slieoL" The two remaixiing paH-
sages are really one: "Thou, Capernaum, shall be brought
down to hades." Here .the word.is used tropically.
Tile, ilst^;^of sheol, though similar, is somewhat more ob-
scure. TJhis results from the character;^ of tjje Qld Testa-
ment,", which has been noted and accounted foi;. Itjs quite
natural. t,hat materialists should use it for their purposes, as
they do, although after all with yery poor success. Psa.
^Yi. 10 we have^ seen quoted and applied by the apostle.
Jaqdb ' B|(eaks of going down to sheol to his &on J6seph\*
and this has singularly little force, if, a going down to non-
en.tity. Jf we compare David's w'ordp of his child similarly,
" I shall go to'sbim, but he sljall nit re^turn to me,"t thi^ is
greatly strengthened. " . '
' ^ Then 'we have such expressions as the '^' depths of sb^ol "^
(Prov.ix. 18), "the lowiest stiebl" (Psa. Ixxxvi. 13, Deut.'
xxxiif 22),— m tha last 'passage God's wrath being, said to
burn" to it,— ** though they dig into sheol" (Amos) ix. 2),
;which show that the grave cannot be the >vholc matter there.
So even in sheol (Psa. cxxxix. SjTthere is no escape from the
presence of God : ". if I make niy bed in sheol, behold, Thbi;
art there!" Can- that be nonentity ? ' ■
Surely we may be excused then from following very
closely the dissertations of thoste' whg have.learnedly endeav-
pred to prove that sheol is 'the ||bode of dead sheep, ot
men's jbones, and of weapons of war ! . For the first state-
inent there is one passage produced, Psa. xlix. 14 : " Jjike
sheep they are laid in sheol; " as Delitzsch expresses it,
^* they are njiftd'e to lie down' in sheol, like sheep in a fold."
This one comparison of the wicked lying down in sli^ol like
a '^ock of sheep, Mr. Constable thinks sufficient to show,
" to the astonishment and disgust of our Platonic divines
and thinkers, that beasts j^o on Heath to hades ^''! ^
. In the same way, Psa. texli. 7, " Our bones arc scattered at
the mouth of sheol," is made ifi assure us that " the bones
N
* Geh. xXXvii. 3;"
t 2 Sam. xii. 23.
m.
t \
. _ i, — -. — _
*.l
\
.>. SHJSOI., HADES AND PABADIgfe. i 147
ofth^derfire consigned m death to hades!" Thepsalm-'.
ist plainly says they are oftfairfc* - •' ' ™ PMlm- ;
_ Bjr others the imagerj^ of Ezck. xxxii. 27 is pleaded to
^wthatpepplego down to sheol witll their w^l^o^^ ^f .
war and the.r swords laid under their heads! NLif
J^bsjfeaksof hringing his grey hairs dow*;,?. sj^w to .
sheol we are bound to believe that sheol is the abode of '
• f„7 kT t? ' ^ Korah and his compa^go driwn ilive :■
into sheol the earth swallowing them up aliv! ; JTl^u,
proof conclusive that men', bodiesio to'bades H We hay" "
seen-rrT "r": ^^"^--V.o/ -.^er^ like- ...the X
• Titne fail, us to pursue tbese phantoms, and yet of suoh
-sort.s.tJ.e r«.„„i„gf„„^ » th,>„st .laborateX'^
- tTXTo hI"™- '.'^^ 'I""'- • *''•■ '*nst«ble'Jtrolap- ,
. weakest and most , inconclisive in It. And ha seemi in
measure Wiou. of^it.]^ Kanx^toa^pW into"hem •
all h,s pnor Arguments aTto the nature, of man; persoriaUtV
bett tJr" - °-?"^'"' t»^ ■»"- Wnably ■
believe that the coqsciousnejs of the fntermediate Slate has
been fully and, mdepeudently established iy the tetts we '^ '
havtexaminsd:; And while, if s,ul is iolj, hades m»t of ' '
thrsTu t' 'l!"^.''^ ""y.'"' «tin«tion,.if on the other hand
the soul be a l.v^ng.^ntity separate from the mere bodilv
orgamsm; there ea« be -no question. A.t it is not t*e
.first; there need be none, that it is no^the other But'
je tave y^t,an argument or two of Mr. ^nstabfe's to con-
bv'^ml'"' T^^" tl^'we nake hades " a •la^d-bf ;«/. »
bj makmg ,t the refceptacl* of men's soul, after death. ' I
can «,.y say, we do not ordinarily j„^. it «, be,t In
thjs sensej_mean^t b at although it bcTRe that'
■A
j;^_j£meihat the. spiri ls
f '.
: * '2 ■ "■ '^'^' ^^o,y^the\v l^opes ^^^^y^F^^^^^m^
well says,
f
'ri.
' •li?
n\f.
148 jTagts anjj. theories as- to a-jutubb state.
of the dead are Irving; they are nevertheless the spirits of.
the had; and .#e necessarily and rigfitly fip^ak of h^des as
the abode of the dead. To us they are the dead : though
not extinct; and to God t^ey live. It is -not a fact that we
find Miy difficulty in a uise.of language which perplexes Mr.
ConSble. It is Writers of his class w^ojiaving^ invented a
new language for lis would fain persuade us it is what we
have been ignorantly using all along.
The only thing that might be judged a real difficulty as
to hades we shall consider after we have briefly loo*ked at
the third term, " Paradise."
The greatest importance tftat the word has in this conije^-
tion is from our Lord's use of it in flisreply to tb§4ying
thief: "Verily I say unto thee, to-day thou sbaOt b^ with
■Me in Paradise." ;..■ ■■■;'.'' ' y' :' ^ '':■■
The common method of dealing with this text is by alter-
ing the punctuation. They would h^ve us read the Words,
"Verily I say unto thee to-dm/>: thou shalt be with main
Paradise." That is, " to-day, this day of my humiliation, I
say to thee." But the order of the words in the sentence is
^ all against them. With the emphasis they give it, 6ti/^epov
"to-day" should precede the verb. As compare In the
Greek, Matt. xvi. 3; Mark xiv. 30; Luke xix. 6, 9; Acts
xiu 33; Heb. iii. 7, 15. But, beside this, the I^ord is an-
swering a prayer in which a time wherein the thief sought to
be remembered was expressed. He had said, "Lord, re-'
member ihe toheyi. Thou comest in Thy kingdom/' The
Lord says virtually, " You shall nOt wait for \h&V. to-day
^ you shall be with Me." This is the simple, intelligible reason
tor the specificatioaof time: "To-day," not when I come
merely, " shalt thou be with me in Paradise." ,
, Seeing this, others would render dijuspov " in that day,*|
or (as for instance Mr. Constable) more exactly, " this day,"
but meaning, " the day of which you have spoken." <'•
Mr. Constable believes we cannot dispute his right to
-^^i>-"
^ translate it thus, and he quotes Parkhurst and Scl^euRner to
*" thatieffect, We have no quarrel with the lexicographers on
'SiH..
\-
::>.'
8HE0L, HADES AXD PARADISE.
U^
r.
*
,-J
s' '■*--
It y
%
c-
g .
^ .
■ ,
\h
ir-
in
I
■* ,
■itf*
m\
^
ov
»
he
%
;t8 '
mf
to
re-'
he
«?/
!on
me
this point,* but must contend nevertheless that their wit
ness is insufficient. , For whilie the word may well be ren-
dered "this day," it cannot be as 'referring to a day not pres-
ent whm the word is spoken. In this way it is the exact •
equivalent of our word "to-day," which we know is incapable
of such use. 'Let Mr'.,^dbnstable produce, if he can, the
passage which would bear this construction.t ,t
MjT. C, seems evidently not easy himself about this con-
clusion.' He vacillates between this construction, and his^,
strange idea of "synchronism." He thinks it may well be *
after alljihat "to-day'.' might reallv mean so, because ^'to
the sleeper m death's arms thete is no time, "• and having ex-
pired before the end of that Jewfch day," the last half-hour
[of it] the penitent thief will ^nd witti his Kiog in His
kingdom, for it is there ho takes up the thread of time once '
more.'
* Although Liddell and Scott, as high authorities^^demur to the 6 6t r
at the heginningof the word having anything to do with the article
and for a- Very satisfactory reason^) that "the word' is Homeric,
and therefore prior to the usage of the article." \ They only give
the meaning " to-day," to' which Dawson's' Lexicon adds, " this very
day-" - ■ .■.:■■-::' ^'V: ..;• ' ■• " .. ,., ',
f Dr. Thomas' reading is perhap^ the strangest, and I meptiou it only
as a proof of the perplexity into which wrk^r§ of this class aie thrown
by the passage. "'To-day' i*9 a Scripture term; and 'raift be ex-
plained by the Scripture use of it. ' In the Sacred •Writii'^, then, the
tenuis used to express a period of oter 2,000 years. 'Thjs use of it
occurs in David, as it is written, ' To-day, if ye will heaf His voice,*
harden ^ot your hearts, letlt ye enter pot into my rest.' The apostle,
commenting on this passage about 1,000 years after It was written, says,
' Exhort one another while it is called to-day.' . . . Thus it was called,
to-day when David wrote, and to-day when Paul commented on it.
This to-day is however limited both'to Jew and Gentile ; and in deflninT
this limitation Paul tells us, that to-day means ' after so long a time:
. ... If then we substitute the apostle's definition for the word ' to-day '
in Christ's reply to the thief, it will read thus : ' Verily I say to^hee '
after so long a time thou shalt be with me in Paradise ' " (Elpis Israel
pp. 54, .5.5).
But he is evidently afraid that will not answer, and so is careful to
. ■■ ■'■■■- ,1 ■
, ■■;■. .^'^
■ "< ■"- ■
■ , * "^ _--\ ■
'♦
160 FACTS AND THEQKIE8 AS TO A FUT1][RB STATE.
,V
That is, "to-day" may mean two thousand years heniJ*
or so, if only you can get t^e "sleeper in death's arms" to.
sleep quietly enough to be unconscious of the interval !
Mr. Roberts agrees with the%rmer of these two" asser-
tions, that " to-day " means " this day ''-^he day of Chrbt>
coming. And he is one of a class of* writers who urge that
Paradise is in the new earth, and theref<>re not yet in exis-
tence, which of course would dispose of" the passage eflTec-
tually as far as applies to any teaching concerning an inter-
mediate state. Mr. Constable too urges that we falsify the
Scripture teaching as to Paradise. I shall therefore briefly
state tehat it furnishes about it. , • di
" Paradise " is an Eastern word for a " parlc " or "'pleasure-
grounds." The Hebrew, 7?arrfe» (DnnS) is only used, Neh.
ii. 8; Eccl. ii. 5; Sol. Song iv. 13. It is there translated
once' "forest," twice " orchard." It is not used for the gar-
den of Eden in Hebrew, but there it is the ordinary word,
gan (M), • for " garden." The Septuagint' translation, how-
ever,. g^ves here ^ra/3ad£trfos (paradise), which is' uniformly
the word It uses for the Garden of EHen, or of God, except
in one place where the usual word folr garden {xijitofi is used.
From th6 Septuagint use of the word, the New Testament
use is dqiiibtless' derived. It does not follow, however, that
it will iiave exactly the same application. Rather, we shall
.find, the Old Testament word becomes in it, as commonly
"such words do, transfigured into a higher meaning. The
Old Testament type becomes the New Testament antitype :
the " shadow of good thing^to come " emerges into the sub-
«tantive realty. It is used but thre6 times : —
, Luke xxiii. 43.— "To-day thou shalt be with me in Paradise."
2 Cor. xii. 4.--t" How that he 'was caught up into Paradise." \
Rev. ii 7.^-"'The tree of life which is in the.midstof the Para-
dise of God." „ '
in the last of these passages the mention of the tree of
life connects itself plainly with th e after account of the
give other interpretations of the pasisage, even though contradictpry of ,
this.
r '
SHfiOL, HAiXES Al^ PAUABISB.
161
heavenly Jerusalem' which is therefol'e at least not t&e new
earth, however related to it it may be. Nor, does this in'
the least deny the earthly promises prodjaced by Roberts,
Each have their place, but those he quotes are distinctly
those belonging to Israel nationally, as the apostle of the ■
Gentiles tells us (Rom. ix. 3). Our blessings ire " in /i^ay-<
€;^ places in Christ Jesus" (Eph. i. 3); and of these the
earthly ones are ttut the shadow. Mr. liobi^rts calls this
an unproved assertion. It is, however) as definitely certain
as can ^e, and without understanding it tb^re can be ,no
proper understanding of the promises at'alL 'We>4|A&ll de- -
vote a chapter to this |ioint hereafter, and therefore may
leay€r'it now.^ , \
The second passage speaks of paradise aa existing novf ,
for Paul was caught away into it, — I have no wish to retain
the." up" if Mr. Roberts objects,-7-and whether in the body -
^ pr otlt of It lie conild not tell, even at the time he wrote.
ManifesUy, if he 8iq)posed he could be caught away bodily
into it, be supposed it to be an existing place, and the plea
that it was a vision will not answer. The "visions " doubt-
less refer to what he saw there. -__ '
To this Roberts answers ^hat Paulraight have puj^posedf
Paradise "made actually existent ic>t Xka^ occasion of his in- "
spection." The restored earth actually existent for Paul to
see ! It is a trite remark that faith is never, so credulous as .
unbelief * " ^
Mr. Constable insists that this Paradise could be'np part
of hades, and that pepple are forced thus to suppose that
there are two Parsfdises ! I agree with him that it is one and
the same Paradise throughout. And the difficulty which,
he supposes is only the fruit of people studying rabl)inic£itl
theology more than Scripture. Mfides, as is acknowledged,
is but 'the " unseen," and never defines precise locality. It
is the attempt to make it definite which has coul'osed peo '
pie's minds, that is all.
But hades is, in the "heart of the earth," says Mr. Oonstar
ble. ' How does he know? Why, the earth swallowed upl
• I
• V
Il -.-
U L
152 FACTS AND TOEORIES AS TO A PUTU^IE STAfE.
Korah and his company, and they " went' down alive into
Bheol." That is his proof. May we not equally say that
hade^ is the belly of a whale, because Jonah says that he
cried " out of the belly of sheol " V Thus it is not so easy
perhaps to decide the question of locality. The necessarily
vague thought of Jthe " unseen " refuses such limitation.
. True, its imagery was naturally borrowed, before the fuller
revelation had been given, from that grave wit)* which it
necessarily was associated in the mind, and thus you have it
pictured as '' beneath," souls going down to it or coining iip^
from it. There is moreover a real truth in this conception,
in its being a descent from man's position, a degradation from
his natural place on earth. The New Testament removes
fpx the isaint the veil of the unseen. He departs to be with
Christ, and Christ is not in the heart of the earth. The very
name of /mdea for the believer almost disappears, and thus
it is most beautifully at the Cross of Christ that the veil
begins to lift decidedly. " With me in Paradise V "may well
be in contrast with Old Testament utterances. Alas,
that men should refuse the consolation, the brightness of
the new revelation, and seek to retain the darkness, for faith
passed away.
In a kindred way is to be explained the saying of the
Lord after His resurrection, that He was " not yet ascended
' to His Father.'' Mr. Constable with others holds that that
is inconsistent with the thought of His having been in Para-
dise in the intermediate state. But " ascension" is anotljer
thing from the departure of. the spirit to God. It is con-
nected with the victory over death, not the submission to
it. David is not ascended, while his body remains in the
grave. And for the Lord how easy to see the unspeakable
difference ! The departure of the spirit was the witness all
had been stooped to, death in its full reality undergone ;
ascension was the witness of that work accepted, and man
as man brought into tne new place with lirod. ~^
mmm
■Ws"
THE AUmoailY A.ND USB OF SCBIPTUKE. 153
U
PART III.— -THE ETERKAL ISSUES.
CHAPTER XV.
THE AUTHORITY AND USE OF SCRIPTURE.
Hitherto we have been considering the arguments of
only a section, although a large and important section, of
those whose views we are examining. We are now to look
at the final issues of life or death eternal. And here there
are two classes of objectors to the common views : those
commonly called " annihilationists " on the one side, but who
prefer for their views the designation of " conditional immor-
' tality " ; and those who on the other side advocate the doc-
trine of the possible or actual salvation of all men, after
whatever ages it may be of purificatory suffering.
Of necessity our examination of these opposing statements
will lead us in very different directions ; they unite only in
I maintaining the doctrine to which is generally given the
Scripture title of the " restitution of all things," and in cer-
J tain ethical arguments against the ordinary views. The
stronghold of the first class of writers they believe to be
in the texts which speak of immortality, and of eternal life
£fe the portion of the saved, and of death and destruction in
various forms of^xpression asthat of the ivisaveH. The
stronghold of theilfcter, so far as they take Scripture as their
g^und of argument, is found, as they believe, in the texts
which speak of the reconciliation of all things, and in the ex-
pressions for " eternal " being not really equivalent to " ever,
lasting." As, however, we desire to take up not merely the
arguments of those who differ trom us, but to show the
Scriptural view from Scripture itself, and as the full bearing
Qf its statements needs to be consideredir. and not merQ
^m
vn^ -^^
f
FACTS ANP OTE0BIE8 AS TO A FUTDRE STATE.
ielected and isolated texts, the conaideration of these will
liecessarily render it the only satisfactory course to meet the
various arguments from whatever source as Incidental to the
examination of the Scripture' doctrine itself*. This only I
believe will suffice him for whom Scripture has its due place
and authority, as ^chat alone can decide in a matter of this
..- ^ ^'"'*- The truth will th^s be continually before us, and our
. - - .;. souls bo kept in the presence of Him whol^ given it,
rather than in the presence of human thoughts and question-
ings, which can b^ but this after all. ^ f
^ ' I do not shrink ft-om the ethical inquiry. But for this we
must have first of all the distinct statement of the doctrine
. before us, and then also Scripture itself must test the ethics
as all else. ^&^
■'^■■■■■1
It will be worth while then in the first place to consilS^
the authority of Scripture in this subject of so immense im-
portancc to us, and which involves not only our views of the'
eternal destiny of men, but of the character of God Himself.
And the question pf its authority embraces another, of what
is authoritative: is it the text, the "letter" of the word, if
. you will, or is "it what some call the "Scriptures of God in
their broad outlines "in contrast to this:-' To which of
these is the appeal to be ? Are we after all only likely more
to lose our way by any minute examination of the words of
Revelation? Is the danger in too close a scrutinv or too
- :- little? -
For it has been asserted by a recent, but vefv well-known
writer* that, because « we are in the dispensation of the
Holy Spirit'— "our guide is the Scriptures of God in their
broad outlines; the revelation of God in its glorious uni-
• ty;— the books of God in their eternal simplicity, read by
^ ^^ T-th^^ Spirit of Christ which dwelleth in
• us, oxee])t we bo reprobates. Our guide is not, and never
shall j>o, what the Scriptures calP the letter that killoth;>—
V the tyrannous realism of ambiguous metaphors, the asserted
r 4 infellibility^ofjisolated words^ It is true he tells us he is
S^r\ r 7 7 * Canon Farrar: 8e!-inons on " Eternal Hope," Serm. 3. ~" —
^mf
'•W'
'w^
THE AUtI^OBITY and USE 01? SOBIPTI^BE, 156
"quite content that texts should decide *' this question ; but
then it is only " if, except as an anachronism, wo m^an noth-
ing when wc say, *I beKeye in the Uoly Ghost'; if we
prefer our sleepy siiibbdr^nWud dead traditions to the liv-
ing promise ' I will dw«yi"m Ifcera and walk in them,' " so
that at that rate wp\^[4aUji g6H^ at manifest dis-
advantage, and witli UtUo^^k^ie it should seem of any sati
factory result. , >^ ,'. . i<|te , * .
There is some little difficulty in meeting objections whicB
from their nature tend to deprive us of the very au-
thority by which albue Ave can decide them. For if we
should remind Cainon Farrar that the apostle tells us that
the' things he spoke were not in " the wards which man's
wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth," and,
that it seems strange to make the Holy Ghost to be in
conflict \vith His own " words," — he might answer us that
wo were doing now the very thing he objected to, and set-
tling the mattet by" an appeal to isolated -'Uexts."" • /
The only encouragement to such an aMMH seems to, be in
this, that he hir/ifself so appeals. He himsen beireves in the
.promise, " I will dwell in them, and walk in them," and
cannot include this among the " sleepy shibboleths and dead
traditions " of whidi he speaks. Moreover he believes at .
least that "the letter killeth." Therefore, it should seem
that we might examine his own proof texts, and see how
far, if indeed he base it upon these, they justify his position.
N^ow it is the same apostle who vouches for his very
.♦'words "Ajeing taught him by the Holy Ghost, who tells us
that " the letter killeth" ; and if we would not have that in
the worst sense an isolated text, a phrase wrenched from its
context and appl/^td hap-hazard as we please, we must
inquire a little wh&t its context is. We shall find the words
then in his s€»cou(l epistle to the church at Corinth (Hi. 6);
and with the verse preceding it runs thus :— ^
" Not that w<4 are sufficient of ourselves to think anything
as of ourselves/ but our sufficiency is of God, who also hath ^
made us able ininisters of the New Testament; not of the
t
"TfW^
«
ill'
166
FACTS ANP TdEOBIES A3 TO A PUTlTRSl STATE.
letter, but of the spirit; for the letter mileth, hut the spirit
giveth li^.^ . \
Jf wo look back to the verses going beforq, we shall find
that ho has boon cojitraHtiiig the writing on " tables of stone"
with the writing of the Spirit of the living' God " in fleshy
tables of tffe hcar^t." If we goon to the verses following,
\vo shall find him speaking of the former as "tie ministra-'*
lion of (Imth, written and engraven In stones," given to the
children of Israel by Moses, and of the latter again, in con-
trast, as " the ministrat^n of the Spirit." And in the next
verse again he styles the one-" the ministration of condemna-^
tiorifthe other "the ministration of righteousness." We
need not follow him further.
Upon the face of this then, the apostle in " the tetter *'
that " killeth " is speaking of thfe " ministration of death*'
and that as what was written ^pon the "tables of stone,"
fhehifn and nothing ehc. It is this that he is contrasting
with the "new testament," or gospel, as "the ministration
of righteousness" and life by the Spirit. The law, the
letter,, killed: was designed by its manifestation of what
God required from man to gilve Tiim the sentence of death in
himself. "When the commandment came," says the apostle,
speaking of its proved effect, *''' sin revived, and I dikV
(Rom. vii. 0). The gospel on the other hand "ministered
righteousness"— provided, not required it, and so was life
to souls, not death. In the one "the letter" of a mere ■
commandment i^killed." In the other the poW^r of the
Spirit wrought, giving life. Pa^il was a minister of the
"New Testament," not the Old, "not of letter, but of
Spirit." -
But then, I fear me, Canon Farrar cannot b^ acquitted
of the grossest violation of his own precept. He Is in real-
ity using "isolated words," woi:ds isolated fr^m tte# con-
text and applied to establish principles with which they have
not the remotest connection. He uses them to put in oppo- '
s.tion the words which the Holy Ghost taught and the Holy
Ghost who taught them ; and to substit ute for adherence to
..^iMiL, il-;
itlh AUTHOUITY AND USE OP SCRIPTUEE.
iht
the inspired text a sort of mystic, living guidance, which r^'
nounces the Scriptures as having any mere verbal accuracy
to be adhered to^^.t^ie asserted infallibility of isolated
words "—and replaces this with " the ScriptMres of God in
their broa^oittlines^Jiot to be too narrowly defined ; " t"he
revelation of God in its glorious unity," untrpubled by the
discordance of "isolated texts"; pratotically; anything that
we may please to call the teaching of the Spirit and the
word, not to be critically tested ^ven by that word by
which the Spirit teaches. / f
On the other hand, ice have been taught that " hereby
know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of error," not by
any assurance of our own hearts, as having the fulfilment of
the promise, " I will dwell in them and walk in them," —
true and blessed as that promise is, — ^but as " hearing " or
" not hearing " the men inspired of God tp give us Scripture
(1 John, iv. 6). We have learnt by the conduct of the
Bereans to "selarch the Scriptures daily'" whether theSe
things are so.v And from the apostle of the Gentiles that
the "very words "^ he gives us, isolated or not, are words
taught of the Holy Ghost Hinaself.
Canon Farrar does indeed allow us to " decide by texts
alone," but it is only if we prefer " sleepy shibboleths and
dead traditions " to the living guidance ^L the Spirit Him-
self. Is the word of God a " dead tfljution " ? I will
gladly believe rather that he cannot mean this. But then
his words do wrong to his^ meaning, and' we have no giiide
to the latter. I quote from the appendix to his book an-
other statement of his views, possibly more calm and delib-
erate than that from the sermon in thafcody of it :
"I caro but little in any controversy for the stress laid upon
one or two isolated and dubious texts out of the sacred literature
of fifteen hundred years. They may be torn from their context ;
they may be distorted ; they may be misinterpreted ; they may
be irrelevant ; they may b^ misunderstood ; tJiey may — as the
prophets, and the apostles, ^ind our blessed Lord Himself dis-
tinctly intimated — tJiey may reflect the ignorance of a dark age, or
■A,
*
¥':
158 PAOtS AKD. THBOBlEfl AS TO A JTJTtJttE St^m.
the fragment of a# imperfect revelation ; they may he a 6ar«oo«.'
.e..u>ntoimpe,:rect^<^<^ ^ stepping-stone J^ firogres,, Wt
the Bible teaches as a whole ; what the Stbles aho teach as a •
whole-for History and Conscience, and l^ature and Experience,
these too are sacred books, that, and that only, is the immutable ■
law of God." ' . .
4^it i8 very plain what Dr. Farrar ^leaits by refusing
the "infalUBllity of isolated words." , For him there are
many Bibles, all Mible alike, and he himself is of these
fallible Bibles the only apparently infallible interpreter. His-
tory is such a Bible^ written where and iiow, out of all the
contradictory tomes to which every day is ^ving fresh
birth, he does not say. Conscience is another, though it
teach men to bow down to stocks or stones^, or Snakes and
crocodiles; conscience, wTiich made Saul. kill God'asaiiils to
do Him 8^'vice. Mature is still another, with, p^chance,
a Huxley or a Darwin as its chronicler, and expounder. Ex-
. perlence, which proved to the Jews of Jeremial^^y, that
While they burnt incense to the queen of heaven, fhfey had
plenty of victuals, and were well, 'and saw no .§vil," AH ,
these are Bibles, upon whose imperfect and contradictory
utterances the mind of man is to sit in judgment— to decide
what it can receive an<f what reject ; and the blessed word
of God is to take i^s place among these, and man is to say
which of its utterances is the "reflection of the ignprance
of a dark age/' and Vhich " a bare concession to imperfec-
tion," and which "a low stepping-stone to progress.^
We may thank Dr. Farrar for his candor. It is certainly
well to know what Scripture is for bim, and how^ far
" texts" are likely to decide the matter in question, ^^here
he finds that prophets and apostles, nay, the Lord Him-
self, sanction his view of thf matter, it would be hard to
say There is certainly abundance of proof of -the very
opposite, and > the mouth»of on^ who professes such un-
bounded confidence in the " illuminatioa of the Spirit ot
Christ," it seems a strange assertion thatnhus the Spirit of
trutb must have taught error, or^ at Iciast have used such
\ ( -
THE AUTHORITY AND USE OF SCRIPTURE.
159
feeble auod imperfect mean* of confm^eating troith, that
He could not prevent its bein^ mixed up with error. We
refuse this teaehing altogether. We on the authority of
Scripture itself believe! that :J* a// Scripture is gji^en by in-
spiration of God, and is. profitable for doi^^^rine, for reproof,
for correctioh, for instrii^ion in righteousness, that the man
<rf Giod inay be perfect,, thoroughly furnished unto all good
works" (2 Tim. ill, 16, 1^);. We believig m a- really "divine,
revelation given to us by One .^ho cannot lie, and who does
not for bread give us a stone, lar put d^kness for light, or
light fOt darkness. %e would obediently " search " these
Scripturef( conscious^lfftdeed of bur own weakness and
ignordn<je ill doing so, but sWerfilj^trusting Him, who as-
sures tis that " he that wM do (lod% wUl shys^Uknow of the ,
doctrine whether it be of &o|i:" (JohnTvii. IT),
Dt; F^rrar speaks of ** the4j^rannoua realism of ambigtiOus
metaphors,'* of eoursfe, the metaptiorat of Scripture. 'And it
is an objekion which we havi^metbe^re, and shall%neet at
every 'step as we now proceed, tl^ ^e t(pxt8 that are used
in this controversy arfe largely of tlttS' nature. Now the
ambiguity of the metaphors' can only be tested by the exam-
ination of the passages in questioil : the fact, of their being
largely metaphorical aflmits of'no doiA|;. Mr. Minton puts
this triumphantly in his 'published ^* Way Everlasting."
"Suppose,'? says he to the person he is aftidre^sing, "we.
agreed to wave ^verytliing on either sidi, of a purely fig-
urative character, whether parables, metaphors or visions,
together with passages admitted to be of;;jdoubtful meaning
on, other ground than that connected with the issue between
us, and to abide by th^e plain prose statements that form the
staple of Scripture testimony on, the subject — where would
you be ? Simply nowliere. You would be out of court."
Mr. Minton's triumph is hardly so well assured; yet
doubtless he has some apparent reapon for what he says.
The pictorial representations, if I. may so say, of the eternal
state are those naturally in which we find the most vivid
images of eternal jud^ent; and these are preciselj^ thepa^n-
«5''
Wl
"m
;*
A
¥2
-:-■■■■ :■ i%S
■■*' -tit"-'''
:
i
160 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FDTUllE STATE.
sages which he and such as he have most difficulty in recon-
cilinc' with their various theories. . The book of Revelation ;
especially, the prophetic panorama of things to qomc, gives
them'cspecial trouble. The eternal torment spoken of there^
Mr Minton candidly confesses his mability to explain in aiyr
way quite satisfactory to his own piind.* But the "highly
fiemrativc" character of these visions is the conslaut plea,
ami they cdn refuse upon this ground whutthercannot ex-
plain. To maintain the authority of texts iSke thescvis just
to assert that " tyrannous realism of ambiguous metaphors ^
a-ainst .whichlbanon Farrar utters his protest, ^et the
book has, as few have, its inspired title, and that title is -the
Recelation of Jesus Christ." It is as if the complamts of
obscurity and ambiguity had already reached the Divine
ears from out the unborn future, and He had provided for
them ^h the assurance of Kv^.beimj a revelation, a true un-
' folding'of" things to come to pass." I would ask thcm^ to
mark this, that it is here they find their greatest difficulty, '
in what Christ calls ///.s '• Revelation."! . '
Jfche figurative character is confessed, but it is only what
is found wherever eternal things are pictured to us. There
seems no other way of their being set beforeHs indoe.l, than
by figures taken from the things aroun.l ; and we may be
sure that He who speaks to us in tliein lias taken not the
most obscure and doubtful way to show them to u.s^. " AV a
see through a glass, darkly ^ sap the apostle. The last
phrase is literally '^ in an enigma '' (I, Cor. xiii. 12, ;/*(t/V/.).
« Thus it is the Scripture way to use. enigmas to describe
what otherwise it may well be impossible for a man to utter
(2 Cor. xii. 4).
Yet thoiK'h it was of old tlur compljiint as to the prophets
that they " spake parables ' (Ezek. xx. 49), it is nevertheless
■ _ , ....... ^.^-.., :-^— /-.^ '
* Way Evorla.stiiig,4the<l.. p. Of>. r f^
t For Mr. Dobiiov ihes.- aro t}..> " liiorodyphs cf Putmds. Mr. Oox
would exclude fr.»m the .lecisien of tlrrs question not ouly "J^^yo\^
all \ho 01(1 Testament (Salvar
bul llie pa r abl fi s of the Lord, and
lion,
tor Mundi, ch. ".)•
-v-^--^' ---■
• »
i l i>I J l L l H l* t i | i MH '
•\.^
THE AUTHORITY X^I) USE OF; SttRIPTUKK. 161'
expected of disciples at least, that* they should understand
them. « Know- ye not this parable?" asked the Lord once
of the twelve, "and how then will ye know all pajalles?"
(Mark iv. 13). Surely our shame It is to be akin to those,
whd seeing do i^t perceive, and hearing di? not understand.
Th^ Lord does not /trifl^e with us, does not mvite us to see
what He forbids us to understand* And there we must
pause for the present. The visions themselves will come
before las' at another time.
M
^ ^*Aa lo tlie doubtfulness of »the interpretatrbn of the parables, Mr.
^Oox asl^s of MatL xiii. 33, ^Bd Luke xv. 4 : " Would it ;iot be-^uite easy
to interpret these weighty and emphatic phrases as signifying that the
wjiole inaas of mankind is th be leavened and quickened by°the truth
of ChriW^n<l that the great Bishop of our souls will never cease from
hi* .luesW)f any poor lost sinner until he find him and restore him to
the tbld 1 " No doubt 'it i§ " easy," if we assume the meaning ofsym- '
l)ols as we please, and tfiishas been largely done; but the " three meas-
ures of- meal " refer to the raeat-offem;i^^yith which no leaven was to
l.e, mixed (Lev. ii. 11), and cannot mean "the whole mass of mankind '*
:M.y more than the " leav.en '' can ever be int^ppreted as good accordin'cr
to Scripture usage (Comp. Matt. xvi. 6, 11, 12; Maik viii. 15 • 1 Cor°
V. 6-8 ; Gal. V. 9). ^ • . v . / ^^ - ''
A-ait«pthe "losg^lheep is the "sinner that re^eth/' and- Christ
<lor.s find all such. As to the prodigal ffgurlng the return of a soul from
i.ell (the far country), it i5*^nworthy trifling, which stamnT the clmrac-
ler of the map wh* uses it^hink of a'sinher^oiHg aiay fro* God
to enjoy. hiuiself in hell! ^^ -tfc. - '
-W^'
U/^
ft...
•. * s' .•
■' "■* ': ■■■■ . :
_ ^
\
w '
i
%€■:
■ '', " " » . '
■•,'.■* ■
'■.•*/,., ■.
■ ■ . ,\f ■
,:: ■-■ :.., '::■ ■ , ■,
1 ■ :.
i
to
\ -• • .
. ■■ ■ ^*
■ 1." .
- "■•
.a-* -.
•
V -. f ■■
■'" ' ■ ■, ' '
'i
5
', -'^^
>. '"">■--.
, ^
.,".■■-■ , ,....'■;-
■■ -V • tp.
;,V,"/ ■.-.■■
' k
." ■ '■.,' ■' *S.
■■'?-.-^':v'
• ..,;■■ • - -•-■
t
\
■■'•>''' ■• .'
■
^' :■ ,. ". , '"'■,
* •
V
' '
,■1 '
a*
'^
-X ..-m
i|I||]^kie ii^^^i^r o\iuniua|iop|s briefly
r. ?^^<?^^'^'*M "^M^i^ iit. roiut;» to this
l0ok at\j>e prophutle ■6Utl|41of the
the
eme
ents
the"
■^!^j . ; ' ^ '%W ^ ^^^^! ^^g'" #h in^r^rtality und 'eternal- Jilc, tw«>
/ '■%* %f ^*"*?«^*^^' ^»ch fbi-anhihijfitionists are only one japKhow-
^; ^^ T H?^^'* |»«cordant up to 'this'! tinte jnay liave been t%r'state-
i . . ;ifl«3Wts, wt?^ find them iii almost pei-|ect a^pement
i^s 'Mi 'Morris: — ^ •■ ' V ■ '^^ ;.■ .
^ YThe Son of Goi],;came to give lifo, even«etornanif(/; aiid if it,
^askcd;/AVho wiUlivo forever ?' ■the ans^wor of thdi^rd and
f ( V ' ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^' who is also the Bi^'otHfe, is ;n these \ '^^*' *
*' that leateth of this bread shall live forever.' Am
, itrey^j^^n^ and evil f or^^ man to say, that In
the Soil of Gqd tlie ' ^fJH^ ^ife ' does not mean 1
words ' eternal life ' (wH^ mean" eternal life, an
'» * shall live forever ; do not mean shall live fore\
their ecii^siastical teaching*, certain men are hu^.
kind of irreverence and evil by reason of thek ha
the false'doctrine of the innate and essential irAtnortf
of
hat thp
le T^^ords
KyruiJ, in
■*^ tliis
>pted
^hrf
eartlUy ' race/'^o ,
And at the othttr end of atimhilationism, the follower of
Ur. Thomas, Mr. iioberts of Birmingham, aftgr q*uotlhg va
*"-Wlinf i^ Arnn ? '• p. 4aps
1
i ■».
■ ~- W^. ■ I
•1
''tTT'
l-HMORTAUTY : IS IT CONIHTIONAL ?
168
%:
I %
"t
rioua passages which speak of eternal life, writes (Twelve
. jbectares, p. 82) : ♦
. " KbV, if immortality bo the uatunil iittribute of eveiy son of
^dam from th<^ v.uy moment ho broatlios. jvlmt can be the mean-
ing of testimonies like these, which, ono and all, speak of immor-
.tality as a liituro eoutingoncy, a thing to l)o sought for. a reward,
a thing to bo given, a thing brought to light through the gospel
etc. ? Tiiere is an uttoi- incongruity in siieh language, if immortal
ity b;'ii natural and present possession. How can you promise a
man that whicli is already his own ? The divine promi.se is,
that God will award eti*riud life to those who seek for gloryj honor
and immtn-tahty ;. and this is the strongest proof that human na-
ture is utterly destitute of it at ijre.sent."
Tminortality and eternal life are here confounded! And
it does not make it bettcrthat Mr. Roberts quotes apparent
Scripture to justify the confusion. He may shelter himself
iinder the fact that he is not alone in it.* He is not; but
that will nfit make him h-ss responsible for deception, even
^ unwit«mg^«spractised.t
The true Scri2>tural statement is this :—
; In the New Testament the true A^^ord for immortality
^d^ocvaciia) occurs but three timers : 1 Cor. xv. 53, 54, "this
mortal must put,on««m/>/-;f/%;" " vvhen . . . .this mortal
''^^t^i^* W<^^''*^''^"^''^ ' ' ^*"f^^nce of God it is as-
^^^F^^f^vilp), that, He •' only hath hnm.mality:'
,T^adjectiVc;|iim|o^ar' does not even occur.
therein ijigindt^>dauoth«- Vni %tphtharsla {dtp^apdia:)
t#ice translated ni our v#8ioii*^^Vwit5#aLttyv'ani that is
the wor'd Mr. Rbberts>ith othe^ l\as caiight-at as showing
va^ssGeffim/ it; but^ts propq^^ lueaning is"*' incorruption,''
and so it is niostly translated. . I cite all the^ passat'es :
Btffii. ii. 7 :—*' glory, honoi- and ^■»M^wW4y.J
42r-"iti3raiR*^ ''*'"
«Vf.v
■V
1*^
(Joodvv
obney- Hastings, H^m^^Moiicriel Z. Campbell, Minton,
Gonsiablo, all agree with hun. No doubt. oth(^r3 also.
tile takes tip notice of Jt ^ven ^n his review of rhy book, after its
bein^plainly pointed out (o him. :ftut this is no unaccustomed thing
f»' ymmi. V
^^
W
\
^^■'-v
n^'^.
164 FACTS AND THfitoRIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
1 Cor. XV. 50 : — " uoither dotli corruption inherit incorrupt imC'
t 53 :— "mustpiit on ywror»*»7)^/o«."
54 ;_" sliall liave put on incorrupt ion.'"
Eph. vi. 24 :— "love our Lord Jesus^Christ in sincerity.'"
2 Tim. i. 10 :— "brought life and imrnortali ft/ to light by the
gospel." '
Tit. ii. 7 :— " incorruptness, gravity, «*/"v?r/7y."
Its adjective, apht/iartos {a<pOotproi) " incorruptible," is
used seven times, and applied towod (Rom. i. 23, 1 Tim. i.
17); the crown of the^ righteous (1 Cor. ix. 25)} our in-
heritance (1 Pet. i. 4) ; the word of God (1 Pet. i. 23) ; and
once figuratively, " that which is not corruptible " (1 Pet.
iii. 4). It is only once in our version (1 Tim. i. 17) rendered
"immortal," but' with no more reason than in other places.
Furthermore its opposite (^a/>ros) " corruptible," is six
.times found, and always so rendered: Rom. i. 2-^: l/Jor. ix.
25;xv. 53, 54; 1 Pet. i. 18, 23. * ,,^
The difference between these words comes out in 1 Cor.
XV., in which they are. all to be fomid. Speaking of the '
dead body of the saint (ver. 42-50) the apostle uses the
word " corruptible " and " corruption." It was not mortal^
but dead. Then, speaking of the resuVrection of those " that
are Christ's at His coming " (ver. 23), he brings in also the
change of the living saints which would accompanj^ it ; " We
shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed ; " " the dead
shall be raised incorruptible, and we (the living) shall t)e
changed; for this corruptible (applying to the dead l^aint§)
must put on incorrupfion, and this mortal (applying i»! tfie
living) must put on hnmortalityJ^ ;* »?
Thus there is evident distinction in the use of thesei^ords
in Scripture; and when it is said (Rom. ii. 7) that God will
render "to them who by patient continuance in*well-doing
seek for glory and honor and incorruption, eternal life," it
is not at all the same as seeking for immortality, but the
— bless e d, incorruptible s tat e in which resurrection or the
ige " will put the samts at the coming of Christ. And
68 only to the saints, as the whole . descriptiop 'i\\
'^f[
: . ■ I
i
.■^ST.
immortality: .i,s it ookditiokal?
165
: : I
!
-4i_-.
?5f.
Im-
Im-
1 Cor. XV. 4:2-50 doefl. The wicked are not tliose of whom
it is said, "It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorrupt
tion ; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory ; it is sown
in weakness, it is raised in power.'" Such words aye appli-.
cable alone to the bloom and beauty of the " resurrection of
. life-'' - .
"'^^uite tjue that th^ saints, alive but mortal when Christ.
comes, will then got " immortality." The liability and ten-"
dency to death will in their case be of course removed.
But that word is the expression of a different fact from that
which is pdinted out in the case of those who, have died.
All will alike of course possess incdrruption, pi^jing on
•alike the image of the heavenly ; but the fact iloticed"
the.liying is that they shall not sleep at a^j^" mortalit
their case being " swallowed up' of life.'' ' ,'
For of course mortality is our condition d6wn here.
mortality " is /io< " our natural and present condition."
mortality is deathlessness, and who imong the peopk Mr,
Roberts is opposing asserts that we do noft.die? It is a
poor quibble that. The ^oul does not die ; nor the spirit;
but man does surely. The question is as to wh at „ d eath is,
not whdtiier men are subject to it. Of course v^i%J||p''K-
it is cessation of existence, but then that is not what we -
mean by death. We mean the dust returning td the earth
as it was, Avhile the spirit returns to God who gave it.
Under the same word we are in reaUt^y speaking of different
*Spllijil Goodwyn has indeed another application of the
words in this chapter : — f
® " Ver. 50 applies the word ' corruption ' to fleiAi and blood, the
eiAte natural man ; ver. 52 applies thfe/word 'incorruptible'
tolEad bodies ' raised. ' In ve#«3, therefore, the Word ' incor-
ruption •' evidentlygpapplies 4*Jj| ^^^^^ *^^ consequently' im-
'* ction, %rhen body and
cqnt^ting the source
^the Adam race,
•"corruptible seed,
remains that the -
mortility ' t6 tlio soul, but o
soul are rounitod. *The ap
of the children of God with
says Jdujiil^he former ate 'Jjol-n'
W 3w
but
')rruptil'»le,
'^""""^^^
*#
m
r-.mt,-
*•%
16C MJ^UIH AJii} lUKOUim AS TO A FlTTUJtE 8TATK, '
latter are bom of ' oorrnptible tiu0lf^9l!lS^o a^pitatl^'Paul gives
furthef force to this expression when Ite says, 'We that are
in thkn |kbernacle do groan,. being burdened, not that we would
be wSothed '—uncovered with a body— 'but clothed «pon,
tbst w)iiTAiJT7 might he swallowed up of life.' Hpre Lh a dis-
ti^tafelertion that the jjersonality — apart or not from the body —
ialp^lal' (2^or. v. 4)."
•|f boldness would carry the day the field were won. As
it is we arej^not convinced. We dispute the fact of" flesh
and blood | beitig the '♦ entire nj^tural man " ; we agree that
" incorruptibn " everywhere applies to the body. T^giieny
the "consequence " that mortality or immortality refers to^
t%^ul. l^ijefers to the bodies of the liviuf/ when Christ ',
dwmes, as* corrtlption and incorruption to the bodies of the
dead. Let any one compare 1 Thess. iv. 15-17, where the
same event is spoken i!Df,^ri% where the dead in Christ, lid
'• we" who ate alive aqd retnaio are (Similarly contrasted.
ITie "we shall tti|han^ " fs WDntrist^ in 1 Cor. xv. 52,
with the dead bei^ ''raised incorruptible,^' and so similarly
in the next ^etse, ^is corruptible " appUes to the. Jeaf/,
f.?!
9inDns toHhe body,
FH^28,the«iiicorrl
eafpresE
_)tible
MchJl^ the gospel is preached
ddlwith the physical consti-
ar
" 4ilis mortal t to 'We'^iying :
the ''tnortaljies/i," (? Cor. iv.
Again, in the passagefrom
s^d" is the "word of Go
uiito yp]^." What „ has tha
tu«Ofl or man? iUia if wdSire bom, as I have no wish to
enyi of " corruptSle seed," how does that show that such
»|^ a term applies to the physical constitution of the soul or
spirit ? Nay, he has himself just now applied " corruptible "
to the condition of the body, and " mortal "^m contrast with
this to the state of T-he soul. /Neither ^ssiiftiption can bear the
least examination. ' »
The quotation from 2 Cor. v." 4 is, howler, still more
recklessir misapplied. WAere is the ^ assertion that the
personality, a;?qr^ froni the, hody, is iportal"? It ts Gen
•
<n
%
V
m
'*r
Goodwyn's own, not the apostle's. He has distinctly stated
that h« groaned, not to be unclothed, but clothed upon.
IMMORTALITY : IS IT CONDITIONAL f
167
'%]
\
Now this is the very change of the livmg we have before been
looking at. Paul, the living but mortal man, longed not to
be unclothed^to be apart from the body— Z»m/, iu opposi-
tion to that, to be cj^thed upon, that mortality, his present
condition, might bdPWallo wed up of life.
How could the "personality," apart from the bodt/, be ac-'
cording to Gen. Goodwyn, *' mortal " any more ? Would
he call a dead body mortal ? And for him, apart from the
body, the soul is as strictly dead as is the body itself.
-Mr. Roberts makes an eflfort to show that immortality and
ililorfUptiofa are interchangeable terms;, and we will allow
him to state how in his own words : .
t:
* Tho first [dOayadia) tells xm that the life cf the uge is death-
ss. Ig^^ entering it we are told that this mortal shall put on
ortality. By this we know the truth declared by Christ, that
ley who are accounted worthy of tho ago . . . cannot die any.
more' ^uko xx. 36). But how is it that life is thus mado endless
to those that were before but mortal ? The second word
^a(pOap6ia) answei-s it : ' Tliis corruptible must put on incorrup-
tion' (IGor. XV. 53).' Men ore mortal — liablep^^i^ath — because
their natures are cnrritptible ; they decay, ^^^flpke them in-
corruptible, and endlessness of life is the ncc^^^consequence.
Hence to seek for iucon'uption is equivalent to seeking for death-
lessuGss or immortality."
.Mr. Roberts' physiological knowledge is as defective as
bi%^ knowledge of Scripture. I have already pointed out
that his theory of life being the result of organization is the
very reverse at least of what the acutest physiologists of the
day assert. Prof. Huxley, well known to be as stout a ma-
terialist as he is undeniably an unbeliever, admits over and
over again that life is the cause of organization, and not
organization the cause of life. (Introd. to Classification of
Animals) I have before quoted from. another of the same
school. It is almost the universally accepted doctrine no^^
— Mr. R.'b pr e sent assertion is but the logical outgrowth of
his former one. If life be the result of organization, doubt-
less immortality will be that of incorruption. But as the
..■'#-''
m-
n
168 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTUKK 8TATK. - !
former statement needs to be reversed, so will 'the latter
require to be. Incorruption will be based rather upon im-
mortality, but even so is not (as it wouhl appear) its nieessary -
Result. We must bear in mind that we are speak in<^ here
of what is almost outside- the sphere of mere human know-
ledge, and where a verse or two of Scripture is aU the
Biblical material to «lraw from either. Hut all that we do
know /is against the view Mr. -Koberts advocates.
Th^ " immortality " as a term is applie.l in Scripture only
to thei righteous is not of striking force wlien wo remember
that i* is only applied to tkeui in two consecutive verses
(1 Cor. XV, .'iH, r)4),.one of which is but really the r»>]>etition .
of the other, /
]Jut, say these writers (quoting 1 Tim. vi. 1<>), •• (Jod **»\r
hath immortality." What then ? Wliy, it is argued, " tlicr
• soul can't have it.' Let them go a little further, and the
result will be ai)parent. The angels then cannot either.
Does death tlien reign throughout the ranks of created, sin-
less beings? That will not of coin>e be contended for;
but it is involved necessarily hi the argument; and must
follow, or the, argument be given ii|). Xo, s:iys Mr. IJob^rts,
for the angels " m-e /?o(? ^<> «.s' . for they are of His nature,
and come only «mjlis erninds '' . . .'• they are of the divine
nature ; they are ' spirit.' " .Vnd so is man's sj)irit "spirit,'"
and we have seen that, if angels be " sons of (Tod"' on that
account, just so are men also '' llis otlspring.' Wliatever ^
therefore this proTCsasto angels, it proves also for th'e spirit
of man. That the angels i-cifffaent God to us,as cruning oft
His errands, proves nothing nor disproves.
The Scripture sense of the passage doi'S indeed^ hutke it
apply to angels, and to all created beings. It is the esseur
tial difference between the Creator and all 1 lis Avorks, that lie
alone by Himself subsists. *' liy Hhn,'''' on the other hand, •
' "all things subsist." "He upholdeth all things by the word
^
<
"'^.
V ■
of His power." Thus we by no means malritain whatMr,
Morris calls, and rightlj|calls, "the fidse d<>etrinp of the
lunate and essential im^^ftality "of th<' t-arthly rsuM'.' So
tA-
i
■c
¥:
■'• '. '. ■ .: "' .
'":■■ '..:;_:li
KTEHKAL hlFK :
WHAT? 18 IT?
160
far from that we contend that the race m mortal, Ra4 that
immortality innate and essential belongs to no creature,
fallen or unlallen. Tt is the a88urance of thig that this pas-
sage? in Timothy gives. In that sense, as possessing it ia
HimseTf, (^od alone hath it, and in Hun '* we live, and move,
and have otir being." " By Ilim ^11 things subsist." ~
But this no more proves that the soul dies, than that
angels die. Dependent, derived immortality it may have
ecpially with them, and in t/iat'senHii its immortality is
affirmed; for they that kill the body cannot kill the soul.
Eternal life, which t|ioy confound with immortSlity, is
a Mholly difterent thing; and this we shall now proceed to
show.^ ':.:'■. --r , ■
■■.■■.■■• .)»*-■ ■ . ■
;^. t
■
CHAPTER Xyil.
ETER>fAV 1/IFEr' WHAT IS IT?
•/,
It will be remembered that the word used in the New
Testament for the life that the righteous enter upon as their
eternal condition i^ always the same word. It is not psuche
biit zoe.- . >^^ '
^It ought n(i|/tbl^ieedful to insist upon this again. ^ Gen.
G^odwyn, as we Mv«„4(een, fully admits it, and tries to make
capital of it in his own peculiar way. As however Mr.
Roberts lyvs made, hi his review bf my former book, one
final effort, to overthro\V this position, we shall again listen
to his own words about it. He says : — -
iF Just a.s we speak of the pEesoiit life under different words,
such as lifts existeuco, being, so; the future life is varidusly
;^esignuti'd according to the relutiou in which it is considered. It
is either ipvxKt mtd^iM. xvi.' 25) ; Zaytfyti/e (Mark x. 30) ; or
mEU.,w,: \\ ;].(! TliesH. iv. I7);a.^ tlit> line of t.lioiig lif. d«>man.lB ;
•a
but the hope in all ctwcrt is absolutely one and the same. The
saving of the i'vxt} (Hcb. x. 39), is the obtaining of eternal C«»w
(Matt. \i\. 29), 1»y tlu' -its' of Pnnl's discourse (2 Cot, iv. H)."
*S|,»",
S- ?"■ ■
M ji ■
■
•
'* '-
"r-^'
M\
i j!
i
r ■■:
■• J
:i^.
''<<.,««
■ • »
**
>170 i'AOTri ANi> THFOKlfiS AS TO A FUTUKU STATi. .
I fe6l as if apology wer6,due to my readers for quoting
lais <»r k)n3\v^ Still as I suppose it seems satisfactory
id himself, there may be others also who need the answer."
ft may be a «hort tjne, When the ." we " who obtain eternal
life are 8tq,tcd to be the life that" we " dbtahi. But atleast.
you may say," the savingof the jif^v is the obtainin|g of eter-
1 al ^>"/ " is it not ? I should Kuppose that proved that they
were different. For certainly it-' would not consist with,
t^eripturfe to speak of '" the sawiy of thp Cc^v ' or of the
' obtain in (/cieiernalrpv XT) y In Scripture phrase, a .saved
.man "keeps his psuche itnto^ eyerl^ting 7.:>e;' and these
"Ihltafs^are" never confounded or reversed. *Eternal life is
'Mever psnche. Mr. Roberts would gladly produ<:cthiB paf-
i<age to prove it, if it could be found. ' i
Let it 1)0 remembered (hen that we are speaking of this
vone word zoo when we inquire into the meaiiing of," ever >
lasting life." "• " / -
^ '.And tirst, what then is " life " ? What do we ordinarily
mean by it 't Mr. Constable raises the same question, and
answers it: and he now shall, tell what he believes it means
Jle says (Duration and SslU of Fut. Punishment) :— ^.^
• * if wt- were only to ask -what was its primnrij sense, we should
liivo no diffienity.^ All allow />.rhtencp.to bo its pi-imary.signili ca-
tion. We will hereafter show tliat the primary sense of this term
is the, only one ad'mi>3sible ; but here we will not further insist
on it*! Wo will here only ask if tliero wct :o»^'titrirers(il sense at-
tached to thi.s terui ; so that wliile there juiglit be to ji grentcr or
l(?ss extent a variat;/ of sen-ses attjiclied to it In one fluco t^r s
.•;.nother, still as accepted by all luunkiud speukiug the Grecian
tongue^ had only one sense which was every >Vhero acceiitod
us a tlw sense/and by some accepted as the. only s(.nse.
Here, too, we are able to come to a certain coTicli^sion'. TJiat.
sense of 'existenc/ wliich is "undoubtedly the pi^i^W #"^^'>^^''
as undoubtedly a sense accepted by every GiVilMaigpaker aH^4
true sense,: 4intl By very many Oreciau.speakejj
only sense. Onr opponents th"ei?^selves cannot atj3^|B not attempt^,
to'denythis. "Y\\Guii^yilifjlttened heathen; says Md^fej)n, ' nijcl^er '
stood the terms life and death as implying simple eristen^ or mmi
'»
.•'■ i«
a.'
♦
m
■ w
ETERNAL LIFE : , WHAT IS IT
171
And Mr. Constable argues therefore th^t so it must have
been understood, >nd meant to be imder^tood, ,by thq Jfeople §
to'whoiii the gospel vfaS addressed, or if i^t, the dilerent
sense attached to it wo^ld have retjuiredi to beifexplained to
them,; and ^ , * , * ^ . *
.0
1^
■O
&
'** of such explanation we do not find a trace.' Xyhere'w© do «
findan inspired writer defining the meaning of ' Ut'e '-he defines f \^
it exactly as a heathen would do :• ' "What is your.li^e ? ' saith the ^
apostle James. 'It is eve^,' he replfes, 'a-vappr, that apj^eeiieth.
for a little ittne, and then vanisheth away.' Life, with St. i^axnes,
himself a jfow, meant bnt what it meant with a heathen, dxiet
en.ce..
»*■
Xi
• •
■«.■
#
Mr. Cohstable is one who, beyond most of his sfi|iooi,
claims for himself critical' and precise accuracy, and he <Shalr
lenges answer to his arguments. ,1 hay^ therefore so dften
chosen him as thi expoisfent of the views of his' own 'class of
writers. But -we have had already' many a proof x)f his in-:
competency a^ ^ r^^tsoner. It may be the result of the
unhappy system he has taken up, which seems to cloud t^
intellect,*a8 it certainly enfeebles spiritual perception. Let
lis ex^ine his statement however.* v .'
And here in the first place, it, is a little disap^poiritingto
turn to the table which he gives us further on in his book,
■ p . . .• ■ » *
of the meanings of the Greek words which be^r upon this
question, and to look in vain for this universal meaning at-
jfajhing to zoe !' -,
. Hi^ vocabulary .»i|p from Liddell and Scott, " allqwed to be
' an^iulbority of the highest order," as he truly says. And
moreover, he says, he appends to the words " every meaning "
(the italics are his own) " attached to them in the ordinary
Greek language." After giving it, he says, "we, will thank
our readers to look carefully at th^ forfgoing*' tabt^," We
have done so, and find as the result:—
... ' ' ■. •» .. *
« ',' Zwrj (zoe), 1. a Uving or property, 2. lite as opposed to death.
Zd<0 (mo), 1. to live f%K>ken ^f nnimnl life) ; 2. to be in^JfuU
Jifo and strength.''- ./ ' - ,"'
m
'1^;.
-?r.- I
v\.
"• ^
■^ ■, .'V ■:
' ; ■ ■*■
■-■.»■■
/ . "
''ITViK [h rertainly reni}irkHl>le, Mr. Ci>nstabU':'g /trimat't/. * ■ \
t
' i
■ ■■'-:;: >?'^ ,".
■ .. . '■ •i ■-■• '" ' . ' ■• -
:■ ,^"
■*»^-"
:"';■§ '\^ '
• • ■■■■■■ :■ •;-:-,::■:>'■■:■' < ■ -*-■■. --.:.*>•■ , ■ - ■ " -■ ..-—>;
'3-
*X-
■ ;-V
172 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE. .^
M universal sense of zoe is not found iii a table furnished by
} himself, and certified to contain " eyery meaning attached to
it in the ordinary Greek language."
. But this is not all. Nor can we acquit Mr. Constable of
<,, the gravest charge that can b# brought against a contro-
versial writer, a lemling himself to cjeception of the, worst
kind. Th^ primary meaning he gives might indeed awaken
suspicion by its strange appearance. Xot orify; is " life, as
opposed to death,". the .wconcAo y meanihg, not the primary,
in his owti table;; but that primary meaning looks strangely
also ; '^a living oHproperty." What kind of property ? aild ■
^why" living "instead of" Xx^^^y——^^^^-^^^- j - j
I turn to Liddell and Scott for explanation, and I find as,
follows:^—
" Zgj^, a4iving, i. e., means of life, goods, property ; '1. Att.
life, cLpp. to death." ' ■ ,
'•A living, i. e., >iea^'S of life, goods, })ioperty "' : that ig;
the primary meapin^. S(*condarily;> and in, fin: Attic dial ci- 1 .
one of the five djalects of Clrreek, it means 'life, as opposed
to death." ^' . ' ,
How different is the whole statement f)f the c*ase fio
that which he lias given ns. And lie le I ain argninj:^ rif)thin<j:
myself; I am but giving his own authority.
WJier
e is "existence" as the universal nicanini; of zoe '.'
It i^ not found as a mf.inirig at all, e\ en in his own \ocabu- -
lary ! .And even the meaining of ///'' as op[)os(^d tc> death is
neither the' primary meaning, nor the universal, bnt only hi
the iJLttic dialect, one division of the Greek tongue otft of
five. To use no language unneces.sarily harsh in the nratteiv •
Mr. Constable has mis-stated a very s^nple matter of fact.
But it is the Xew Testament use f>f^the term with whiih
we are concerned, and we do. not purpose carryiDg the e.\
amination further^ For my OMjn part, in the case of a com-
mon New TesjtJtment word, I am eoi^ncpd thjit" a Greek"'
concordance (that is, the examination f)fnfe. word itself as
it occurs in ^>cripture) is of more value to the. Bible student
than the best <llctionaiH that ever was. 'I'he word /.oe
*■■ .•*;;■
#
V
:,i ■.■
;■■-'■ t
»i
■. ht
■■' i. ■
■i
< •■■'■■ '■
, v: "■
'■■■ r»'^
V
;/ '■■
ihi-t.
osod -.
!^, 1
\--%
J'"' •
'. • ■
ETERNAL LIFE: WHAT IS IT ? . ITS
occurs 134 times'in the New Testament, it is in one pliofe
rendered *' lifetime " (Luke xvi. 25); in every other case it
is rendered, as it only Could be rendered, ** life."
And Mr. Constable may rajise the questipn, if he please, >
are not existence and life>but the same thing ? I aniwer, the'
question occupying so intently 'the minds of many in the
presently, w6ul<ihave no meaning if it were so. We have
already quoted Prof. Nicholson to the effect tHTat "no rigid
definition of life Appears to be at pre^edt possible." I be-
lieve from the Scripture point of view indeed something
approaphing a definition may b^ possible, but certainly not
in the crude way which annihilationists press with the mo8t__
extraordinar^iConfidence. " Eternal life," says Mr. Roberts, '
' is in th6 first place life in its pririiary «en8e of being." Is
that the .prima-ry sense? Can nothing "be," but what
''lives"? 'It is'not even the sense at all,' any m6re than is
existence. "Croodwyn contradicts both j he says :—" I am
now prepared to add that life dfoes not in Scripture, nqt
anywhere else, iavariafcly mea^m^re existence ; but is in-
separable from a condition or chama^r developed by the
action of the mind."^ ^^^^'^^^'^0$ " inseparable '" /rom
a certain '< character," then ji|!an never he '^mere exis- ■
tence " ; and s6 far .at feast th/de^hitipn is correct. Let
us examineit.a littlc^fjl'ther. ;^ff
Life manifests ifee^^lrjr ac^:*it is th^ "energy that
W'ks the whole machinery, so ta speak; oT the being in ■
w,hich it dwells. But we may also, and in fact do more fre-
quently speak of it as the motion %i the machinery itsplf,
The latter is life phenomenaU what it is as subj|ct to our
inspection, a matter of actual observation and knowledge.
The former is life po«en^i«4 the po^rar behind th6 movemejit^
and unseen. ^ « •
But then weabo speak of life in a- still larger way as.
compi-eiiendinj^ the ^Surse of this active eadstenqe; life as
furnishhlg the id^vidual' A/s«on/. 'And %3 connected with
this, although distinct, we speak of life as'difforehtiated %
its swrmmdinys r fingl.ish life, American Dfd, and'evcil with-
\
t
■*.
nimm
.\
*■*
iH FACTS AND THiiOBlES AS TO A FUTURE STATK.
out an adjective at all, of a young »man entering upon /(/%,
^^e in the pregnant sense, implying its full tale of. hopes and
Ijoys, and cares and sorrows.
^ ' In the sphere of merely natural things of which alone we
are as yet .-^peaking, the life potential according to Scrip-
ture, is the 5o?</, or psuche.
2. Tl^e phenomenal, physical, animal life induced by the
presence of the soul in th(? body, is also psuche.
3. The historical life is on the other hand always zoe.*
And — \- ■'' ■ '■
4. Zoe, too, is life in the pregnant Hense, implying iill
tiat it introduces to: \"7 7~7'~t~7''
The first two meanini^s are ponWected; together and
covered by the one word, psuche,>s the last two are on the,
other hand connected, and covered by the one word, zoe.
Of psuche enough has\beer said Already. • Zoe usecl with
reference to the natural lifef occurs but thirteen times in
the New Testament. I give all these occurrences that we
may have the subject as fufly aspossil»le before us. V
1. Life in the historicar sfense :~ ,, '
' ' ■ \ ■ . '■',■-
Luke i. 75 : '■ulltho days o'^oiir hie." \ .
xvi. 25 : " thou in thy hfi^time recoivcdst thy good things. " '
Acts viiJ. 33 • ^' his life, is takoii from the earth. ''» . , ■
xvii. 25 : " he giveth to ad hfe and breath an^ali' things." '
y. Bom. viii. 38 : " neither deiith nor life shall separate us." ^ '
1 Cor. iii; 22 : " all things are yours, whetlier life or death." * '
XV. 19 : " if,in this life only we have hopp in Chn'.st,'"
Phil, i; 20 : " whether by life or deatl."/- . ,- ■■ ; '■^.
1 Tim. iv. 8; ^^ having promise of the life thtrti^ ,.' ;.
* I lieave out vi cor^ideration /^f^^?. which, alth.mg'lt ii figure.s largely
in ordinary Greek, oce^irs 'but fiVe Liines in ilie New Tejitarnent" in the
sense of " life,'.' and hero ahv'aj> as a synonym of -<\)e ip the historical
sense. lis use lies outside of our present, •inrj^uiry. The five passage?
are Lake viii. 14; 1 Tim. if. 2; 2 lira, y^ 4; I Pet. iv. ^V V Jr»ha ii.le.
. tit is strange that ^oodwyn should say Truth and 'Tradition, p. 18)
" In everi/ instance where zoe j.s u.^'d it \s. ji]jpliod to'thf ♦■tfrnity of
Gbd, of the Lord Je-sut<, and of .believ.vi-s MHim.'" this is but one of'
th«» tnanv ••arelfss <t.'Uciii<'ri,(.'< fo-hc r.iiiini.'.n ihc "<■ writc''^ .;
-f
^v
' ♦ ■
•'i
■^c-
bVJii^ESfcAX Hi'ii:
WilAT IS IT*^^
175
iHeb. t4/»: *' neither fegintaiQg of day s^DOT eild of life^
: i^ames iv. It : "for what is your lif^ ? it is even a vapor." '^
^ 2. In the pregnant sense ; only- twice, but distinct :—
Luke Xiirfe -^ a Uiaidi's li:e boiisisteth not' in tUe^bundance
of thitigs.'" , 1 1 »
' I fit iii. 10 : " lui that- will love life, and see good days.
io far then we have been speaking ofvnatttFal life only.
I |ave been thuH |;aitieular in speakingj of it, because the
natural sense is of <'Oursc the prin^toyy and furnishes the
/asis of the spiritual sense. We, s^hail find, if I mistake
iot> by carrying these definitions/ with n.>^ thk they will
~ass£t u^ greatly l^lMlipprehe^^ calk
'^etematUfc,"' Mhlch as a term is/used in a precisely similar v
V way, a way whicli the crude corii>tion of 31es^rs. Constable-/
' and Roberts cart in no *wi^e baronize, much less explain.
If life then is not mere " existence," • eternallife " is still
less, if possible, merely "eternal ; existence." It is a life
begun here ami now in tho»e who ^re nevertheless as morta^^
as eVev, a cvonsidcralion which at once sets Buch an explana-'*
' tiou of it entir(>ly f^'^'^^- 7^^ -picked Avho have it not
'♦ exist " iust as much as those who-have it, while they do not
m this sense ' Ihe" at all. ,' Let us examine 'this closely, for
it is the key of the v.-hole position: - ' - , ,
; *' Eternal Lfe '" in Script ure W .-ilways, as before said, zoe, .
never pau(-h<'. 1^ ^s presented ho^ycver in the same four •,
' aspects as thi^natmral llf.'. Here the potcijtial life*', ihc flteul
• of ihis spiril^al existence, is Christ Hims(,^lf The phenom-.
enal life, tl\e rrsuU of UV'. relationship to' us,- is that which- '
begins with our nc\^ :ui.l spiritual birth.' The historical -l.ife .
is oar individual course on o.irth a- «-hildrcn of God, An^'
finally we enter »i])oii life, embai-k on it in the fnJ! and preg-
nant sense, when w.' "g") itilo" it \n the fast haNtening dav •
of the v*^aviour\s' comhtj;. W<^ m"st ^^ok at it in each of
these different apl^H'-aliou'-.
1. Apart from the ijlust ration, not eveik Mr. Constable
would pro1>abiy .lopytVo tirsl ^ensc, although he'nm^t^ ucmkIs
' ■; be far from secn,^» it ■' })t1i of :,' --. .1 • nw'aning. Scripture
#'
176 FACTS AHI> THKOniES iJlS to A i^UTUltK STAtK. ^
is full of it ; but it will suffice to quote but a few passages,
rhus the apostle speaks of Him who in the beginnini,' was
with God,, knd was God, that "in Him was life, and the life
was the light of men " (John i. 4). In his %t epistle simi-
^ larly,tliafr>*the life was manifested; ami ^4^' have seen, it,*
jjnd bear wifm',s>s, aiid shoyv un'to yon tliat eternal Ult^whicli
m
s
Son
.^.
^■■\
\
^ was with the Father, and was manifested unto ^^ "^ff Join
A.f.:2). So the record is, "W /God hath giveh unto u
-'etenial life, anc] this life is hi His Son ; he |kt hath the Soi
hath life, and he that hath not the Sonoftiod hath not life
:^QW here to'begin Mith^ let me ask, is it eternal ej^l^caee
^ that was manifested in Christ, and was the light of men?
But again," and furthermore,-^ " r ' •
2/ ^pi only has " he that hath the Son of Goxl " got lilfo.
but he has got it as a; present possession and an*a1)iding one^
.He has- no mere pletlgeand promise of it. It^is as
h -possessing it that JieJs in the spiritual sense a child of God
and born of God.
_ .^ He that believeth on the Sojti Jmth everlasting life"
;>(a!<)li:hiii.'86). "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that
he^retb my words, and believeith on H|m that sent me hath
eviBrlasting litt^ «n.l shall not come into condemnation, but
IS pass?jed from d,eath'uuto life " (ch. " v. 24) .
,:' Is this only 'f the pr^mile and the pledge "y Nay ; for—
i ' ." Excej)t7e'cat the fleshj^f the Son of man an.l <lrink His
Wood, yelme no liie"l^.y<m ; whoso eateth mv flesh, and
:armketh my bkiod llATtf eternal IHc " (ch. vl. 5.5, .''>4).
And again,"We know "that we have passed from Ileath
mto life, Tiecause we love the brethren. He th^it loveth not/
, • hlfl brother abidelh in <Ieath. Whosoever Imteth his brother
.48 a murderer; A»<iVe;know that^ no murderer hath eteruai
fife ABIDING IX II ni " (1 John iii. 1 1, 15). \ . . '
. Thus etertid life M « id," anrl f^ abi^eth in " the 'believer'":--
he. has no mer* pledge and promise of it; it \^ begun in him
/Already. Listen, and^iei*^ Lord Himself wiH define it vet
• mortf wiinolv " for— — ^^^^^^^^ ■ ' — -^^— — — ^
\
mortf wiinply J' for
i
/'
V_,
A
,' «, M W
KTKRNAL LIFK: WHAT IS IT?
w
iages.
1
■■
; was
e life
si mi-
en, it,*
■ .:' ■. ■■ ■-.
rhich
. . 1 ■'
Jolin.
' i
o us
; Son
.■
life"
te/ice
■ ■ ■
ren?
.:
■ ' :
lilr^
one. ■
' "\
s a^
_ . ■,'
God
*
■ ■;■
-
\ ■■■':^
Ufe"
' ■ ■ f
. *
that
,.
ATll
but
1
jr —
h
His
J
and
.:
r>4).
■ .
-
jath
not'
:her
^r ')
-
'uai
1, 1
i.
or :-* •
- ;
liin
vot-
■ 1
1/^
"This is ///'^ ,'femal, ihat they might know," or better,
« that they know,"*—" Thee the only true God, and Jesus
Christ whom Thou hast sent " (John xvii. 3). / ^
Here it is characterized for us, and we know (if we know •
anything) the life it speaks of. It began in us when faith
begam It began with our new birtlu It is not then eter-
nafexisteiice, for still wo die. It is not existence, but a new
and blessed energy of good ; an activity of holy aflfections
of which Christ now known as Saviour is the spring and ,
soul. This is eternal life, if Scripture is to be believed.
The definitions of annihilationists fail hopelessly, therefore, ^
here. ^Eternal life is not immortality ; it is not eternal ex-
istence, as they allege. It is the ^ life which we have as
spiritually quickened 'from the. dead.
;]. The outward liist;prical life necessarily blends with the
outward natural life'^d that they cannot be really separated.
The life of the sahU and the life of the tnaii are here but
one. For this reason no Scripture can be product under
this head, which might iM>t be fairly challenged. \
4. But the pregnant sense is, as we might expect, in fullest
use of all ; for our life points ever forward to the time when .
we shall have it in all that it implies. And even as we have
said/ the young man 'enters u^on /(/«," when he enters
Apon its full activities, free from the necessary restraints of
imnjaturitv, ^o we too shall " epter Into life," albeit we have
it now within us. And who that feels the workings of the
life within most fully, but must look forward, too, most
Bimpty to that future,* and say to himself, w ithout a thought
of denyhig what he has already, that his life is there ?
^ Thus "yd have your fruit unto holiness, and the end ever-
lasting lite •' (Uom. vi. 22); " in the world to come et^nal
iitVPIark x. 30) ; "in hope of eternal life" (Tit. i. 2);
^* shall inherit cverlastiirg life " (Matt. xix. 29), and sunikr
^pressions,. in no wise interfere with the fact asserted qmte_
asi pl,ainly, if not as freg ubntly, that we have eternal life abi d-^
•-" * For it i^a woU k»towri,^t>«cifliarity of John's gospel to use 'iv(t fot '
■■t,
l\
1/ " V
„
«
'i^ »
J
-
p'
1*
•
-—
Ji
178
A'AClo AND lUJiOKlEb At TO A FUTUKE HXATE.
ing m U3 now. These are only the various modes of speech
which as we have seen we use with regard to the natural
life itself: - •
Yet these expressions are all that the writerK who hold
what they call the doctrine of ♦• conditional immortality " can
V urge againsfthe view that life eternal is what is begun in
us in new birth already. ' Mr. Constable calls this sense of
life the "figurative" sense. But it is no more figurative
than 13 the necessary result of using words pertainipcr to
what is natural and applying them to what is spiritual.
^ And this we have always to do if we speak of the spiritual
at all. Eternal life l)elongs not to the sphere of the natural.
It is what was manifested In Christ down here, and is- ours
now in present possession— spiritual not natural life.
Hence we use the term as it must be used; and Mr. Con-
stable cannot use it in his fashion without falsifying Scripture
to do so. a "
He does thus falsify ii, when he says, *• Scripture -repre-
sents eternal life as a gift not yet enjoyed by the ciiildren
of God.'" He falsifies it when he says that, "while there
are no doubt many Scriptures, which describe the believer
as now having everlasting life, we are expui-.ssly told
elseichere that this consists in havlnrj Go-'Ts pledge and pro-
mise oi that everlasting life; but not its aetual posse.ssion
and enjoyment." This is botd mis-statement. Where is it
" expressly told " y m,.. Constable cannot find it. He can
find that we are promised it and go into it. He can find "
that we have it-now. He cannot find that the latter onlv
means the former, ^^
Hence, his premises being unsound, his conclusions must
m. Eternal life is not eternal existence simply, but some
thmgfar beyond it, ani the wicked, not possessing eternal
life, are not thereby proved to lose existence.
There is only one clause of this argument remainin<r to
detam us for a moment. The words of the apostle (Col iii
3) are quoted in his own behalf by Mr. Roberts: "Your
life 18 hid x^nth Christ- in God." And .so General Goodwyn -
BTBRNAL LIFE: WHAT IS IT?
17»'
^ JBttemity of Umng dates from the reBurreotion ( John ri. 40,
53, 54) and is at present * hid vith Christ in God.' Never-
theless the child of God ' hath ' it now, howbeit it is in safe
custody," etc. This is the way in which these men read
Scripture ! Where is it said that " eternity of living " is hid
with Christ m God ? It is said " your life is." And where
is ihere a woid about its being in " in safe custody " ? It
iB William Cowper, Tliolif've, who sings,
*' Your life is iml with Christ in God,
, ^ ^ Fipjf<md the, redck of hann.'"
■ to
^
i
[iii.
1
our
yu:-
•■
-
1 ''
m.-- : ■■■-
)
1
But tlien that is not Scripture, The Scripture use and
purport of tii«j text which Mr. Goodwyri quotes is far other-
wise. " Yft\re dead''' says the apostle, '' and your life is hid
with Chriht in God; when- Christ our life shall appear, then
shall ye .'ilso appear with Him in^ory.". The passage be-
longs to the first class of texts pc^jrod out, in which our life
is ulentifed with its origin. Chm^is this life. He is hid
in God, and the world sees Him not until the day of His
appearing. Our life- then is in character a hidden one, we
shall not appear till we appear with Him. A Kfe which
draws its character from Him WM9 is the soul of it cannot
be known by a world which has r^cted the Son of God and
• foimd no glory in the l^ord of glory. With Him then we
are dead. Our life is a hidden one, for Christ is hidden.
But it is hidden i:ii G^
which it will shine fully out."
loe shall. This has nothing to do with the question of
security, or with eternity of living. It irf Christ -v^ho is hid-
den, and whcii is our life
Him. But that is • no de
. implies tfee very contrary,
gives us this character, and mjrfi
world knoweth us not; becai
iii.l). ^ • ;
Eternal life is not then mere et
'it date onlv from the resurrection,
rod, ai»d soU^ waits for the time in
Itt .^.,+ Christ^is to appear ; and then
|ife, therefore, is hid with
its being in us here, but
our possession of it that
J>eing the soul of it, " the
w Him not " CI John
ity of living, nor does
It dates ^T us from;
V ■
»^
■*■' ■
'fi.
180 FACTS AND THEOBIES AS TO A FLiUKE STATE.
that qaickening by the Spirit which every child of Go^ has
known ; and manifests itself, though the world (and ala.s,
others) have no eyes for it, in every throb and movement of
the soul God ward; while w« wait yet to enjoy its ful-
ness— ■ ■■■ , • •■'.■■,■
" In the world to come, eternal life."
V
./
CHAPTER XVm.
TttE FIRST SENTRVf'E.
As I have said, I do not refuse to consider the moral
aspects of the present question. But just now we are occu-
pied with what must necessarily j? recede all such considera
tionis." The facts must be before us before there can be
any proper appreciation of th«ni. We arc searching for
the facts of the case, and* any preliminary moral reasonin"-
would be out of place— %ould hinder and not help our
investigation. ^ - ^v. "
The question of penalty stirs all the feeUhgs of our heart,
and there are two things, often forgotten, \yhich should lead
us t6 question how far we can safely allow their influence.
. The first is, that we are judging in our own oause. The
second, that the sin which has entailed the penalty lias en
feebled necessarily the power of true judgment. The heart
of man is not only " desperately wicked " : it, is deceitful
too. Will it be apy more likely to judge righteous judg-
ment because the cause it pronounces upon is if s own ?
itself? Is the simier's estimate of sin and its desert so "^ikely
to 1)6 right ? B there no sel f-interest in the way ? no pride
that wiuld forbid to stoop so low as to the truth ? Ah
the heprt of man! that question of th(! All-seeing is th
nt of its trust worthiHess: '• V\ ho can know ity"
ju<3g-
■ i
I^K PI'
Yet there is One who kno:
181
im? and has
spoKen in sucb a way tha|^^^^^^^Hpdly know what
He has said ? He has. I e^Sj^^^H^t stir my poor
human feelings, no doubt, and makHHSnrmur at the judg-^
raent He has given -.—A am quite capable of that. But I
look at the Cross, where fox man His own Son hung, and I
cannot persuade myself I have a more tender heart than He.
No : His judgment is not an enemy's, nor the impassive
estimate of One mdiSferent.^/le^as given //is Son. And
though His judgments may be a great deep, and I may be
little able to follow out His' governmental ways, I have what
\h hetter^ for I know Hi tnself. ■*
Thus you and I, reader, are to listen to His words; not
with heartft callous to human suffering, but subject to Him.
The deep, dark shadow of the Cross, whereon for us the
Son of God hung and died, prepares us for a view of sin and
its results deep and dark enough in shadow. Biit we know
the heart wc ?ling to through the gloom ; and the pheep, here
as ever, know the Shepherd's voice.
We are now to, look at the solemn question of penaltjf..
Mr. Constable does but follow in the track of others, wj^en
he takeij us back to the sentence upon Adam to find in it
the key to the whole matter. We shall examine what he
says attentively.
"Death,' he lemurks. " was the penalty which God originally
pronounced against human sin. All that God purposed to inflict
upon Adam and his posterity in case of transgression is included
in that word ' death.' 'In the day* that thou eatesfc, thou shalt'
die. ' It is of the utmost consequence then that we should under-
stand what God' meant by death; nor" is there the smalle.st
difficulty in doing so if we will only attend to what reason and
justice require, and what Scripture expressly declares. Its mean-
ing then we contend to be, when it is thus attached to sin as its
*Edw. White maintains (Life in Ctirist, p. 118) that the execution
of this was not carried out, but the sentence was delayed by mercy.
This is a mistake. " In' the day " does not require so rigid a constnu-
tiun. — Coiiii>. '2 Sam. xxii. 1, Van. xcv. 8, IjIgcI. xii. 3, Is.i. xiv. t^, xxx.
26, Jer. vii. 22, Kzek. xx. r», ai)d esppcially K/.ek. xxxiii. 12.
-ho might answer us that
ig he objected to, and set-
solated -'nexts."'
j^h an aiHW seems to .be hi
lie himseli beireves in the
I, and walk in them," and
jeepy shibboleths and dead
Moreover he believes at
Therefore, it should seem
%roof texts, and see how
le, they justify his position,
who vouches for his very
B Holy Ghost, who tells us
we would not have that in
i phrase wrenched from its
I as we please, we must
. We shall find the words
church at Corinth (iii. 6) ;
uns thus:— =■
ourselves to think anything
y is of God, who also hath
%/) Testament / not of the
«'-.-
,/
' f H
-C-
//
w-^m:. ■
■,1 -. ■
-.r
:. *
J3
Aateelalion for Ififoniurtioii and
*)?J-^ IIOOWayneAvenue. Suite 1100
.**\, -■ Silver Spring, Maryland 20910
• ■ 301/587-8202
ManaoaiiMiit
^^■■
'■■a^
«:*■
Centimeter
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 mm
m
\ \ f \ f \ M \ \ \\\ \if \ \^^^^
Inches
2 3
1.0 m
lift |£ 12.2
136
i
Hi
I.I
11.25 i 1.4
2.0
I
18
1.6
,9k
^:
^>
m/^
^
y
MONUffRCTURED TO RUM STRNDflRDS
BY APPLIED IMRGE. INC.
t<^^
». "•**
^'-
182
PACTS AND THE0BIE8 AS TO A PDTtTRE STATE.
I
'mk
i
. penalty, the loss of life or existence. ' One of the first p^ciples of
justice requires that parties threatene'd with a penalty for trans-
gression should have the fuUg,^t opportunity of understanding
what the penalty is. God accordingly speaks to Adam of death
-, as a thing whose nature Adam £new. Now Adam knew very well
y=what death was in one seftse, and in an^ sense- onbj. He knew it
to be the law of the l^w^r creatures, and ^ consist in the loss of
their beinet O'ld existence. Hfe knew nothing of any other senses
of death, such as • death in sin ' or « death to sin,' for in his inno-
cence he did not know what sin was at all. Still less did he
understand by death an eternal existence in agony. Ho had one
clear, weU understood sense for death, the loss of life and lieing."
Again he says :-#.,.
"As soon as Adam transgressed God came to him, and repeat-
ed to him in other wordi* the penalty he had just incurred. It
was ' dust thou art, and iinto dust thou shalt return. ' God's defini-
tion of the death inflicted for the first transgression is frequently
repeatSd in the later Scriptures. Paiil tells us that it is the death
which aU men actually undergo, whether they are among the
saved or the lost i and therefore an eterpal existence in pain can
be no part of its meaning (Rom. v. 12, U, 17 ; 1 Cor xv 2'>i
Such too was the death which Christ endured for human sin-
the very same penalty to its fuU extent to which man was ex-,
posed ; and therefore spiritual death or an eternal Ufe in misery
can form no part whatsoever of its meaning X>od said
nothing in the first instance of transgression as to whether this
death would be temporal or eternal, but what the death was He '
fully explamed both by word and by example. He gave life to
the race of man, and He would withdraw that life if man smned. "
I have thus quoted Mr. Constable in full in order taring
the subject properly before us. If it had opiy been for the
sake of answering him much less would have sufficed. But
we are seeking to bring out the Scripture doctrine and not
merely to refute certain errors; and this is an imp6rtant
point to be clear upon in order to a full and satisfactory '
view of the great subject before us Yet in aiming to be
thus clear we must enter into a field of many controversies
not yet by any means extinct, and are almbst sure to awaken'
feelings, which may prejudice the point of main <(.n<,ern for
'iJr
•31
w
THli FIKST SE^TEKOE.
1»3
J
many minds. Still we must not shrink from what seems
needful, and Scripture is no more iincertain here than else-
where.
; As to Mr. Constable's main point, it is not hard to see
that he makes immense aasumptions, and that upon these his
argument in its entirety rests. Let us grant for the mean-
while, at any rate,, that it is of ordinary daath the prohibi-
tion speaks. How can he prove what Adam knew abou|^'^
it? Supppse it true he must have known what the penalty^
was, how can he show that Adam learned it from seeing
death around V how can he show that there 'had been any
death to see in Eden t If death had been there, how can
he harmonize' this with the " creature being made subject
to vanity," as Rom. viii. 19-23 shows, through man's sin,
and waiting man's deliverance as its own ?
Supposing it true that Eden before the fall had been pro-
faned by death and corruption, how does he know that
Adam would have argued thjtt death would be to him as
absolute nonentity? Everywhere througji the world we
find that man has nursed an instinct of\Jii|ontrary sort in
the lace of suclf death ever before his eyesl Why should
he think that he who had had wisdom given him to name all
the beasts and distinguish -them from himself should have
been less wise ?^ Or haply does he think this a mark of
degradation ? or what else V .
Again, if man were to have instruction about death, why
should not God instruct him? If we must needs assume,
what other assumption has more probability?
In the face of all this, Mr. Constable's argument for ex-
tinction loses all probability. When contrasted with the
reality of what death is, according to the Scriptures we
have examine/d, it is manifestly entirely inadmissible.
But it will be profitable to inquire more fully just what
was the punishment of death denounced on Adam, and how
far it has-affected, his posterity. And the simplest method
we can take in doing so seems to be, without any doubtful
argument as to the words of the prohibition, to ask our-
f
.•'mir
-w
•mm
t'
1K4
lAC IS ANr» tllKOKIIlS AS T(» A FCniri: STATE. *
selves, whnf Scripture elsewhere stat«'s as to tlie .-onseqiien-
ees of the first sill.
Now evidently the fulle,vt stateinent we h^Ve as to its
effect on Adam's postOFity 46j.ihit whicUs- given us by the
apostle Paul in the fiftji chapter of his epistle to tl.e saints
;at Rome (vers. ll>-21). And here there are thr e things
of which he speaks :—
First, " sbi entered into the world," and" '• mr.ny became
sinners "; this is the depravation of nature, which is the sad
heirloom of suceeediiig generations.
Secondly, « death li(f sin, and so death passed upon all " :
this,is corporeal death, the death he could point to as unde-
niably "reigning from Adam to Moses" even, the time
before the law. , . :
Thirdly, ''judgment was by one to- condemnation,"—
''Mponalimen to condemhation." Thiy||i'hat deaths fol-
lowing upon fiin, proclaimed. '^ It was -^mP^ that nature
•was tainted in her whole course,that "thd God who had
made man, and could not otherwise repent, now " turned him
to destruction." •
Of these thre6 things the #8t clearly is the cause of the
judgment pronounced, and not the judgment itself Of the
two latter, the first is the infliction, and. the second is in-
•i volved in it, and shows its character. Death is the infliction,
b^t not as qfi arbitrary thing procee"ding from the mere will
of the Creator, but the mark of changed relationship to Him
which the fall ha\i i)roduced." D^th then (what we ordi-
narily call that) was the sentence, and that alone ; but it
involved necessarily a cliange in moral relationship ]>etween
the Creator and the creature, distance between man and
God, which His iQve and pity might yet find meanl of bridg-
ing over,— which was not jeijincd therefore, but which was
thei'e.
Now, I apprehend, the difficulty found in reading aright
the sentence, "Thou shalt surely die," proceeds from the
seeking a /;m/ sentence in what was not inton-lod yet a-,
final. God had of course His plan of mercv ah< .i
\
t
-4.
1 ■
'-'i-
i
■J
1.
Hi
t' ■
TE. *
onsecjiien-
as to its
us by the
ti.e saints
'% tilings
y became
;8 tile saci
ion all " :
as tfnde-
tlie time
ation,"- — **
eatli^^ fol-
it nature
^\io Iiad
rned iiim
se of the
Oftlie
id is in-
nfliction,
lere will
► to Him
we ordi-
; but it
between
nan and
)f bridg-
hich M'as
g aright
rom the
I yet a:;
.' \\\ Mis
THE FIKST 8ENTENQE.
185
}|-
-4
I
■■■<!
•t
■.f
mind, and was not yet giving^ eternal sentence. Had He
left man to himself indeed, no self-recoVery on n\an's part
being possible, it would have been, no doubt, practically
eternal. But He had no design of leaving him to himself.
As we know, this senfence, under which the whole race lies,
is not the close, but the beginning of our history; and we
shall keep, I believe,* most closely within the limits of revela-
tion, by interpreting the sentence following the sin of Adam
as in no way involving the eternal issues, biit as strictly
provisional with a view to the intended mercy. This relieves
at once from the difficulty as to the penalty involved; It
makes all clear and consistent ; and is in the highest
degree important in reading aright the eternal penalty itself.
This in no' \py interferes with the tirst death being the
'type and shadoin of the second, while it harmonizes with the
fact that when the second death comes the first death will
entirely pass away. It harmonizes also with the statement
of Scripture everywitete, that that second death will be con-
sequent upon dk future judgment, in which men will be
judged, not at all for Adam's sin, but "according to their
works." It harmonizes also with what we shall find to be
the fact hereafteif, that the Old Testament revelation has no
direct announcement of the second death at all. In a word,
it will be .found to clear the way for the after-question
in many and most important respects, while it i^ a view of
the matter, which from Scripture itself it seems impossible
to contravene. , .^
It must be admitted, .however, to lie athwart two of Mr.
Constable's assumptions very directly. The first of these
is, that " ALL that God purposed to inflict upon Adam and
posterity in case of transgression is included in that word
' death ' " in the original sentence . The original sentence
may be a shadoio of the final one, as I have said, tmt that is
all, and not enough for his argument. His statement itself
is a mere assumption, which it is Hufficient therefore to
^'deny. ■ ' j /■ ■ •_; ■ '■' • ■. *- ■",
The second is, " that parties threatened with a penalty for
'•«.
:*^
"*-*
%
fj
1«6
F.Vtns^M> THEoiuKS AS To A i'lrtLICK STATK.
*'A
trangression should have the fullest opportunity of under-
: stancTing what the penalty is." Xow the i^enalty here is for
latiiifj of (he tree. Did that define to Adam's posterity, who
never sinned this way at all, nor could do so, what the pen-
alty of //*'//• sin \vould be V Plainly, as to legal enactment,
"from Adam to Moses '' there was none. And thus not
one of thorn could be punished; (rertainly not raised up
to endure the agonV of the lake of, firo, of which no expe-
•riencCj no instinct, no revelation, could give them the merest
huit !
But Mr. C6nstable's assumption will not endure the
moral test, any inore\ than it will the test of Scripture. Is,
sin a thing iu itself Worthy of punishment, or only when
committed in full viev!^- of its consequences':' We must of
course grant that that full view involves heavier responsi-
bility. But do I only sin when I know exactly what I shall
lose by it 'i That is an ^nmioral argument, which infers so.
X-or is it consistent with what even nature itself teaches.
For he who sins against the laws of natu# so-called (which
are after all divine laws), ti'^ a generalcthing knows little of
^ the consequences of wliat he does ; y<!t disease and death
follow none the less surely.
Thus easily are Mr. Otinstable's theories refuted. And
while we do not force into, the first seHtence anything that
the words will not without irain admit, while w<' do not, we
trust, add one iota to theV" whole libraries of confused
jargon and Hopeless nonsen^i^e,'' which he tells us have been
written upon this subject,— Iwhile we deny as much us he
,that the death spoken of is death in sin, of death to sin, or
even eternal tf>rme^t,— we Maintain none the less, that
while certainly deatfeis death! it is not extinction.
. It would be the most attrat;l^ive courses, peihaps, from this
point to follow out the Old 'liestament revelation as to the
future state ; but before we call do this, we must look still
fiirther at the lexicography of i the subject that we may un-
derstand the meaning of the terms which are used with
reference to it. bofore we look int it as a whole.
'>
TE.
iJKaTKH TION, A.ND L'iti K,iMJ>j£^D IKKMS,
IHT
of under-
here is for
mtv, who
t the pen-
nactment,
thus not
raised up
no expe-
he merest
idure the
ature. Is,
mlv when
! must of
responsi-
lat I Khali
infers so.
f teaches.
m1 (which
1 little of
nd death
ed. And
lino- that
o not, we
confused
live been
eh us he
to sin, or
ess, that
Tom this
as to the
look still
mav un-
*
led with
'>
\<r
\
CHAPTER XIX.
■■*•#
OK.STUUCfJfoN, AM> ITS KIXDRED TEKMS.
MEJSTT.
— THE OLD TKSTA-
We shall Still mainly follow Mr. Constable, because he is
the one appealed to by his colleagues as the principal au-
thority on tlie subject, and bejcause he certainly claims to
give very distinctly the whole vockbulary of words relating
to it. Indeed, I may say the main part of his argument de-
pends upon this. But his strength a,ud his weakness lie very
near together, as we may shortly see.
He gives us fiist the Old Testament phrases, and foremost
of these the passages wliich speak of death, as Psa. vii. 13;
Prov. yfi. 3G; xi. 1; Ezek! iii. IS; xviii. 4- xxxiii. 8. I do
not as^ yet take up their application: this will come after-
ward^; we are only at the vocabulary now. He adds to
thesre two (Ezek. iii. 18; xiii. 22) which give loss of life as
th/ equivalent of death. No one would deny this, of course;
the question is, is death extinction ? We have seen over
^nd over again that it is not, and Mr. Constable admits that
if this were proved it would " militate giavely " agamst its
being so when applied to future punishment. These are his
words (Hades, eh. vii. 17) : — \ :
"And hove we would particularly warn the upholders of tiixxl t
•scriptural trath of life and immortality only in eiiri.=it, to beWare I
how by explaining away the natural force of the many Scriptures L
vyhich teach that the soul Jfes in the fir.st death, they greatly *•
weaken their own argument when tlicy come to insist that the
.second death means the tnie and real extinction of the entire
^man. Scripture speaks of it simply as death. If the first death
is consistent with man's in fact not dying, but continuing to live
in regard to his most import#t part, whose survival again may
be .supposed to imply the restoratiort-of the body to life, it seem^,
plain that the common idea of the 'first death MiiiiTATEa obavely
against our view of what is intended by the second."
■\ s-
<',
188 FACTS ANU THKOUir.S AS TO A FlTirKK STATI;
Rlt
This witness i» tnu', and it is all 1 tuicd say hrrr. The
meanin;^ of thu j)as8agt'S we Hhall examine by and by.
He next crowds together a number of passages of' verv
different applioations which lie makes to describe the ''end
of the ungodly": — " THe destruction of the transgressors
and sinners shall be together" (Isa. i. L'S) — which applies
to the purification of Zion in the last days; '']»repare them
for the* day of slaiujlitcr'' (Jer. xii, ii) — which is also judg-
ment in the land; "the slain of \the Lord shall be many,"
and " they shall go forth and look upon the m/r</.srN of^thc
men that have sinned" (Is:i. Lwi. 16, 24) — God's destruc-
tion of Israel's enemies and others; "Ood shall dti^/roi/
them" (Psa. xxviii. fi); '• they shall be consumed" (xxxvii.
20); '• they sliall be rut o/"' (xxxvii. 3S) ; "they shall be
rooted out of the land of the living " (Psa. lii. .')) — misquoted,
and referring to '■ Doeg, the Edomite " ; 'blotted out ''of
the book of life " (Psa. Ixix. 28) ; and " they are not " (X<ib
xxvii. 19) : — not one of these can be shown to apply to the
final judguKuit of tiie wicked. Let Mr. Conlfe>le prove
this if he can.
But " for the h'ake of greater ])lainneM '^he takes up the
separate Hebrew words; and here the fiiU amount of his
concession as to death becomes ajiparent. Aft thear mn-t/s
are applied to xlcaih. If death therefore does not mean ex-
tinction, plainly its synonyms need not. Thus, then, the
foundation being remove<l, Mr. Constable's edifice falls to
the ground.
Thus we have first, attad (laX) to perish : and here
presents itself from Lsa. Ivii., a text already spoken of " The
rhjhtii>m perisheth," auU yet "enters into peace"; "the '
good man is perished out of the earth." It is the word also
applied to a "lost" sheep (Psa. cxix. 170; Jer. 1. 0; Kzek.
xxxiv. 4, 16).
But we can little trust Mr. Constable's statements: the
next word, haras (Din), he says, is " another word in
frequent use for future punishment." There is one pasm<ji
which he mny jtoss i bly hsiv ethom/ht applied, but wliich has
•f-
The
n:.
H of VtTV
the 'ViMjc'i
istjressor.s
li applies
»are them
Iso judfj^-
•(' raaiiy."
cN of"* the
destnic-
[ ih'Htroj/
(xxxvii.
shall be
isquo^ed,
I out of
3t" (X<ih
ly to the
le prove
8 up the
nt of his
mean ex-
hen, the
; falls to
ml here
f. "The
"; "the '
ord also
5; Kzek.
nts: the
vord in
[uch has
J>I.STi:irTlON', .\.NI> ITS KIMiltKD TKKIIS.
189
no necessary refcreiu'e to another state at i»ii, i
r. • -^
and* that is
l*sa. xxviii. r» : " IJeeaiise they regard not the works of the
Lord, neither tin; optmition of His hands, He shall destroy
[or overthrow] them, and not build them up."
The third wor<l l:camath (HDY), is the word usejd, in Psa.
oxix. IJiO, " my zeal hath consumed me " ; and in l^xxviii.
IG, "thy tern)rs have (tut me off." It would be impossible
to show it to refer to final judgment at all.
The fourth, {thamad (^0*J•), Mr. Constable says, " is sig-
niticant oi' uffer extinction,'^ ho that it must be the most
Ibrcible of all these terms. Yet, we' find it used to predict
the curse upon Israel under the penalty of which as a nation
they still are, and which is not " utter extinction," as the
very passage shows. ** Also every sickness and every
plague, which is not written hi the book of this law, them
will the Lord bring upon thee, till thou be^- DESTROYUD.
And ye shall be left /5v« in nnmber,^^ etc., i.^^^not utterly
extinct at all (I)eut. xxviii. 01, 02). In the 3aji' chapter it
is ad<led further, *• And it shall come to pass when all these
t lungs arc come upon thee, the blessing AND the curse,
which I have set before thee, and thou shall call thm to
mind . . . and shalt return unto the Lord thy God ... that
then the Lord thy. God will tur^ thy captivity," etc. (ch. xxx.
1-3). Here is national repentance and restoration predicted,
after what ^Mr. Constable calls " utter extinction." Here is
in fact the j»laee in all Scripture where the word is used
most constantly. It is foun<l in xxviii. 20, 24, 45, 48, 51, 61,
translated 'destroy' and in 08 "bring to nought": and
yet the very prophecy shoNvs that there is no " utter extinc-
tion " at all in the matter.
^ It is also used repeatedly of " death," which is not that.
The fifth word is karath (n^D) in Niphal, which Job
(xiv. 7) uses to say, in the face of Mr. Constable, that " there
is hope of a tree, if it be cut down-' i. e., of course, " hope of
a tree after it is extinct," as we saw of Israel before.
It is used also (Dan. ix. 20) of Messiah being cut off: and
let Mr. (^)iistable say what this means. — ~~ — ' — —
£^,
ItfU
KACIS AMi^'UKOUIKa AM To V FOXUKli HrAlK.
It i8,U8od of death continually, and this Ih indeed fiifl
almost constant une, although • it does not always, as we
see, mean as much as that ; for a ih.ad tree, never sp,ont.'<. •
Finally, the sixth word, ttat/uttz ()'n:), is used once in the
psalm wEit,'h according to its title, speaks of Do( ^' (lii, 5; :
• God sliall likewise (/rstro;/ thee forever: he' shall Take tbee
•may, and pluck thee out of thy dwelling-place {lit. tent),
•md root thee out of the land of ihe living.' It is death by
the judgment of God that is indicated, and the nieaning is
better given in the margin, " beat thee down.'
I have grave complaint to Inake of the way Mr. Consta
ble uses all these words. He is content to say loosely of
them that they are "applied to future punishment." He
brings forward no proofs, he suj^poses you will take his
word for it of course.' He never attempts to show that they
apply to the judgment a/Yer death at all. Temi)oral judg-
ments are mixed up with eternal. No exceptional uses of
t!ie words are taken notice of at all, no contrary arguments
.that might be alleged, or anything of the kind. Tlu- conse-
Tjuence is that, while claiming i)reci.se accuracy, he is as loose
and inaccurate as well may be.
Lqt Mr. Constable point out, tew or manv, the passages
be relies upon to prove his point. : Lot lum'b.ing forward
the convincing arguments which a.ssure him that it is indeed
•* eternal judgment," that they speak of Let him meet the
arguments upon the other side. Let him show that the
words which speak of the destruction of material things
apply in the same sen.se to />;nnaterial things. Let him t^
this, and hewiljat least have brought his argument into
some tangible shape, and one which the gravity ol tbe sub-
ject demands. Until he does so we shall have ,ause to
suspect an argument which requires the assumption of mate-
riabsm for its support, and which treats the overthrow of a
ma7i and of a loaU, as if it was undeniable there was no
diflference between the two. *
We shall give Mr. Constable's summing up of the Old •
Testament testimon j\ as he understa nds it. W e have gi voa
>-
X
iiii;.
lys, as w«
iu;e iu the
;^Mlii. 5;:
take tbee
[lit. tent),
death hy
ean'mg is
•. Consta
r^osely of
nt." He
take his
tliat they
ral judg-
uses of
'ijfuinents
1)0 eonse-
i as loose
passages
forward
is indeed
meet the
tliat the
il things
him t^o
cnt into
tlie 8ub-
•ause to
of niate-
ow of a
was no
■'Jt:-
■ii
J)E8TKUCT10N, AND IT8 KIXUUED TKKMS. Itl
hii whole reasoning, and therefore may safely appeal to our
r6aders if he has taken the first step towards showing what
he asserts.
•' By every unumbiguoas tenn," he says, "it has pointed out
the punishment of the wicked as consisting, not in life, but in th«
loss of life ; not in their continuance iu that orgahiz«jd form
whicli constitutes man, bnt in its dissolution ; its resolution into
its oripfin.il parts, its becoming as though it had never been called
into (existence. Wliile the redeemed are to know a life which
knows no end, the lost are to be reduced to a death which knows
_J- of no awaking forever and ever. Such is the testimony of God
^ iu the Old Teshiyient. If Christian divines refuse to accept it
_: I M'cause Pliito, .mrt before h'im Egyptian priests, taught a doctrine
j «t the soul's essential immortality, let them see to it. Wo prefer
the word of Oiod to the logic of Plato and of Egypt." '
And so do we. Nor have we appealed to either, or to
^ aught but the word of God all through. And moreover
we have /faithfully and minutely examined Mr. Constable's
arguments througjW^ ^nd tested them by that word, and
have found them ^Kfrig. The keystone of his whole argu^
>__::3uient, as we have said, is its materialism, and -he has himself
4 virtually admitted it. If <3eath is not extinction, as it is
rwt,— if the soul is immortal (thotigh not independently, but
by the will of its Creator), as it i8,--then Mr. Constkble's
argument is wholly, iiretrievably, hopelessly gone forever.
But we must follow him into the New Testament.
>.
■4.
ll
«'
the Old
192 If AiJJH SUD XllliOUlLo A?) 10 A 1:1 ILMi: stATE.
CHAPTKR XK.
ill
I I
THE XKW TKSTAMKN'T TKUMS.
Hu begins of course with the wor.l so decisive, one way
or other, to his cause — with " death."
He quotcis a number of the passages in wiiicli this is ap-
plied to the punishment of the wicked,* " with|^t the small-
est effort to show that its terms Sleath ' or Mo die' have
any new sense placed on them." ^ . , *
Now if this be so, and we bear with us the reme4Hfl)rance
of what death (in the ordinary sense of it) is, and tlj.it, it
never means nor implies the extinction of being, we shall
have to consider all the texts he Oan bring- for\var<l of ^his
kind as «//am«^ and not ./o/-, his view of the evtiiictioii of
the wicked. No more than the seed in extinct, when, sown
in the ground, it is preparing the ha^t--ho more than
man is extinct when the spirit re^ns tfpfiod who gave,
' it— no more, if I am to accept the necessaijjrbouclusion from
such use of words, ijainore will the wickecf become extinct J
when eternal death becomer^ their awful ]>ortion. I grant, x
of course, the body might become extinct upon this view of
the matter, but //o^ the spirit or the M^ul. Even Ko,tl)cr^< is »
no escape from God into the blank of ncrtientily. Alas for
him wV> thinks that there is such ! r
But we cannot avail ourselves of this argument ; for this
reason, that there /.•>• an ex/m-ss stafiuu/tf, that death as .
. applied to the final punishment of the wicked is not mere J
ordinary death. In llevw xx. 14, the "second death" is ex- |
plained to be " the lake of fire." The editors of the^rqek 1^
^Testament, without exception, re^d the passage: "This is |
* the Becond death, <Ae ;«Ae t»//yr." Ami to this the first
♦ John vi. 50;^^ 51 ; xi. 26 ; R<mii. vi. 2\-^i ; viii. 1:5 ; 2 Cor. 1i.
16; James i. ^5; v. 20; Re^. xx. 14,
\
'mi
TK.
TIIK J^KW TKSTAMJiXT TEltMS.
lua
», one way
this is ap-
llic stnall-
<lic ' have
rnW!)rance
n<l tlwit, \l
;, wo shall
irtl of this
tiiictioii of
rh'.'u, sown
more than
who i;ave.
lusionfi'om
»me extinct
1. I «;:rant,
liis vi(!W of
Ko,tl)cr^|'"is
. Alas for
it ; for this
It <leath as
s not mere
ath " is ex-
• the Greek
' : " This is
lis the first
l:}; 2Cor. li.
death (ielivers up its prisoners. This is at the end of aH.
when the heavens and earth flee away before the facp ot Him
who sits upon tbe throne of judirment (^'r. 11). It is when
finally, all enemies boing i)ut uiuler His feet, the Son shall
deliver up fhe kingdom to the Father; and then "death,
the last ehcmy, shall bjj destroyed."* 15ut so for fro^the
tiecond death being then destroyed, it is then that its reign
begins, to endure (whatever that may mean) " for the ages
, of ages." , . ' ,
The first death, then, gives plaee to the second. They
are not the same. The " second deat^i " is the lake of fire.
Will even Mr. Constable assert that this is oi^I^ extinction?
Second extinction it cannot be, fbr therd has been none
before, and moreover extinction would be deliverance ./•^><*'i;;
it. Ex!linction Ay it would' be as rapid, according to t^
iisual argtlments, as by any x)ther process whatever. How
long would it take for life to be extinct, or flesh and blood
to be consumed by a literal fire of brimstone ? Woui4'it';{
consist with " torment for the ages of ages " ? Yet
must at least be the distinctive fmtnre of the lake~-e^nre.
What then does this " second death " imply ? It m^t be
torment and extinction ? But these are contlSctoW
terms. " Life or <kHth;' says a writer, " is the theme dfthe
Bible, not life or tannentr Yet here tormerit, and that "for
ages of ages, must be ^admitted io Ipe the distinquiahimf
feature of the second death ! Thus death tnust in this case
■ mean torrhent ; at le^t^hat must be j^dft of what it means;
for the lak« of fire undeniably means torment. It cannot
mean irresistible power of extinction, for any ordinary ^
would make quicker work; flesh kid bipod ev^n can res^
it for ages, and so (as all natural comparison is oqt of qiies-
(ion) why not forever ? No ; it means protractedSprment,'
extraordina?!-, imnaturally, supernaturally protradJbd tor<
ment; if it can mean this and extinction ^too, then ex-
* For thus it seems one should read "hdxccroJ h^fjot Harotoy f^r
«»
■■\\l:' (
M mit mi m'
-^"r
194 FACTS AND TUEOUIES AS TO A PL' TURK KTATE.
*
tinction itself may mean protracted existence and its end
alike.
Tims at least " death " here, as applied to (he future
punishment of the wicked, is not, cannot he, and' is c'xi)resHly
stated not tp be, used in its ordinary sense. I shall not
pursue the matter further here because the fitting place to
in«iuire its precis* meaning will be found when we come to
look at the intensely solemn and important i)assa<,'c8 reU'rre<l
to. This we liope to do in the fullest way hereafter, and do
not wish to anticipate it here.
Mr. Constable goes on to the passages which speak of
" eternal life " as the portion of the righteous alone. This
we fully believe, and have looked at already. lUs (luotation
of Matt. X. 29 has also been met, and. needs only to be re-
ferred to briefly again. It runs : " he that findeth his life
shalllose it, but he that loseth his life for my sake shall fiuil
it." Psuche is the word used here in both cases, and, as I
have before said, the par.allel place in Luke ix. 25 show.s
that " his^soul " is just the equivalent of " himself^ And
this we have seen to be very common phraseology in Scrip-
ture. The finding and losing (the same word as elsewhere
given " destroying ") the soul in the present world arc re-
versed in the world to come. The finding becomes losing,
thtf losing finding there. He who makes himself the object
of his life, loses'himself and is cast away. lie who sacrifices
self and its interests for Christ*s sake is really preserving
all for the -world to come. The idiomatic expression is im-
possible perhaps to put into English without a periphrasis;
but the meaning is intelligible enough, An<l the actual
laying down of life in martyrdom is not neqC?ssary at all to
the application. Can none but those whd_^ actually die a
martyr's death live eternally V The making it a question of
literal death or life would affirm so. It is not " life" then,
that properly translates or interprets the verse.
Mr. Constable now turns aside for a moment to Moses*
wish to 1)6 "blotted out <»f (tod's book" (Exod. xxxii. 82).
lie lliinks that " wo caimot suppose that he could even for
I
ud its end
(he future
3 ox|)resHly
[ shall not
g place to
e come to
L'S rei'crre<l
tor, and do
[ speak of
one. This
s (juotation
^ to be re-
Kth his life
B shall fiiul
i, and, as I
, lio show.s
^//:" And
;y in Scrip-
i elsewhere
rid are re-
tnes losing,
thd object
o sacrifices
preserving
«sion is iin-
eriphrasis;
the actual
•y at all to
iially die a
piestion of
life" then,
to Moses*
xxxii. li'I).
d even for
I
THE NKW TESTAMEN'T TEltMS.
nit have wished throughout elomity for
195
vi
a nionu^i
pain and moral corruption," and so we must infer he wanted
" the utter cessation of life " instead. But it is a little too
much todecidoa<iu('stion of this nioinent by our supposition
one way or another of what Moses i/n/sf have wished for at
a moment ()f intense and excited feeling. Granted he did
not wish for " nioral corruption " at all, much less for
oteniity, he might have^cepted the thought of punishment
instead of the pe(^| WTTOout a question of this. To force
his words into fei-f^t and calm consistency — to reason out
the feelings of a mbinent when intense emotion had over-
mastere<l reason— isAo pervert and not to interpret.
Wc have heard Mr.. ,Mhiton's complaint of the use of
' figurative ScHptures, by which certainly God means us
nevertheless to learn something on the subject, whai,ever it
may be. Yet iiere Mr. Constable would take Moses' wish
at a moment of unreasoning excitement, follow it but to ill
its^ necessary consequences, and decide the question in his
own favor by a simple suggestion that he could not have
meant to acceiJt these consequences! To which we need
only answer, suppose he could not, what then ? Is it so
strange a thing in times of much less intensity of feeling fbr
conse<|uences the most obvious to be wholly forgotten and
ignored ?
, We pass on to consider other terms used for eternal pun-
ishment.
The first of these is apoleia (^jrcJA^a)^^ " destruction."
Mr. Constable says, " There is not in the Greek language a
word more strongly significant of the utter loss of existence.
'Its proper meaning,' says Schleusner in his lexicon, 'is
the destruction of anything so that it ceases to exist."'
He then (|uote8 Peter's words to Simon Magus, '* Thy money
perish with thee," literally, "thy money go with thyself to
destruction," and adds, "Here we see Peter's sense ^•.de-
struction. It had the same meaning when applied to a man
as it had when applied to metal : disorganization and wast-
ing away until it should disappear, was the idea which Peter
n
li I
i 1
!!
I
190 FACTS AXD THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE. STATE.
attached to it in both cases alike." His next argument
is still more extraordinary. Quotinj; Attn xxv. 16, htv
remarks : . »
'* I'V.stiis hen' t«'lls Aj;riirt»<t that it waS not tlic mann< r of lln>
llonmns to «li'livtr nuy muu to (It^ulh (literuUy, to'de.structioii)
before the aecnscd had un oppoi-tiinity of dofouding him.self.
Festus here calls tlie destruction of man hi.s death ; " — Mr. Con-
stable means, of conrsu, tliat he calls a man's f/^*//// Ids destruc-
tion, — "and as Festus, uorBTLES.s, Avith almost every man of his
station at that time, riiUcul^'d the rfrt/ iilfu </ uni/futni-f Uf,' after
this, lie could only have iiit<'nded by tlu; destruction of a man
the putting him out of all existi-ncc. Likij i^y isixo accepts the
TEKM IN THE SENSE OF FE-stls, aud We huve thus in the usage of
two of the inspired writers of the New Testament, Peter and
Luke, the sense of destruction established as i)utting out of ex-
istence."
If this argument were in the first edition of Mr. Consta-
ble's book, it is rather extraordinary that the book has sur-
vived to a fourth. Such reasoning would seem only possi-
ble to such mental hallucination as would preclude all serious
controversy. Out of the simple fapt that Luke chronicles
Festus' words in which be uses for "death" the word^
" destruction," Mr. Constable draws the amazing conclu-
sions : —
First, that because Festus was a Roman governor, h^\
' doubtless" shared the scepticism of his day.
Secondly, that in using the word "destruction" in this
case, Festus' (su])pos»<l) views gave the word a peculiar sig-
nificance.
Thirdly, that Luke must have known the scepticism that
was in Festus' mind. And — ,
Fourthly, that by recording his words Luke meant to
signify his adhesion to this scei)ticism which Mas behind
them.
^ I can only say, that this is logical insanity, and that upon
these principles all reasoning becomes .impossible. This
very Luke elsewhere, as' we have seen, in stating the well-
known Pharisaic views as- to " angel and spirit," tells us thai
E.
IHB a&W TESTAMJiNT TEUMS.
197
irgunient
1
. 16, luv
- 1
«•!• of tllC
structioii)
't
J himsplf.
■'
-Mr. Con-
s (Icstruc-
uin of his
' li/i' nfter
of !i luiin
t.
t;EI'TS THE
' usage of
Peter and
>ut of ex-
. Consta-
c has sur-
ily possi-
■ '±
ill serious
hronick's
he wonV
J couclu-
. :' '..f
ernor, he\
" in this
!uliar sig-
sism that
^ ■
meant to
IS behind
hat upon
►le. This
the well-
Is us thai
they " confess " both. " Confess '* is his own word and
surely. implies that he behevt'd that to be the truth which
they were confessing. Yet Mr. Uojjerts <M)nsider/» that even
too worthless an argument to reply to. What would he
say to Mr. Constable's ? And here is Luke against Luke !
Rather here„ is Mr. Constable's censure of the unhappy race
of historians, who it seems are condemned to endorse every
falsehood that they tell us another utters !
On the other h^nd it is not to be wondered at if from our
point of view we' should consider this application of ''de-
struction "to death, as the overthrow of the very thing it is
sought to establish by it. Not alone do we tind it in the
lips ot Festus. The verb upollnmi (diiuXXv/nt) is used in this
way over and over again (Matt. ii. 13; viii. 25 ; xii. 14;
xxi. 41; xxii. 7; xxvi. 52; xxvii. 20; Mark iii. 6; ix. 22-
xi. 18; Luke xi. 51; xiii. 33; xv. 17; xvii. 27, 29; xix. 47;
John X. 10; xviii. 14; 1 Cor. x. 9), and translated by the
words " destroy " and " perish." In all these cases utter
extinction is not its meaning.
In his interpretation of the apostle's words to Simon
^ Magus, Mr. Constable again manifests his incompetence as
a reasoner. How " thy money be to destruction with thee "
shows that the destruction of the piece of metal must be
just of the same sort as the destruction of the man,- it would
be hard for him to show, while it is very easy to assert it.
If the man were only a piece of metal li^e the money the
reasoning might hold good, and something like this is really
the ;%sis of his argument. He is a consistent materialist
all thfough, and a material destruction for man is all he
can according to his principles believe in.
But even as to material things the fdrce of the word is
not by any mej^ns) what Mr. Constable would make out.
When the new Vine bursts the skins and the bottles are
maprecl (Mark ii. 32) the same word is used to express this.
Now the burstmg of a skii|i-bottle is by no means its " dis-
organization anfl wasting away till it should disappear," as
he tidies to make out must be as to the coin. It is not even
flil.-^JH-
198 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A PUTUBE STATE.
theJhHt stvp to such wastiwf away. This would equally go
on were the bottles whole. Mr. lloberts urges that the
bottles are .lestroyed as bottles; but that is my argument,
not his The bottles arc destroyed />r t/m purpose totrhn-h
thu wi-re onuimilly ihstined, and so is man whethei* as th(^
Bui.ject of the first death or of the fjecond. In either case
he is set aside from the place for which he was originally
created, in the first death temporarily, in the second " ej<jr,
nally. But the bottles exist, though " destroyed " : they drf
not cease to be; and so neither does man. This is the
Biblical force of destruction.
But again, apoUumi is used in the sense of " losing' (Luke
x\'. 4, etc.). The " lost " sheep of the house of Israel (Matt.
XV. 24), the "lost" sheep, "lost" piece of m«)ney, "lost"
son of Luke xv. are all examples of this use of the word.
Alsd Matt./x. 6; xviii. 11; Luke xix. ID; 2 Cor. iv. 3.
Mr. Roberts here contends, that " in the case of an article
lost, POSSESSION is destroyed for the time being." These
gentlemen are sometimes wonderfully easily satisfied. So
a man in prison for a week may be said to be destroyed,-
because, as R. remarks, " soil kthinq is destroyed," and it
\» no matter whether it be the man himself or anything
else,— his liberty, for instance ! ! But ui)on this gn.und it
would be hard to maintain the doctrine he so zealously ad-
vocates. - '
Mr. Constable, Finds up his discussion of these two words
with a characteristic challenge, an«l a ro-affirmation of the
words of Dr. Weymouth, whom he calls " one of the best
Greek scholars of the day," and who says, "My mind fails
to ^conceive a grosser misinterpretation of language than
when the five or six strongest words which the Greek tongue
possesses, signifying 'destroy' or 'destruction,' are e.x-
plahied to mean maintaining an everlasting but wretched
existence. To translate black as white is nothing to this."
But it is Dr. Weymouth who in this misinterprets, and
It does not take first-rate scholarship to see it. For where
does he find ^ny one who interprets the words in question
\
lally go
hut tho
juiuent,
Uj irhich
f as tho
ler caso
•iginally
they drf
) is the
'♦ (Luke
il (Matt,
"lost"
le word.
p, iv. 3.
II article
These
letl. So
stroyed,"
"and it
.11 y thing
'(Mind it
•usly ad-
words
1 of the
the best
ind fails
.jje than
^ tongue
arc ex-
/^ retched
this."
'cts, and
r where
(]nestion
THE NEW TESTAMENT TEKMS.
1
199
\
i'jf.
by any tiling else than " destroy " and " destruction " ? I never
saw or heard of one who violated language in the Avav he'
complains of. The words are found just as he would have
them in the common version of the liible which is in all our
liands, — a version made too by people of tho very views
which he assails. Let him tell us who the people are who
propose to change them.
The fact is, this is not what Dr. Weymouth moans, and
tlie parade of Greek scholarship is thrown away. Dr. Wcy-
nioutii niust mean that we take the Eagllah wordsj^-which,
thank Go<l, brings the question into a shape intelligible to
very many more than can claim to be scholars, — that we
take t\\ii EiK/'ish words " destroy " and "destruction" (for
it must be allowed we leave them in our Bibles) as mean-
ing " maintaining an everlasting but wretched existence."
Kven in this he is exceedingly inaccurate. I can answer
at least for myself, I never understood these words in any
such sense. When just noW we were speaking of the
bottles being '= destroyed," surely no one understood that
their " destruction" meant their " maintaining existence " at
all. They inhjht exist : true; but their destruction was not
their existence, nor ever understood to be so. It was their
being set aside as useless for the purpose of theiv existence •
an.l in a similffr way, only remembering the unspeakable
diilerenco between an inanimate thing, and a raor&Uy ac-
countable being such as man, do we understand the destruc
tion of the wicked.
Mr. Constable adds : " Even the leading modern advocate
of the Augustlnian view, who all but closed his literary •
labors in the defence of thjs wretched cause, looking in blank
<lismay at tliese words of 7Toom,"cMiTmlysay^f them, ' They
do not hnjnrlabhf mean annihilation!' We on the contracy
assert that such is in the New Testament, as used of the
wicked, their invariable sense : they are there ever connected
with death.". ^
And that proves procisely^he opposite, while it proves
also bow Mr. C:!onstable's annihilatlonism and his materialism
-. ■ ./■■ . ■ :,.■ I-' ■■
?j;1
!ii_.j ;_■:,■
?s?
K !
u
■rr
if'
r;^
\
.s
200 FACTJ? and THKORIE.S AH TO A FUTUKK M-VTE.
Stand or fall tbgether. I make no pretension to more than
ordinary Bcholarship, but I dare maintain against all or any,
that the words in (juestion xkvrr in tfieni^rhjcH mean annihi-
lation at all. I-.ot the proof be only from Scripture, and
let any that \vill i)rove it. We must pass on tiqw to other
Words.
The next he takes up is aplf-wiizo {dtpavKo)). It is once
used as applied to unbelievers (Acts xiii. 41), '' Behold, ye
despisers ! and wonder, and perish" an<l once to the "van-
ishing away" of life (James iv. 14). The latter is its true
signification in both places, although it has other meanings.
Mr. Constable quotes from Josephus two passages, in which
the WiWd is used, once for the annihilation of the sluggish
and cowardly at death: ""a subterranean night (li.s,w/o<s
them to uothitKj'''' ; and once in describing the doctrines of
the S;adducees, " that souls jyerhih with their bodies''; and
he adds: '* That which the Sadduceos taught would happen
to all men at the first death the apostle tells us will be to
unbelievers the sad result of the second death : they will
rise from their graves and see what they have rejected, will
marvel at their folly and will vanish out of existence."
But almost all this latter is pure invention : there is noth-
ing in the text about the second death, about rising from the
graves, or even of passing out of existence in his sense of it.
And this is quite unquestionable, because it is a 'simple adop-
tion of the language of the Septuagint translation of Hab. i.
5, where Mr. Constable's idea of it suits neither text nor
context. It is there added as an appendage to "wonder
marvellously "* as if to complete the sense, *' wonder mar-
vellously and vanish.' The apostle puts it, " wonder and
vanish," thus still more plainly making the last words give
emphasis to the former by the substitution for "marvel-
lously " of " vanish."
We have next four words, ultimately united together,
* The LXX. read75f rf oi HixraipfiovTfrai [nai ini^iA-t'ipare,] utxi
Savjuadare [Bavjuadia] nai dtpnyiisOtfrf. The apostle leaves out
wjjat i«j enclosed between brackets.
■ %
s
.f4-
THE NEW TK8TAMENT TKIIMS.
201
ore than
I or any,
n annihi-
lire, and
to other
18 once
'hold, ye
he " van-
its true
idanings.
in wliich
nhigufislj
rines of
s''; and
happen
ill he to
;hey will
ted, will
^•" - ■
is noth-
from the
ise of it.
•le adop-
PHab. i.
text nor
' wonder
ler raar-
idor and
rds give
' mar vol -
ogetlu'r,
trf,] Htxi
leaves out
■ *
.m-
phtheiro, phthota, diaphtfieiro an if kataphthelro {.f/Jn),G,
ifOo/Jii, 'h,i,pfjeifjco, »arit,pOf.i,jfv). In the New 'rcstaiiH'nt
the first and second :ire uniformly translated " ««.rrupt " and
"corruption," evci-pt I Cor. iii. 17, wher^; wi- find, correctly
enough, "defile" and "destroy," and 2 Pctur ii. 12, 'nSide
to be taken and dmtmyedr The thinl is foun<l sjx times :
Luke xii. 23, " where no moth cormpteth'' ; 1 Tim. vi. ,0
"men oi corrupt minds"; 2 Cor. iv. 1(1, " though our out-
ward m&nperUh "; Rev. viii. 9, « the sliips wereTA.s//-oye<? ";
and xi. 18, « shouidst destroy them which dcsfn>i} the earth."
The fourth is only found, 2 Tim. iii.. 8, "men of corrniit
mmdR,"and 2 Peter ii. 12. "shall nt.fa-ly pvrhh in their own
corr,uption."
The meanings are sufiiciently well given in these passages.
Of the third of these words Mr. Constable says, " The sense
• of the word as signifying wasting away to utter destruction,
IS constantly found in the New Testament." Nowthe word
is found altogether six times in five passages, as we have
seen, an.l Mr. Constable is able to bring forward two not
very clear or certain instanees of this " constant " use : the
first, " no moth cormpteth " ; the second, " though our out-
ward man jocW.sA." . %■
Kut it is upon L^ l>eter ii. 12 that, he naturally lays most
emphasisj "Si)eaking of the ungodly, Peter says, 'These,
as natural brute beasts, made to be taken dntl destroyed, shall
utterly perish in their own corruption.' Here 'the same
Greek word is used of the end of beasts, and the end of the
unyodly. Wii know what is the end of beasts taken and
destroyed : even such, Peter declares, will be the end of the
ungodly in the future lifo: they shall perish there as beasts
perish here.'' '
This argunu-ut has more appearance of truth in it than
any we have yet had from .Mr. Constable. It is however
merely fallacious. The true comparison necessitates no such
inference. For the point is really just ^Vhat we have before
glanced at, man's loss of the place for which he was origin-
ally created and for which his natural constitution fitted
A
#'
20*J PA<!T8 AND TMKOUIKS AS TO A PrTUIlE STATR.
■) i
him. From thin place ho pcriHhos, utterly iktIhIics, :iiul ig
«lcHtroye<l : he " Ioscm himself ami is cast away." This is the
liatiiral thing for a." brute beast, tiutde to l)o taken ami de-
stroyed," — to fill a place ^temporarily, not perpetually.
Man, made for eternal occupation of the ]»osition assigned to
him, perishes like the beas^; when he forfeits forever and
loses this. The comparison with the beast is here sufficiently
obvious without its involving the physical extinction
which Mr. ('onstable's materialism would alone suggest.
Two- other words, — rjutlotlircno and okthroa (i?oAoO/^i r.i,
uAcVo?)-r-are " proi)erly and primarily significant," says
Mr. Constable, " of utter extermination by death. They are
appliied in the New Testament to the punishmeht of sinners
hereafter: 'Every soul which will not hear that prophet
shall be destroyed from among the j>eople'; the ' wicked
shall be punished with everlasting destnu'tion. from the
presence of the Lord ' (1 Thess. v. 3; 2 Thess. i. 9 ; 1 Tim.
vi. 9)."
The first of these words occurs but once (Acts iii. 23) ;
the second is four times U8e<l, — three times applied to the
destruction of the ungodly. Exolothreno is given by Lid-
dell and Scott as " to destroy utterly." Olethros is given as
"n//«, destruction, death."
A last word, not given by Mr. Constaljle, is katar<ieo^
{H(xrcx/j^£a})y to make void, of no effect, to millify. It is the
word translated " destroy " in 1 Cor. vi. 13 ; xv. 2(5 ; 2 Thess.
ii. 8 ; Heb. ii. 14 ; " come to nought " in 1 Cor. ii. 6 ; " abol-
ish " in 2 Tim. i. 10.
The effect of this inquiry as to Greek is to bring us back
to the English, better satisfied than ever to abide by its
decision. We have found no cause to quarrel with Dr.
Weymouth when he tells us that^^'e Greek M'ords in que^;-
tion mean *' destroy " and " destrilction." As this is how
they are translate*! in our common version, we may liave
confidence in it. The (juestion is after all one of simple un-
derstanding of some common English words. It takes no
uncommon education to arrive at a satisfactory settlement
,1
I
■ -I
■A
THE NEW TESTAMENT TEKM8.
203
, and iH
i.s Ih tlic
irid «U»-
.*■
etually.
jpie«l to
■■'t
ivr ainl
iciontlv
tiiiction
-,-
JCHt.
loO/JftMj
■ ■ ' ...
t," says
•;.»
""hey are
'sinners
.*
prophet
wieked
om the
ITim.
Hi. 23);
to the
by Lid-
given as
fifar</eOf
[t is the
■ ; ,..;j5
2 Thess.
" abol-
iis hack
*
\i hy its
1
'ith Dr.
in queh-
■ 4
is how
■,™
ay have
iiple un-
- .-A
akes no
i
ttlement
.J
of the <iuestion raised. It is worth while to have gone
through the Greek to have discov-cred this. Our readers
will go with us with the more a.ssuranco and intellincnce,
that we m:iy adhere in this to our common English version.
Meanwhile, we shall close this chapter with a remark or
t wo on Paul's wish that he were " accursed from Christ for
iiis l)rethren ' — which Mr. Constable l»rings forward as "an
• •vact parallel to the prayer of Moses already referred to."
Xot questioning this, our remarks as to that prayer of
Moses apply here with equal force. I also agree with him
that '* an eternal life of blasphemy and moral corruption "
was not in Paul's' thought, nor implied in the word used,
"anathema." \X. \» punishiuent he was wishhig to bear, not
'• bla.sphemy and moral corruption." Nor iloes Paul say, " I
i'ould wish," as if it were a deliberate tiling, but "I tms
wishing " — an impetuous wish at a certain time when brood-
ing over Israel's terrible condition. To frame a doctrine
out of, or su))port one by, the expression of a ntf|ment'8
fervid emotion is to strain Scripture, not inter])ret itJ" *
But Mr. Constable thinks that his is the only view con-
sistent with " the use of the term ' accursed ' among the
Greeks, by whom it was applied to any animal devoted to
death, and removed out oi^ the sight of man, in order to
avert calahiity." ^It is granted fully it is " devoted to" de-
stru(!tion," an<l occurs thus in a passage much more to Mr.
C.'s purpose, though quite inadequate for it :" if any man
love not our Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema"
(1 Cor. xvi. 22). But this in no wise shows what the destruc-
tion is, of which the animal sacrifice might be a ti<»-ure.
Th'.; argument goes to<yar, for those same animal sacrifices
auK.ng the Hebrews sjMp of Christ, gj|d were equplly '• de-
votei^ to death, and removed out o^KS sight of man."
Did the Lofd suffer what' Mr. Constable would imply by
" utter death " ?
ifALla AMU TUEUIUL^S Ab lU A JfUXUUE «»IAX£.
CHAPTKR XXI.
A FUKTHKH SURVEY OF TIIK srlUPTUUK TKUMR.
Death and desfcruction- are rl«»ftrly ScripturL' phrases for
title end of the wicked. But th** HrMt is never extinction as
we have seen, and all tliis elasH of textN are elearly affftin.it
the views they are (pioted for. Destruction apiin is the
ruin of the thing or hfing of whi<rh it is pr(><li<<tv|id, but by
no means its passing out of being, ^t'lu* importance of the
point is such, Ijowever, tliat w(? shall again review the mat-
ter in company with others of Mr. Constable's school of
thought, allowing them to state it »to us in their own way,
and to bring forward the arguments by which they believe
their own view triumi»h!intly sustaine<l. *' • )
Mr. Ha.stings has given us a summary as to ^*The Destiny
of the Wicked" in a small tract bearing that title, and con-
sisting of Scripture texts arranged under ton different heads.
To these Mr. Jacob Blain^ias a<lded others in his book,
"Death not Life." Theso^jvo will furnish us with divisions
under which we mav^rrang*' the material furnished by sev-
eral other wrlter»r''^ ^ «
Mr. niain has indeed recalled his booK since the change
of views already mentioned, and he owns " ihRUjnirf, of the
texts quoted to prove endlesk loss of life "' he now sees " bv
further research only to refer to temporal death or earthly
judgments." Still, as many yet hold his former views, we
'^^^ may use his headings a^j above said, as c^onvenipnt enough for
the purlfiose of our intended review.
To begin with Mr. Hastings' headings a*; to the destiny
cked\;
They shall not live forever." To which we may
shall die.
r
£.
A FUKTUEK SURVEY OF TUB 8CRIPTURK TERMS. 205
y ■
rases for
iction as
' affnbiHt.
n is the
, but by
e of the
the mat-
ch oo I of
wn way,
believe
Destiny
in«l eon-
il hea<ls.
lis book,
livisioiis
by sev-
a
' change
/ of the
ees " by
earthly
ews, we
vnojh for
^Ipptiny
ve may
r
^ The texts quoted under the first we have already con-
sidered ; for they are those which speak of eternal life, that
which with God is really life. Take as an example: "He
that hath the Son hath life, and ho that hath not the Son of
y/ God hiith not life" (^John v. 12). Or again, John vi.
58 : " Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink
His blood, ye have no life in you.** How is it that Mr.
Hastings does not see that, according to the passages he
quotes, taken as he would take them, not only the wicked
will have no futHre existence, but h<i»e none now ? That
is what hi's proof texts show, if his system is correct.
. But what his texts do prove is, that eternal life is not
merely existence or immortality, and that in the Scripture
language one may bo (to use Paul's expression of the woman
that lives in pleasure)^ 1 Tim. v. 6 : " dead while living."
Now, if there be such a living death even now, as we are
thus assured there is, ?rAy not for eternity'/ And if the be-
liever, having now (as we have seen) eternal life, yet enters
into it as his general state hereafter, why may not the un-
believer, dead now ^fs alas he is, and alienated from the life
. of God, yet go into death as his final adjudged condition,
by the sentence of the Judge hereafter?
Mr. Roberts, apparently following Mr. Edw. White,* con-
tends against this application of I Tim. v. 6. He asks of
. the person in question whether she was "actually dead, or
in a state relating to death as a consummation ? Is it pot
tUe sense actually expressed in the words of Christ, ' Let
the dead bury their dead 'V (Luke ix. 60) : the living said
to be dead, because destined to share the fate of the corpses
in question ? This," he says finally, " cannot be f/ainsaU/."
But one would think it could. For very plainly, if that
be all, the man whom the Lord addressed was a?; dead as
anybody else, and the language would be quite unmeaning.
Nor can Mr. Roberts talk about the second death. " The
■ dead" who were to be buried could not mean dead of that
death.
Litpiri Clirist, p. 281.
^
■; 'li -X
2m
now, as it i«-|>r()vxMl
-r
FACTS AKD THEO^lI^EJi Ati It) A f tTTUKK HTA-JK.
Mori»ov€!r, We have a nimilar |»hra»t'olo|5y Huffii;u!nt|y olw-
where U) tlotermine it« meAiiiiig v^ry preciiK'ly, For in-
Hlanoe, where the Lonl (in John v. lit, '2'y) Hpeakn of 'ihe ^
dea«l hearing IIim voice ami living, He in plainly not H|ieal|iii<',S^|
ofthofle Hubject to the firnt <lealh, for the life mml of mmt'm^r'
Ik) in contract to the death. If therefore those Hiilyect to
|»hyHical death are ** paflHed from death to life," th^eannot
i»hy«ically die, which we know in not the truth. The
" dend " inuHt then bo considered as Hubjectx of; i)r .sentenced ♦ '
to, the second death, acconling to Mr. Roberts; but thin
will not hold either. Undei' the power of the second death
I hey are not yet, and nectljru)! in that sense deliverance, for
the second death is the ^jft^ of fire. And again if we say
v. nfcncrd to the second deatlr, deliverance from' this sentence
Would not be finickrinixj. But as such our Lord represents
it, the impartation of a true life here and now, a life which
is morally characterized by the knowledge of the only true
(fod, and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. The death in >
li ^gii'Contrast with this can only be what w«' rightly call spiritual
™ death, '* alienation from the life of Ood through the ignorance
that is in men, because 6t the blindness «ibiiiklJtearts " V
(Kph.Jv. IH). Where thili!feisnot,deatl
Spiritual death i.«i^what t^ie .^postle intenWuWi [Wiiily by '
" dead whihj llving.^^, Xor can -Mr. Roberts prove that Scrip-
'fej? anywhere intends by the dead the fiction he conceives,
ing of the first <leaih-^re never in Scripture called
t^-sue ^; and he is merely evading the force
■pl<>"nl^^ainst him as they stand. I ask again
tlipffP'^lvlJre be s^^t. Irving death
there IS, why not for eternity y
> Again let us remind ourselves also that the secon<l death
is the lake of fire, beginning Avhen <le:ith (as it is onlinarily
understooil) ends 'and is no more, and certaiiily not therefore
its continuance or repetition. In no way can the threaten-
ing of " death " imply extinction.
'All Mr. Constable's arguments as to the primary sense of
\vord8 and the necessity of their being kept to their literal
i
I
>*
■••1
i^-
I
s^
ni\^ olae-
For ill
kH of*lh«
N{K!:il|i
r)f coil
ihjcct to
y cannot
\h. The
i'titt»ru*c*l .
lull this
nl death
111 CO, Tor
r wo say
W'lltCIICO
prt'sciilH
to which
nly true
loath in •
spiritual
iioranoo
oaftH "
iiiily by '
t Scri])-
ticoivos.
L"! calk'<l
10 force
k attain
prove* I
I death '
linarily
I'retbre
roateu- *
nne of
literal
-«:
■J
>*
A FURTIIKR 8UBVKY Of TUKSCBI^URKTRIWH. 207
\*ininj?, which no nUuiy twiiido hiiniivlf iiwiil upon, oom-
;|>tiaoly break downfii the fa<w of the fact** of Seripiliro. It**
in ill vain to urge a uho of terniH«uch an Macaulay and Hume
in their character m historiaiiH of the proHciit wouhl necoBsa-
rily re<|uire to make, when the things in quostle^n liodong to
that future whore wo Me iy dtytyftari^ hi a riddrf« (Jod haa
not mocked um indeed, nor iwed words in an iwareal or un-
truthful HeiiHo, Kio Holoinn HtateiuontH arc n®t unAtted
HiirOly to convoy a moaning which the general douHont of
ChriHten<lom une<juivocally attachoH to them. A»d writem
Huch as Mr. C(2tu4ahle show plainly that they are not, by
the way they conHtantly peroert that moaning in order to
force it into contradiction with the Bible tennft. ThuH
(Joodwyii says : *' l(, death does mean ceaseless suflRwing in
///«', thore^ can bo no confidence in expression by words ";
and so Constable, "death is made to mean its direct opp6-
site— life " ; and so Dobnoy asks, " How was Adam to ua*
derstand that death meant life — cndle^n life — endless life m
tort/ieM ?"' . * - m
But who asserts such' a moaning ? The second doth^e
the lake of fire, and th"terof<yro torment cannot be oxolllded
from the idc^ of it, as wo have soon. But death inUaelf
doois .not *' moan " torment even here. It means anything
bjl^" life." It means separation from the Blessed Soarce
of life : th«t " alienation from the life of God ^ on msn's
side, which lis spiritual 'death, meeting its end in God's final
withdrawal on the other. And as God's withdrawal caimpt,
mean inditierenco, and as Ho cannot cease to be the Moral
Governor of His creatures, it implies the manifestatiolL.-..
of that eternal <li8plea.^ure, which the lake of fire is.
This may suffice to answer Mr. Minton's question as to
what life the wicked can lose in the day of judgment, and
which he sett^les by a process of exhaustion can lie only
phystt^al life, ^e might answer that, if that be the judg-
ment, surely it would be release to many, and scarcely, in
comparison of preceding anguish, judt/hient at ail. But- his
question is founded upon a misapprehension. We have seen
i
'.
S
T
I
• ■' ,-'1
r^'i^'i^-.'
(1
I I
( <..
t-v
4 r
«>
( i
^^■v^
x:
'26s
■ (I , ■■
FACTS AKD THEORIES AS tO A FUTUKK STA'rE.
N
that the righteous "enter into life » in the world to come,
and yet that that doe's not imply that they have not got it
here'; and similarly the wicke<l enter into (lr„f/i, fi,ul it in
all its awful reality, in that Judgnuu.t day. It is their whole
condition, unrelieved and unmitigated as heforo it might be
aye, even for the rich manor for Cain. The resurrection
Ibr.just or unjust alone can give them their full capacity
for enjoyment or for suffering. The resurrection of the
Wicked jjrecedes their judgment to the' second death.
W^i-raaypass on to consider Mr. Hastings' third^head,
with which we may take as merely synonymous with it in
tjjie original, his fifth. These are—
"3. They shall perish.;' >
'< 5. They shall be destroyed." •
Mr. Hastings depends mainly if not entirely here upon
what he considers the simple force of the words "destroy "
etc. Says Mr. Jacob' Blain : "If destroy is sometimes ap-
plied -to calamities on earth, it still means the enmn^/ of a
thmg, as of prosperity, liberty, country, character, etc. • so
to say It does not mean the ending of the thing to which it
refers is/a4r."
So it seems a question of some simple English words
which strangely enough, we do not understand. Our trans-
lators used however both destroy and perish for ruin Where
tlje thing remained in ruins, and di.l not come to an end
Ihe bottles burst by the new wine are thus said to be " per-
ished," as we have seen. They were ruined, looking at the
ongmal purpose for which they Were <lestined. And so
though the righteous "perished," he entered into peace'
So again we have, "the land perisheth," "the valley also
shall perish;'' so over anc! over again is it said that
Israel was to be - destroye<l,"-^nil after this had come upon
her her captivity was to be turned (Deut. xxviii., xxx ) The
constant reference to death agrees entirely with this. In
none of these cases is there an end of the thing destroyed
tl'; r'uf V°r^'\'' ^"^'" end somewhere, must say
that If the land perishes," the .ta(e of prosperity do.., .n.^
iTE.
to come,
not got it
find it in
lieir whole
might be
surrection
11 capacity
on of the
th.
ird^ head,
vith it in
ere upon
destroy,"
times ap-
^ifi[/ of a
etc. ; so
which it
1 words,
ur trans-
n \vhere
an end.
^e " per-
? at the
And sOy
3 peace,
ley also
iid that
lie upon
). The
lis. In
itroyed.
ust say
>£S,-and
^f
A FURTHEK SURVEY OF THB SCRIPTURE TERMS. 209
this is what is meant by *' tht; l:iu<l " ! "In the case of an ar-
ticle lost " — the same word in tlu? original,-^-'' poMftift/on. is de
stroycd " ! and so on. The case is very plain ilial destnic-
tJon does not mean "annihilation" in ^(!//// of these examples.
But there is one text which we must specially look at in
this connection, and a very important one it is. Mr. Minton
has given it the fullest examination that I have seen, and
therefore we may best follow his argument as to it. It is in
his "Way Everlasting " (pp. 27-33), and follows what he
calls th(^ "settlement" by "exhaustion" of what life the
wicked have yet to lose in the day of judgment. This
we have i^een he decides must be nattwul life, and he SToes
on': — : ; ;.; V '
" A0. is not that just the lifo which our Lord Himself precisely
defines to be what, </'/// be taken away from them? 'Fear not
tliem Avhieh kill the body and are not able to kill the soul ; but
rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in
hell ' (Matt. X. 2Hj. Now I i>ut it to yom- conscience whether you
can find a more distinct and jiositive utterance than that upon
any subj(!ct wliatevcn- in tlie whole Bible. Would it be possible
for any Inunau being who i-ead that text Avith an unprejudiced
mind, to have the smallest doubt as to its meaning ? Does it not
distinctly threaten that God will do to Ijotli body and soul that
which man can do to the body, but is ' not able 'to do to the
soul— '^Z//' them ? " , ' v>i
No, Mr. Mhiton, it does not. The word is expressly v
altered to avoid saying so^. And what is not said here is
not said' any where moreover in Scripture. The soul m nether
''killed." Let Mr. Minton say, what would be the result
if it were said : —
" And what is kiUing ? Why, depriving; of life. While, the
body retains one spark of life of any sort or\lescriptiou, it is not
killed ; and while the soul retains one .spark of life of any sort or
description, <7 is not killed."
, I quite agree with him. And how then can he account ^
for the fact, that having used this decisive word in the first
clause of the sentence, tiie Loi'd refuses it for the second
I'»''t V — Certainly not without sonie reason for it. He turns
210
FA(;rs AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTUIlE STATK.
! I
asKlo from saying what would seem the most natnml lhin<.
for Ilim to say, an<L instead of using again the word '' kill "
which lie had jusfused, He substitutes "destroy" for
" kill." \ ■
Nor only so. Mr. Minton cannot find this word kill ap-
plied anywhere to the soul or to future punishnuw.t. It is
rejected as unfit both here and everywhere. And T ask, V
why y Why does the Lord substitute "destroy " for '' kill '"^^2
Would it be believed, after Mr. Minton telling us so «4^
phatieally what " killing " is, and how decisive of the cont^C^
versy m his favor, that he has the boldness to reply "^7,-'
^Jouhtedlu to lacreas>^ theforeeof the threat,',, in. f. It 'is the
same thing, but expressed by a stronger woi;d— in fact the
strongest word that can be used " !
Now the wonl « kill " is only employed for takin- fife
and scarcely ever in any figurative sense at all. Mr. Minton
appeals to Liddell and Scott as his authority. We will
accept the ap])eal, an<l contrast the words. The latter word
in the verse, apollu„d {^an6\\vii{) is indeed given as "to de
stroy utterly, kill, slay, murder," but it is added that it
means " very fre<iuently in all sorts of relations, to destroy
nan, spoil, waste, s,juander," and in the middle form'
not only "to perish, die, lalV'lbut "also simply, to f<ai
into rum, be undone," an.l even "to be wretched or mh-
ei-abley
Now compare the other word apoktehio {,{noHTitvc^ and *
we find the only meanings given to be " to kill, slav, smite
to^eath, to put to death, to wearv to death, torn'ient "-
but this last metaphorical use a, very rare one, and in Scrii)-
ture never employed. Now I ask Mr. Minton,-I ask any
honest man,-if our Lord had <lesigned to use a word which .
should unequivocally set forth the annihilation of the soul
whK.h would have >een the fitter for his purpose, the one
>v )*ch in Scripture language has no other sense than that of
taking hfe, or the one which is ,e,-y jVc^iuentlu used in
other senses?
And ev<.M 'this, decisive as it ought to be, does not put
■m
mil ihiiiuf
nl ''kill,"
roy " for
<1 kill ap-
it. It is
I'l T :isk,
•"kiU"-i,j
It is the
fact the
mo; fife,
■ Alinton
>Ve will
er word
"to<le-
that it
lestroy,
! forin,
to fall
or //k's-
<»),an(l *
', smite
ent "—
I Scrip-
isk any
I which .
e soul,
lie one
hat of
sod in
W
i^"
A FURTHEK SURVEY OF THE SCRIPTURE TERMS. 211
the argument in its Strongest form. For if we will be at. a
little pains to go beyond the lexicon, and inquire for our-
selves the force of the terms in Scripture, we shall find— and
I do not doubt the same to" be true elsewhere than in Scrip-
ture—that apolhunl is ifEV-ER the word Used sitnpft/ to ex-
press the taking of lifV That may be (often is, no doulit)
fieecsmri/// implied; but that is quite another thing. It is
never once translated "kill" in our version, only once (in
the middle) '' die," where " perish " would be better (John
xviii. 14), and is actually i)ut alongside of kill hi the same
sentence to convey a ditferent thought (John x. ID). The
more aiiy^one will study the Scripture use of the words, the
more he will be convinced that the very opposite of Mr.
Mhfton's jassertion is the truth, and that the decisive word
to conve^ the annihilationist meanhig is the very word that 4
the Loi,-d n-jects, and deliberately rejects, after having used it
in the bi*gi„„ing of the very sentence from which He rejects
it at the end. '
I close ih Mv. Minton's own words that " it would really i
seofn as if the force of demonstration could no further go."
We may pass on then to Mr. Hastings' next class of
. texts: : ' : , ,
' "4. They shall be cut off." '
. AH that I've quotes hi this way is from the Old Testament,
an<l refers, as the <]uotations themselves prove, to the extir-
pation of the wicked out 0/ the earth simply, without in-
timating their after-condition. Thus Psa. xxxvii., speakin»r
of millennial days : " for evil doers shall Jie cut off; but those
that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the earth."
Again, Nal.mn i. ir>: " () Judah. . . the wicked shall no
more p<iM thromjh thre : he is utterly cut off.'' Or again,
Prov. ii. '11: "But the wicked shall be cut o& fm,u the
earthy a>id the transgressors shall be rooted out of it:'
There are few more frequent causes of mistake with that
class of annihilationists tp which Hastings, Miles (4rant,
Blain, and Roberts, among others, belong, than this con-
f(Minding of the destruction of ihe wicked out of the earth
|)Ut
212 FACTS AXi> TUEORIES AS TO A FUTUUE STATE.
in order to the great predictc'<l l)l».'ssing for it with the eter-
nal judgment when the earth and heavens flee away. They
believe. in no heavenly portion of the saints, nothing more
than a sort of " heavenly eoiuUtion '' upon earth. For then>
conscfpienriy destruction out. of the earth is apparently in-
distingniishable from final judgment. We shall have to
consider the difference hereafter, hut the passages quoted
speak for themselves.
The same remarks apply to his sixth class : —
" 6. They shall bo consumed."
Take Zeph. i. 2, .i, for example : " T will utterly consume
• all things_/;y»yt offh,' Inwf, saith the Lord. I will consume
man and beast; I will consume th(^ fowls of heaven, and the
^ fishes of the sea, and the stumbling blocks with the wicked
and I will cut off man from oj^f the laml, saith the Lord."
' So Psa.' civ. ^) : " Let the sinners be consumed out of the
earth, and let the wicked be no more." These are some of
Mr. Hastings' own texts adduced for the annihilation of the
wicked ! The cause must be weak that rcrjuires such argu-
ments.
Mr Hastings' next three heads I must leave for after con-
sideration. They are these :—
"7. The agent of punishment shall be fire an d<« brimstone.
^' ^. They shall be burned ui> root and branch.
"9. Their punishment shall take place, not at death, but
at the coming of Christ"
To the tenth again the same remarks apply. It is all the
earthly judgnipnt \Yhich pre(;edes millennial blessing. And
upon the principle of interpretation which must be adopted
in order to make texts such as these apply to the final ex-
tinction of the. wicked, I could not only pi'ove that Enoch
was annihilated (because he " vxs not ") but could find the
doctrine of annihilation in most books that were ever writ-
ten. According to Mr. fl.. if 1 but find Israel assured that
" they that war against thee shsill be as XOTHING, and as a
THING OF j^ouGHT," or " that they shall diligently consider
the place [of the wicked] afed it shall not kh;' I am en-
■•'i
A.TE.
:-h the eter-
-ay. They
hing more
For then>
•iirently in-
1 have to
jes quoted
7 consume
I consume
n, and the
le wicked,
tie Lord."
'Ut of the
some of
on of the
uch ariju-
after con-
'imst'one.
eath, but
is all the
g. And
adopted
final ex-
t Enoch
find the
.er writ-
red that
and as a
consider
[ am en-
■ )
:i
M
A FUKTHEK SUUVKY OF TUE SCUIPTUltK TERMS. 213
titled to put these expressions in small capit:ils, and consider
them conclusive proof that the wicked sire annihilated I
Once more I ask, what can I think of such arguments as
these, or of the cause that needs them ?
jVfr. Blain adds to these quotations :—
11. "Slay, slain, kill." All his texts as us'ual applying to
earthly j\idgm^t8'.' t
12. "Blot out." Here he quotes Psa. Ixix. 28, which is
earthly judgment, and Rev. iii. 5, which has roference to the
peculiar case of those in Sardis who had " a name to live '
on earth, showing'that it applies to the projeftsio/t. of eternal
life. Man had, as it were, written those names in the book
,of life. Christ would blot them out, where it was only
that. What eternallife is we bave already seen.
13. "Hewn down." Here be quotes ^Nlatt. iii. 10; vii.
19. But compare as to the foreo of the expression Dan. iv.
14 : it does not at all imply even the taking away of natural
life. Hi*! argument about the fire we may see th(; force of
by and by ; but certainly if " hewn down " itself signifies
the extinction of natural life, t^iere would be little cause to
dread the "<fire " fiftcnnards.
14. '* Lose life." These texts have been" already con.
s^dered. • t :>
"End." Mr. B. remarks, "If the wicked are immortal,
they have //o 6«r?, and this language is absurd." Rut of
what then, or of whom, is "everlasting life " (according to
Rom. vi. 22) " the end " ? If everla.sting life be an end in
any way, whether of a saint or of his works, then " end "is not
necessarily cessation of existence. A man's final estate is
his end, and the end of the wicked As " destnu^tion " ; InU
a:nnihilation it is not.
As to Rsa. vii. 0, '• O let the wickedness of the wicked
come to an'end ! '* it is the groan of a soul feeling the stroufr
hand of oppression, and has no reference Jo eternal judg-
ment.' ■ ./'''','
Mr. Blain's following texts (except one) have all reference
to that clearing out of evil from th« earth, which he every-
ill
i! i ^
■j
214 FACTS AND THEOIIIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
where seetns to overlook. Yet it is a most real thing, and
figures largely in thp>'or<l of prophecy, as what is to take
place at the coming of the Lord, before the earth shall have
its blessing under the dominion of the Prince of peace.
As to the iw^jy tliese texts are <|Uoted I have the same
prcjtest to make m general, as I had with regard to Mr.
Con.stal)le\s (piotations before. The citations are loose, ran-
<l!)m and careless.' They are heaped upon one another, as
if to make imj)ression by theic numbers, And overwhelm the
juilgment, rather than invite ins])ection. Words and
phrases are taken from their context, an'l assorted in the
• fashion of a eoncordj^ce, with no discrimination of the texts
in which they are found. The examination^' of them leaves
the impi*ession of unmistakable carelessnesH in the use of
Scripture, an«l a most thorough trill to jjush t(,> the utmost
every expression that in the Ica.st may seem to favor their
doctrine. Against it I appeal to the ve,iy texti* they have
cited. They need but a little i)atient Qxamination, with sin--
gleness of purpose afid Waiting upon God, to give true 'and
imambiguous testimony as the word of the blcssc'd God
who cannot lie, cannot fill the soul that looks in faith to
Ilim. . - .
N«»TK. — Jlessis. CoMsLabIc and Wliitr both jh-pss an argumpnt beip from
certain i»as.sai;e.s in Plato's PIwimIo in wiiich somoof tin- Nt'W 'ffsl'titnent
words are used by him to give tlie idea of tlie literal destructi«)n or " tx-
tiiii'tion of thu nDitl.'' liiil Plato's use of tln' wonls carwMil, avail to set
aside a use of them, j»rove<i as we have proveil ii from the New Testa-
ment itself. .Si)ite of their protest, it is well known tlial many words
attain a moral or spiritual sit,rnificance in Scripture, which will be
vainly, souizht for in classieal' Greek. They will hardly deny this, as it
tan so easily bejtroved. Tha't Plato should use some of these words
therefore, in a physical sense, while Scripture uses them in a spiritual,
is no -rVreat. cause of wonderment. Let them meet frankly the ar<,'ument
from Scripture, and riot settle the question by appeal to the terms of
Greek [dulosophy.
X.:'
THE PROVISIONAL CHARACTER OP DEATH. 215
CHAPTER XXII.
,'v
1,
THE PROVISIONAL CHARACTER OF DEATH.
We now come to look at a point of great iiiiportance in
raiiiiy respects, and which has been in<lee<l already spoken
of, but not fully proved or dwelt upon as it deserves. I
mean the provisional and temporary character of the first
death. |l ^'
We have already argujd that the penalty attaching to the
eating of the forbidden tree was simply this, and did not at
all (as so many beside Mr. Constable assume) include in it
" all that God purposed to inflict upon Adam and his pos-
terity in case of transgression " ! Where is the least warrant
for this? The actual result to us of that primal sin we
have had the apostle state to us, and that is (so far as in-
fliction from God is concerned) physical death as His stamp
upon a fallen condition, His judgment of a race corrupted
from its beginning.
Herein lay of course the possibility, nay, probability, of a
final sentence. But God is in no haste with judgment ; and
this was the beginning of tlie world's history, not the close
of it. Who, save for the need of making a system, could
imagine the beneficent Creator of man, at once, and for the
personal ottence of our first parents, adjudging all their de-
scendants to eternal death i Scripture at any rate has naught
of it, and we are seeking to follow Scripture in its simplest
^cts and t^tutements.
It may be urged, however, that death followed as one of
these facts and that that shows that Adam's posterity shared
in Adam's judgment;
But that is a very different thing, as a little consideration
will assure us. Death was indeed God's judgment upon the
race as vitiated and corrupt, but — inasmuph as it was cor-
rupted by another's sin and not its own, — a judgment which
t f
if
210 FA( TS AN'l) THEOIUKS AS TO A PiltUKE STATE.
was :i iiiorcifu; diseiplim. for it, :i witness to the fallen crea-
ting, of its own condition, an appeal to it by its own frailty
an.l hdplossncss to Io,,k liij^her than itself for hclil, an ad
monition so to nuinln'r its days that its heart might be
applied to wisdom. What should we do without the'thorns
and thistles which grow ouX of the ground cursed for man's
sake y AVhat should we do without the need of the sweat
of the brow ? What, without the ministry of death itself?
Surely a blessing is in this curse ; it is an evil which is good ;
the discipline of the Father of spirits for our profit, chasten-
ing of a holy han.l that we may be partakers of His holiness,
and in its own nature contrasted with that final sentence
which is " Depart from me, ye cursed." The first death and
the second death are contrasts and not'th&same.
Such is its nature, if we consider it as the fruit simply of
Adam's sin, its legacy to his descendants. It was the wise
and tender foresight of Ilira who saw the floodgates of evil
pierced, and the awful outburst of iniquity^, before it came,
and ordained this as its corrective, as 0ne who did not
intend to give up Ilis creatures to it, to perish through help-
lessness alone. If by one man sin wais entering into the
world, then "death by sin" was the Divine ordinance..
And rigiit and good every prodigal proelaims it whom the
j>ressure of hunger causes to think pf a,Father's house :— •
every psalmist that ever M'as, witli Israel's sweet Psalmist
when he owns "Before I was.aftticted I went astray, but
no\v I have kept Thy words." .^
This is deatli as an appendage to a fallen condition; but
if wo len it there, there would be manifest incongruity with
mueli of Sci-i].ture and of fact as well. In order To hav^e the
( whole statement and the full harmonious,. trut>, we must
look further. We must distinguish between death as we
should rightly consider it, as introduced into the world
through anot/ier^s sin, and, on the otl>er hand, as brought
upon us through our own personal transgressions, The
Old Testament iff ful l of thi s lasll i ubject, which Is found
also m the New. At Corinth, where thev were profonin-
- .J-:
THE PIIOVISIONAL CUAirAOTEK OP DKATH.
217
the Lord's supper, many were weak and' sickly among them,
and many slept (1 Cor. xi. 30). And the apostle John tells
us of a " sin unto death" for which h^ does not say that oni^
should pray (I John v. 16).
But the Old Testament^jJ is that insists ever upon death
as the penalty of j)ersonai transgression, and this is just
what the text means on all sides so little understood, " the
soul that sinneth it shall die." Even this is not the Htjeo)id
death, which the Old Testament knowf^jiothing of. It is a
sinner dying in his sins and under judgment, and which
leaves its boding shadow upon the future beyond <leath.
But we must reserve this subject for another chapter.
Death is then a provisional, not a final, sentence. It is a
corrective discipline from the Father of spirits in view of
the entrance of sin into the world. It is in its own niature
temporary and to pass away, as Scripture declares it will.
,A8 the separation of soul ami body, it is a necessary hin-
drance to the full blessing of the righteous, and a hindrance
also to the full judgmemot the wicked. Fi>j- tlic righteous
and for the wicked alike, although with opposite effect, it is
at the resurrection finally done away. ,
Let us look at some Scriptures which in this way get their
proper significanci^, and in this way only.
First, the Lord's answer to the Sadducees touchitig the
resurrection (Luke xx. 27-38). These Sadducees were con-
sistent in then* unbelief, and, as they denied resurrection,
they denied the^ existence also of the spirit in tlie separate
state ; an<l it^is this last that the Lord takes up and proves,
in order by it to prove the resurr«t?lion.
God says at the bush, '* I am the God of AbrahaMi, and
the God of Isaac, and the Go<l of Jacob." Buti,JpWe were
then in that relationship to them, they must be existent for
Ilim t<» be so. lie c«mld not be the God of the Jcnd (m
the Sadducee sense «»f death, the non-existent), they must be
in some sensfc alive, alive to IHm^ and so they are.
But then this apparently proves but a s'eparate existence
of the spirit in <ieath, and that has ever been the ditficuky
;5»
218
FACTS AND TlIKOUlfia AS lO A l^UTUllE STATE.
about it. How does proving the existence of Abraham^
Isaac and Jacob in the soparato state. prpvc resurreaioii ?'
. Very simply after all. For what is «k>jHh upon this view
of it''? Ma'hifestly the infringement of God's creative plan.
He had not made man a spirit merely, but a »[>'mt k^toilied.
A spirit <?wembbdied could not be God's intentid^^^pr His
gifts and calling are without repentance. The bo^j/ tliere-
Jbre miiat rise again, *° • .
And this is no forced argument. I doubt not it was- one
well understood in that day, when men' wore accustomed
to a sort of reasoning which the clear light of the New Te»-~
tament (wherein life and incorruptionl^^ye been brought
to light) has set aside as unnecessary ti^fipso who have it.
But that this is no forced argumeiitwe have the best possi-
ble evidence ; for it is 3Ir. Constable's own condusim (per-
feet Sadducee as he is as to the separate stat/6)~krto Vhat
the separate existence of the spirit might imply. We have
(luoted his words already, but will cite them again to show
how he considers this linked by Implication witli resurrectit^n
of the dead. "If- the first death." he says, "is consis^enjb
with man's in fact not dying, but continuing to live in regard
to his most important part, whose surniiud mw, a^f^n he
supposed to imply the restoration of the hoih/ to llfi^' etc.
That is what it really does, and we may well" belie/e it no
forced or unnatural conclusion, ^^:hon we find fro^ such a
quarter so decided a testimony as to its n.itunilne/s.
Take an illustration from a flua before our iyos. The
preservation of the Jews as a nation after ni'ar ei«rhteen
hundred years of dispersion into all lands is one of the
standing miracles whereby God rebukes the unbeUef of His '
prophetftj word. But what does it argue to those who be-
lieve m His hand as guidmg surely and not doubtfully, all
things according to His resistless counsels ? If we must
say, this is the finger of God, to what does it point ? Surely
to that 7iat tonal resurrection from the dead, which yet in
His own time He will accomplish. This is the simple- .
prompt conclusion of faith. It may serve to illustrate the
THE PROVISIONAL CHARACtEH OF DEAXn.
2id
^
(•onnoction of thoupfht between the belief in tlie Heparate
spirit and tbe resurrection of the body.
And >ve may note tliat the insi)ired hiHtorian seems in
some way to connect them, when, l*aid having ])roclaimed
himself in the council a Pharisee and the son of a Pharisee,
he a<ld8 in explanation : " for the Sadducees say that there is
no resurrection^ neither angel, nor sinrit ; but the Pharisees
confess both."
But we must not forget that there is another way in which
the words of our Lord are attempted to be explained. In-
deed, we have already hcanl Mr. Roberts upon the subject.
Let us now listen to Mi*. Dobney.-. He has taken particular
iiains to establish the sense in which the passage is to bo
understood. He says of the explanation of it in the way we
have given : ''With us it would be a striking and satisfac-
tory [H-oof of a continuance of conscious existertce after
.death — but no proof whatever of d resurrect io)i ; and yet it
is to prove this last exclusiveli/ that our Lord, who couM
not have reasoned inaccurately or sophistically, adibices it.'.'
He paraphrases therefore the Lord's argument thus :-r-
" (iod is not the God of the dead [utterly and etoruiilly
p(>ri.shed, which was the sense iu which the Sadducees used it,
with wliohl He was disputing] but of the living.
" But he calls himself the God of the Patriarchs.
•' Therefore those still live — ;or will live again [which is the
jg with Him to whom the future is the present, and who
things that are not, bnt shall be, as though they already
same tlii
culls the
were].
" But then, as already intimated, since it was a resurrniion oar '
Ldrd undertook to establish, which He establishes only by jnov-
ing a lift', after death, tlie life which >carries with it a pi'oof <n'
resurrection must either be itself identical therewith, or else do-
pendent thereupon. " . .
The patriarchs " live" then in the purpose o|^ God as to
Ihem, not actually, but God caljing that which is not :i ;
th ou gh it w ere — th at is how Mr. D obn oy unde rs ta nds it.
]>ut then, when God says, "I am, the God of Abra.iain,'
the irvHcnt actHally is everything/. If otherwise, then us
■. ^ ' ■•■ ■■.'.■.'■ ■' ■■ ■
» '■".'*. ■-'■''■■:..'.'.'■■ ■ - • - ■ ■ :■■.-■■
,7. "^
X
'f.r
>*■
~\
220
F.VcrS AND Tilt'OIUKS AS TO A FUTUKK STATE.
\,
!J!lTr!^'^'!;r"'"'''^ '" '''^"'^ «"'"'«<'ience, no less
n.an thof.,t,.ns<Ue m.^ht bo AlM-.il.a.n's (Jo.l i„ that .....so
arm ihi rcMiim-ction !,♦. involvcl at all.
i;... il is no, ,n.. ,|,a,,in ,1.. u ay Air. Dolnu-y .uHlor-
staii.i. it, C.xl euILs the tl.i„i..s (hat aro not as though thov
wtM-o. In th.. passage ho i^uotvs, (Jo.l doos h.doecl si.oak
,. oMho -many nations "of which Ho haVl n.a.ie Abraham
atho^v.th <hvine certainty, as being, although they were
notyef>. But He does not speak of their ;,/r..>,^ existence.
t! r r;r/"? '■'"'• ^^ "^ ^^^"'^ not..ssert,"I«m'
the Go<l ol Abraham " as a matter of ^>resent relationship
^ui,en none o.v.stcl. To .say so is to speak deceitjfully fo/
HniL . I a.n the Cio<l of 41irahan. " to human ea.\{ nece.s.
sanly „.forrea what C4oa >^ then at the time nXpoke
Nor was there here prophecy at all ; no announcemene of
the future; nothmg tha^ could involve the thought 6f the
tuture (,od could no more say He was the God of Abra-
ham wlule there was no Abraham to be God to, than He could
' T/J "" '■?':;;"^ ''"' ^^'•^' ^^ '•'''"''^"^l y^^^^^ ^>«fo^e ^^ resur.
ect.on.. . I ho Lord which Is. and which was, and which is
l^^T^r ";\'"=^"''-^^'^« ''^'^^•''^" the ,,resent and the future,
H hu-h Mi. Dobney wouM confo.md. JJut God says, " I wil
be a.s well a.s •' I am, ' a.id in this distinguishes, that we
•nay u.iderstand Hini ; binding Himself to Ihe foL of hnl
;-ms|>eech which Ho adopts; speaking like one of our-
^ohcs however httle He bo that, in.stead of hiding Himself
lioni us i„ His own perfeetion.s. ' o ""useii
-I ..^ the God of Abi-aham" then involved the tact of
Ab^im s ex.ste,i..o whei. He spoke. He oouM not be the
^^od of o.ie who had no existence, could not l,e in relatioii-
-up o a nonentity, co..hl not be (in the Sadducees' thought
.d wiiut the dead were) '' the God of the dead." -The ^,--
(^' Mr r't1f ^r '" '" "^'^ ""^'^^^^"^ partimplied
(^3Ii., Constable allows) '^ the restoration of the body to
Deatiii ,s then in its own nattire temporary. As the de
rang^ndit of God|ti^ of man in his cLior^ ^
>ti^
THE PUOVIHIONAL CllAKAi TEK OF DEATH.
221
of necessity be set aside. It is the provisional apjiendage
of a scene into whi<;b sin has entere<l, but where (iod's
iiKMcy also aboiindH. In its nature it (Hiuld not l)e Hnal.
hi /act it is to be done nway.
Death does uoteiiter then into tliey/y««/ judgment- That
is expressly stated to bo " after death.'' "It is appointed
unto men ONCE to die, but aftku this the Jm/f/nifinty %,
There are men we wot of who say it is appointed u^ito men
nrice t*o die, — that the second death is of the same nature as
the first, — and that death thus /.s the judgment. Let us ex-
amine carefully tht'u this text also. ° '
There is otu' frjiiitful cause of misapprehension of it on all
sides. The sentence produced is not understood to be, what
ii|yon the lace of it it is, part of a larger sentence in which
the portion of the saved 'm (listin'/nis/h'J frohi fhe i/fneral
lot of men: " Xow once in the end,of the world hath He
[Christ] appeared, to put away sin»bv the sacrifice of Him-
self An<l AS it is appointed unto men once to die, but after
this the judgment, so Christ was once offered to bear the
sins of many; and unto them that look for Ilim shall He ap-
pear the second time without sin unto salvation '* (Heb. ix.
26-2H). : ^- , /.-. ,,.■
There is a manifest contrast here— a designed one. The
express object of the passage is to display the etticacy of the
work of Christ. He had anj>eared to j)ut away sin by His
sacrifice. Sin had Ijrought in death, had created a neces-
sity of judgment. How then did Christ's work meet those
effects of sin for those who believed? Were death and
judgment their common jmrtion still? Alas; the general
answer has been ui the afHnnative, and thus the meaning
has been almost taken away from this pregnant and wonder-
ful statement. Men say still, with the woman of Tekoa of
old, " We must na^fh die," and as for judgment, to deny
that a saint shall be judged Would be by the mass considered
h e r e sy, if jt w e re iiot lunacy. Let us seek to get '' full as-
surance of understanding" as to this.
First, as to death, is it a " must needs "that the believer
f^;
A'U. .
<»
cO
<A
.
222 PACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
die? Did Enoch die? did Elijah? Will the saints that
are "alive and remain un to, tU<e coming of the Lord"?
" We shall noi all sleep," says the apostle, " but we shall all
be changed." Thus death, with the apostle, is no necessity
for the believer. We may die, liot innst. We may meet
it as the provideiftial dispeii|ation of an infinitely wise
->§-^^^'~""^*.^^^'''^*^'' "^* ^^ penalty, nor necessarily even as
judgment, in that sense in which tlie Father jiulgeth His own
children.* It is '' to depart and be with Christ, which is
far better,"— to be "absent from the bqdy and liresent with
^ the Lord." Thus has Christ " abolished deatli, and brought
life and incorruption to light by the gospel."
This, let me trust, is simple, though only to the one wlio
refuses the unbelief of the Sadducees as.to death. If it be
nonentity, the blotting out of existence, no fair words about
it will ever make it other than it is confessedly to Mr. Consta-
ble. But we have not now to do with him. In Scripture
and for faith (but oh how little alas, faith is with ns) death
is no more the portion of the saint. It is abolished. And,
if alive and remaining to that coming of the Lord for wliich
\WB are taught daily to wait, shall never even "sleep" at
all. ; ^
And notv as to judgment after death. The plain unequiv
. ocal statement of our Lord has been obscured to us by an
unhappy translation; but there is no question as to the
simple fact, that in John v. 24-29 tKe word used both for
"condemnation" and " damnation " is the simple word for
"ju(|gment." Alford's and the Bible Union revisions both
• give "he that heareth ray voice, and b<|}ieveth on llim that
sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into Jad^j.
m€?it"; and again, " they that have done evil unto the res-
urrection of Judf/metit.^'
—The common thought is, "we shall have to come into
judgment, but we hope not to be condemned^ The Scrip-
~^^^^^*^^^^L^L!^'i^i^^*^^^_^ best came into judg-
* For of course I do n(,t spoak of sucli caMvs aTthi^o of ti.o Corinth-
mns . or of a " sin unfo d o nfli."
-^
THE PUOVISION.VL GHARACTEU QF DEATH.
228
ment, we could not but be condemned. Hear the Psalmist
express it when as a servant of the Lord he yet pleads :
,,*' Enter Mo« into judgment with Thy servant, O Lord ; for
■^ in Thy sight shall Ko flesh living be justified" (Psa.
cxiiii. 2).
And that this is the fact Scripture everywhere beats wit-
ness. The solemn final scene, as Rev. xx. pictures ^t, before
the great white throne, we shall look at in detail at a future
time. But' the second chapter of Romans is sufficiently
plain as to the issue of judgment, for those .who come into
it. Let us look briefly at the apostle'* M'ords.
Mark then, in the first place, it is " the day when God
shall judge the secrets of rrien by Jesus Christ " (ver. 16).
The principle, too, of the jtidgment is clearly stated. God
" will render to every man according to his deeds ; to them*
who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and
honor and immortality (incorruption) eternal life : but unto
them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but
obey;Unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and
anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew
first and also of the Gentile; but glory, honor and peace to
every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also
to the Gentile : for there is no respect of persons with God.^*
These are the principles of judgment ; what is the actual
result ? Who of all the sons of men can advance his claim
to eternal life upon this ground, before a holy and heart-
searching God ? The issue is this : —
"For as many as have sinned without law " — and these
are the least guilty and the least responsible — "shall also
I'KRISH without law; and as many as have sinned in the law
shall be judgei) hy the law." Does anyone think he can
escape, when judged by the laAV ? The apostle's words
elsewhere exclude absolutely so vain a hope. " For as many
as,.are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is
wi^itten, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things
written in the book of the law to do them" (Gal. iii. 10).
This then is the law's judgment ; and this the patient con-
■/
224 FACrs AM) THKOHIKS AS TO A FL'TUJiE STATK.
tiniiance in well doing which the law requires. Judged
then hy this nUe, who can escape? Xot one, assuredly.
As it is written again: " AVhatsoever tlic law saith. it saith
to them that are under the law: that every moiith may
he stopped, and all TitE wokli» hecome guilty before
God" (Rom. iii. 10). :
If then (4od enters into judgment witli a saint and servant
of His,o'.vn. he cannot l)e justihed. The ()ld Testament
and the Xew unite in this assurance. And (Tod's way of
dehveran<*e from condemnation is hy deliverance from the
judgment that would involve it. The believer does not
" come into judgment "' : the '' resurrection of judgment " is
the portion of the wicked alone.
Let any one consider, Avith the fifteenth eliapter of the
first epistle to the Corinthians, and the fourth of the first of
Thessalonians, betbre his eyes, the order and connection of
what is detailed there, and he will see how clearly and sat-
isfactorily Scripture deals_ with this question. When •' the
Lord Himself sha-ll <lescend from heaven with a shout," not
yet visible to men, as we shall see directly. •' first the dead in
Christ shall rise." They rise - in power,'' " in incorruption,"
"in ghu-y," ''in the image of the Heavenly '
,\
Himself Could there be a question of trying (bi- tht^lAlife
these perfected and glorious saints? They have Keen
-of Christ
already, for a longer hr shorter time, every one of them
absent from the body. arKl present with the Lord*. Can it
, be now a question of whether they had title to the Ijlessed
place they havVbeen in ? ^Assuredly it win never be : the
case has been abundantly settled l>efore this. ' And can it be
other for those who, remaining alive, without dying change
their mortality for immortality, and are caught uj) with the
risen saints in one jgorious company, "to meet the Lord- in
the air," and " bcforever with the Lord" ?
It is fffler this that the Lord apjjcars to judgment, for we
are assured that " when Christ (who is our life) shall appear,
then shall we also appear with Him in glory "' (Col. iii. 3).
And not tiir after this is there judgment, personal judgment.
■ i5?^^TT3,'^i:.Ts^r ■
THE PKOVISIONAL CIl'vKACTEE OF DEATH.
2-25
<' He shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing
and His kingdom.'
Details as? to the judgment wpl come afterwards. It is
very evident there, is hero no putting upon trial to see who
they are, and whether worthy or nftt to enter into life.
Christ's call, which makes no mistake, summons forth His
saints to meet Him. Not one is forgotten; not one un^
known. Blessed be His name ! it could not be. And thus
the whole matter is definitely settled, and can never come
up again.
That we should give account of ourselves to God, is
another matter, and should not bo confounded with this. As
a question of reward, we shall receive for the deeds done in
the body, and "suffer loss " or find gracious recompense ac-
cordingly. That is n^t denied but affirmed. But we are
not judged according to our works: we do not come into
judgment, if our works do. There is a very manifest dis-
tinction between these things. .
. > Having seen then the Scripture testimony as to death and
judgment, let us return to look at these as the portiQn of
men, from which Chnist's work delivers His own. *'It is
appointed uiAo men once to die, but after this the judg-
ment." For the saint on the other hand, " Christ was once
offered, to bear the sins of many, and unto them that look
for Him shall He appear without sin,"— or rather "apart
from sin,'' as having no more to settle that question —
" apart from sin unto salvation." '
''Once death," then, arid '' aj'ter this, judgment " is the
lot of the unsaved. How clear this makes the distinction be-
tween the two ! Death temporary and to ijive place to judg-
ment, which is not in death but afterwards. Thus Scripture.
How feeble then again .all Mr. Constable's arguments as to
the primarj*ense of words, and that death and nothing but^
death in its primary sense is the final judgment! '"
Twice
death, in effect, is his argument : once before, and then again
in the judgment. , Once death, says Scripture, but after this
the judgment. '''^That judgment is indeed the second de a th .
220
FACT8 A>fD THKOKIKS AS TO A FmuUE STATE.
? death m ,vh.ch they ,vl,o suffer it al,o never 1? H J
vam to dispute the unspeakably solemu factT ' "^
. • CHAPTER xxni.
. , ^ . . - . . • ■ - ■.-.•■■■-
7 : - THE JTlXISTUr OP DEATH
If death has then the place which we have seen it ha« it
aeatd , naj.itis rather ust what wc shnnl.l i.. •
,to «pect, that Go,l woul.i' take up ^^^01 of it a , 'TT
condemnation of »a„ ,W,ieh it i^Z^^^-^^
upon the hearts and consciences of men ,, 1 T ™
g«i«ve.ay. W.shou.d cx;:trn," r/ootrtrat
Thfl™r:f7he;:;^\i:L^^'T;'''' -^-^e nas.done. '
is that it was a " atL^^ii^So?:^^,!,:""™;""''-/" --
of condemnation.'.' , «' aeatli, —a ramisfration
tla^htVa'lctri'sfr Z'' •V'""™'->-.''P-tua.
and therefore ZZ Xu tteZt a r'"'' '"'T"' '
leardt, of the very rrreatP f voV t ' 'esson, when .
of the inade^uaey^ir;::.! ™^^,^;>^ a .a.^^^^^
:^ t:rstaEiS""'""%" » — " -^^"^
that the death it sneik, or " n \ T" '™ "'"'«■•«••""'
di e "-i s notthe ^ !! l^ .".^ !'"• "'"' ^''^^^inneth ■? sh all
^
^c^tMnr.voa}ed.econd death, but "aeath
THE MINISTRY OF DEAltL.
227*
of the
secornl
dies*'?
,How
bas, it
>n of.
eason
>fthe .
home
t and
, that ;
tself, •
>e ^n .^
-\.
in its ordinary Heuse. Thi« once established Batisfactonly.
wc shall find the Old Testament in a now Ught, and the
perieet Helf-consiste.u^- of tr.uh everywhere m its utter-
*° And thi; will be established, as soon it is seen, what should
be manifest as to the holy law of the unchang.'able God, ^
-that the obedience it required was absolute, perfect obedi-
ence, and nothing short. This the Nej Testament, no les.
than the Old, abundantly declares. We have already had
the apostle's statement as to this, which shows, that; Chris-
tianity itself also ha<l not modified the law's reqmren^nts.
It is the <teat apostle of the Gentiles, the man who, if any
did, upde'i-stood God'^ grace in the gospel, who assures^us
that "as many as are ol' the works of the law are under the ,
curse- for it is written. Cursed is every one that contmueth .
not in aU things that are written in the book of .'the law' to
do them " (Gal. iii. 10). It is again the apostle who is con-
sidered by many (however improperly) the apostle ot law,
who unites with Paul in this testimony, that "whosoever
shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one pomt, he is
guilty of all" (James ii. 10). Unswerving, pertect obedi-
ence was therefore* that required by the law. .
To this, however, may be thought opposed ^e whole sys-
tem of appointed sacrifices and the forgiveness that m this
' way the very law itself proclaimed. But the objection
' would apply in that case to the apostles' teaching, who cer.
tainly were not ignorant of so plain a fact. We must take
it up, however, a little particularly, and try to show the
■ consistency of these two things.
There were,' as all wiH easily remember, tioo givmgs ot
the law. The first time (which we shall find as history in
Aodus xix.-xxiv.) it wasp»/-6 law,- with no whispered ^ord
even of mfercy,— no provision for failure or for sin. - Moses
-i then called up into the Mount to receive from God's
' hand the tables of stone " written with the finger of God."
There, in the Mount, he does indeed se-e the pattern of
other and of hsavi^ly things, ft»r God would show us th a t
'■• ^
:f.
228
PACTS AN^D THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
,^
merijy is already in His heart, as it surely is. But na wofd
of this is yet npokoii to t;he people, and as actual institution
fiiids no i»laco till the aovonant of tlie law as first given is
transjrio.ssed and set aside. As far as the people is con-
. cerned, it is all as yet law pure and simple. Under this ,
they fail utterly, turning their deliverer-God, " their glory, " ~
into the similitude ot an ox that eateth grass.' The tables
of the covenant are broken^ judgment is executed on the
guilty pe6ple ; and all, on this ground, is over forever (ch. '
xxxii.). j^\::.^. _ :, [■_ ;.-■ ..■■■_ j ..:._•■'.■■:■/ / '. '^'^ . : ■■■
But the blessed God has still resources in Himself, and
again He takes up the peoj)le. Again the law is given, word
for word the §ame, and not ajo^ abated; for the hqiiness '
of God's nature can know, no change. But there 'is this •
difference, and it is characteristic: it is now witten hij the ' ,
hand of th^ mediator (xxxiy. 28), and not l)y God Hinlself.
The law- is in the hands of the mediator, and nox^ mc hear
the new glad tones oflong-sufferilig goodness apd mercy.-
Jehovah declares Himself as He did not before. His_/
glory shines out as not yet it had. He is "the L6rd, the
Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering and abun^
dant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands,
forgiving iniguity and transgression and sin." This is new
ground; and yet, not altogether new, nor grace unmixed.
He is still the I^awgiver, still in a covenant of works w4th
His people :— " and that will by no means clear the fjuilty:' '
This is the new basis upon which everything is now to rest. i
It Is law, but it is not pure law. It is law in a mediator's
hand, ministered in mercy, yet not lessening its requirement :
ai> appai'ent contradiction, and in reality two principles
united which cannot unite reallyin the justification of man.
God says so : He cannot dear^cmhot justify ; and it is of
tfie law thus given,.the second time and, not the firgt, that
the apostle speaks when he calls the law "written and en.
graven in stones," " the ministration of death" and "the
-mmi s tfatioD of condemnation " (2 Cor. iii. 7 ,9). i t is of
this law in .the hand of the mediator, that he says again.
THE UINISTRTt OF DEATH.'
229
.A« martya- are of tte works of the law are under the
T/we look utfhe scene ae»cril.ea.i„ tl.e book of ExoUus
- T'^^iv ) we shultWuJ tlml (io,l really gave w.tne^s at
<""" ' v™! Hrive ir^f its trufe character, although n,
,he very t.me^He g»> «";«'_ eharacteristic of pid Tes-
rer:lS„%rhen Mo,e. the r,^;J^^^
■^. Tesmnent (lispensauofi,- ^"^^^ ^^;^\ ^11.! He said,
fm- there shall po man see me, and, live. An ,
The^tat ace V me, and thou Shalt stand «P-;;-^ *
„7 U sha 1 come to pas^ while my glory passethhy, that
and It shall comi, i i _ j. ^,^(,g ^.,ti,
I will put thee m a c eft .<f the rock, a ^^
• 't:Uhr::tthe>sttUneofthegi™^^^^^^
-: ^i-rr;rwS^^e.e^-
human eyes^notyetahetobehom^^^^^^
;^rs'ra^^"ra:'C— .rof t..t d.^^^^^^^^^^^
-^^;;;:t-Sdr^=c^<'T-y,u
watir^vell hefore the holiest deel.r^ t^ w^ -
the holiest was not ^^V"*" . ,1 hrvtnhmed, came
4f
230
PACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
* mail turneth from his wickedness, and doeth that which is
hiwful and riglit, lie sJiall save his soul alive" (Ezck. xviii.
27). Hut who ever did what was lawful, as measured by a
law, to break one qomniandnient of which was to be " guilty
of all" y Who ever broke off his sins so as to be fit for
the presence of a " holy, holy^ holy " God ? Never one :
not one. "There is none righteous, no, not one" wa^ the
law's verdict; " there is none that doeth good, no, not one."
And the veil hung before God's presence unlifted, save as
once a year the typical l>lood was put upon the mercy-seat ;
and then it dropped again, impenetrable as ever, for '• the
blood of bulls and goats could not take away sin."
Thus, through all the old economy: until one day, marked
out from other days by a darkness such as never was; And
' when that passed, the darkness in which God dwelt had
also passed. "The veir of the temple was rent in the
midst." .
God was no more "in the, darkness " ; He was " in the
light " (1 Kings viii. 12; 1 John i. 7). i
The way into God's presence was no more barred up :
Christ was " the Way " (John xiv. 6).
And instead of, as heretofore, One who could not 'clear
the guilty, there was revealed the glory of divine grace,
juHtifi/iufj the uiujodly {Uom.'w.b), ' '
One would gladly enlarge upon this unspeakable loving-
kindness ;— would gladly apply this healing assurance to any
soul conscious of the double character of evil attaching to'
man. He is " ungodly " ; true, but he is more, much more,
than that : he is " without strength " also. Christ died for
him as having that character (Rom. v. 6). As having it, he
is welcome at once to the blood which cleanses from sin,
and the grace which strengthens and enables for holiness.'
But our subject is now the character of the law rather: let
us turn back to consider what this involves as to the Old
Testament.
*■ . ■
God was, then, by a dispensation of law, shuttin^^
man up
to mercy. He was running the plough-share into the soil
i-
»
Tllli MINISTHY O^"^ DEATH.
2ai
up:
' l^U a (or the seed of the I'ospel. He was not o}/ if
Snont constantly asserts thl8>8 the obj«et of the law^
The apostle speaks of it as ^hat all Christians were wdl
Ivarc of • ;' We km>w thaS what things soevev the law sa.th,
tt 'Ih to them thnt are\.ndc. the law, //«< e^u; ,.ou,k
,^:\. ....M ana all the woH.l ^'-o- ,?" r^^ "^
rnl" '. Uv the law.i8 the knowledge of sin. 1 he law
ILtl. wrath " "The law entered thaMhe offence mis;ht
rhtn.?-"iahcre had heenalaw givenWK.ehco,.l,l have
1 riife, verilv righteousness should-have been '-y Jh" »«;;
Rnrthe Scrii.nrc hath conel.ided (shut up together) all
^der sin . r the.promise l-V faith of Jesus Christ m.ght
be given to thetn that believe." I need not quote more
, '*' But'l'ow, if such was the scope and oHicct of the la.v -^f
God by it was seeking to produce conv.ol.on ot a smfnl and
helpless condition, and t« cast men thus upon H.s mcrcy^-
S simple that lie shouhV take up in it the - «"<".™'"2
oHhat death which had enterea in by sm, ai,d wh.ch was
constantly appealing to man in every possible way -the
brod seal o.' 'condemnation-wide as humanity-upon the
- fallen creature! How irresistible the c.,nvMc ,o,, of what
man was, and where he "was, in the eye of a holy God, ,f H^
2" Id cime in and say to him, meaning just what ,t would .
rneanwhen heard in connection with the first threatening of
ritr literally carried out, " the man that doeth these
thi^B shall /.<.•-■ in them," "the soul that sinneth^t shall
'''The strangeness of this interpretation to m>rrS just its
perfect consistency with the whole design »<1 •»-"2' "^^
the law. If no one under it ever escaped death Ov.th one
exception evidently on at^l.or g.o.,nd) people thmk .t im.
possL that death on. ;?^ai,.ry.^
meant. They
forget thiit no one cvor aM falfil ltKtl;at thieve
»:*•
was,,.,., righteous, no, not evenone. How; couid they th^
escape it ? And if God in the law were not jadgmg tor eter-
232 .. FACTS AND THEOUIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
. nity, but as a present thing, to cast men in the conviction of
their lost condition upon His mercy, how consistent with
this plan that He should make the judgment ui»on that con-
dition a thing a[)j)areiit to every one under it, instead of
^omething yet unseen, and which eternity alone should too
late reveal ! .
Had God said, as we have made Him i^ay, " the soul that
sinneth shall die the second death,^' they might have com-
forted themselves with the assurance that no one could know
much about that, and written placid lies upon the grave-
stones, an<:l lost the whole reality of the ruin they were in.
Doubtless many (lid do so in spite of all, for light never yet
opened eyes closed to it, but' still Go<l had bome witness, ,
none the less, if they rejected it as men still reject, that they
were fallen creatiires, and tcho had confirmed by their otra
act and deed the original sentepce under which they lay.
Every white hair in a man's head, every wrinkle in his brow,
was thus God's witness in a double way, a solemn aj)peal
which one would thint irresistible. Death was not that for
which man was cheated ; no, it was God " turning man to
destruction."' "Thou hast set our iniquities before Thee,
our secret sins in the light of Thy countenance. For all
our days are passed away in Thy wrath ; we spend our years
as a tale that is told.f . . So teach us to number our days,
that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom" (Psa. xc. 8
9,12). 'i" .■ .;■ : - ' - ^,
But not only in this way was man's lost corfdition mani-
fest, but the judgment of the law still left God free to the
grace which was under the veil, while yet the veil was not
removed. Had God said, " The soul that sinneth, it shall
die the second death,'' none could contc?st with Him the
justice of that sentence; butr^surely it would seem to bind_^
Him to eternal judgment, to universal justice, but divorced
from grace. As it was Hxi «lid not bind Himself so that to
the broken a nd contrite He'could not s how mercy, outside —
of law and its penalty altogether. It could do its work as
convicting man of sin, and on the ground of human effort and
■f ':•
THE MIKISTUY OF DEATIt.
•23H
f
'^' " . , ^.o uhiit him ui» in condemnation, bring
rn .::^:r::sC^.-, yit leave Hm in u,.t woH|
"'" ; 1 r '^vcinto which lh« full li;^ht yel l>a,i ...... u,.,l
|,„y„ .a th. S'^^ '" ,„„J^^ia„l„l [.■ .M.uM be free to exer-
„„uld not co,ne, to a "'"^J *'"| ^ <,o„,,i ;„ ^Uort
,.!8c where man's liopc was in Uis mercy, i-
He nlv l.an,l., aB to all working out of clam, upon God.
U co^d not tie Rod's hand, a, to mercy shown to man.
Is to th" '•"«» "'"^'f' *"* ""^ '"^^ ''""' realy speak of the ,
tweenWsa lnngwh^^^.,when ^^^^ ^^^^^^ and mother -
.Jw. hpart of the ten comnuinAinents. And in ueiu. ,
tlie nean oi luv. i^^* i^.w.r* thcso verv com-
"Tet'^rone who doubts rca,! ph and on through the
en ; Sat^lch, if he will, and let him ^^^^^^
.enalty pronounced, ^^J^^ ^XTt t^e It aU.
ar^s rt;:! tuit :fr i, ..jArea-^^^
• «;.« tn apstruction cast its shadow </ver the state
\ on . ^ ^ the whole scene, and what is the/
tUs?ofTl\t"whLhtheLordofglor " Ohris| ;
/ r lll^d I from the curse of the law, bemg niade i
^.ath redeemed "^ J""^^ ^J^^ ^°^ ;„ „ ,, „„, ,iat /m».
r^^:
234 PAl'TS AND TIIi:0IUE8 AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
expression surely of the curHo, uihI not the whole thing; and
HO, as I h:iv(! urged, is deuth. This is death in its most
><hainot\il form ; but it is not the second dt-ath, nor doe8 the
\&\v speak of that.
Mr. Constable has endeavored" to show that the Old Tes-
tament announces death as the ])unishment of the wicked in
the future state. It is not to bo supposed that he has
"brought forward the worst pass.ages to j)rovo this position.
Let us then see what he produces. He says :— -
.'* There [in the Old TostuuiontJ tJioword mubt lie taken in the
sense God has stiunijed ni)ou it, nud left unchanged. It is there
over ftud over agiiiu described us the end, in tiie future age, of
obstinate trans^jressors. For such God declares Ho has * \iYO-
viiled iho itis/rttments o/ileiilh\- of such as Imto divine Wisdom
tliiit "NVisdoni says, ' they that hate xao lore death ' ,• to the wicked
God saith, 'thou shalt surely die,' ' the soul that sinneth it shall
'die.'" ;/ ^^, ... ..-- ^- ,. ^
He adds: .„ ,.
"Xo ()ne, wo suppose, will app^ the death pronounc'od in
the above passages uiiou unrei)ented and unpardoned sin to
that death \vhieh all men alike, whether saved or lost, undergo
as children of Adam. They can only apply it to future 2>unish-
ment. , Death, then, is, according to the Old Testament, to be
after judgment the result of sin, as life is the result of righteous-
uess." ". ' 1
I havt! shown how directly this doctrine is opposed to
Scripture. Death after judgment is Mr. Constable's version ;
"after death tlie judgment" is that of Scripture. And of
course all he says upon this is his own conjecture. What
pf0of has he that this death is aff«'r judgment ? None.
What proof that it is in the future state? None really.
He has only a \4ry weak argument that all men alik*?, saved
or lost, undergo the first death But does he mean to say
tnai it iiever comes upon inen tlierefore as direct Judgment "tt
lor Bin ? If so, he is at direct issue with fact and Scripture
aiiKe. . ,
What would he say, for instance, to these statements of
Klihu ? '• He shall break in pieces mighty men without
THE MINISTRY OF DEATH.
285
; and
most
J8 the
I Tes-
ted in
c has
liliou.
in tho
there
3c, of
' pro-
istlom
riekeil
ishaU
ud in
tin to
(l'>rgo
inish-
to be
teous-
;d to
sioh ;
id of
-Vhaf
rone.
\ally.
aved
) say
tnent
)ture
number, and set other, in their stead. Therefore Re know-
cth thpir works, and Ho overtumeth them m tho night, bo
that they are destroyed. Ho striketh them as wicked men
in the open sight of others, because they turned back from
Him, an.l would not consider any of His ways (Job
xxxiv. -24-27)
Or ac^ain- "And if they be bound in fetters, and be
holdcn In cords of affliction ; then He sheweth them then-
work, and their transgressions that they have exceeded
He openeth also their ear to discipline, and commandeth that
they return from iniquity. If they obey and serve Hira
they shall spend their days in prosperity and their years in
pleasures; but if thoy.abey not, they shall perish by the
sword, and fhev 8h# die without knowledge. But the
],vpocrite8 in heart heap up wrath; they cry not when He
bindoth them : they .lie in youth, and their life is among
the unclean "(xxxvi. 8-U| comp. also xxxui. 1^-30).
This is indeed the great lesson of all this part ol Job.
The thorough and complete exemplification of the principle
we shall shortly have occasion to consider, in that great day,
the dav of the Lord upon the earth, when it shall be cleared
bv iudgment that the meek may inherit it (Psa. xxxvii).
Of this the Old Testament is full, and the principle is, as we
have seen, the principle of the law ; to substitute for it the
New Testament complete revelation is to lose the under-
"^ standing of the old dispensation. _
*. "strange as it may Skm, and inconsistent too with tne
known belief of the .Tews before our Lord's time, there is
not really one passage in the Old Testament in which either
heaven is spoken of as the abode of the righteous, or hell (m
our present sense of it) as the abode of.the lost. The word
« hell " is always in it that word " sheol' V ^f hich w^f have
already looked at, and which is the equivalent ofihades,
" the unseen," and applied always and only to|hede^th state.
rf'.
•/
This abundantly confirms the belief that the :^degththreat-
ened, even to impenitcmce and unbelief, was d^at^ m our or-
dinary understanding of it, but death as tl^c judgment ot C^od^
Ls of
hout
. •
/y
J236 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTfJRE STATE.
'%\
and throwing its awful shadow over the eternity beyond, ys
With this Mr. Constable's texts completely harmonize. Nor
does he indeed attempt to show that the death they speak of
is judgmenr in a future state. It would be impossible for him
to prove this, for it is not true. f
The legal , dispensation was intended as a means of reach-
ing on a broa<l scale (and with a still broader after-purpose)
the consciences of men. It was part of a method of grace
to prepare for the coming Christ by icon victing men of
guilt and of helplessness, shutting them up to the grace
; ', which was then to be revealed. And thus it was that there
was a " due time '' for Christ to come, as the apostle de-
-l rlarefe; and that when this purpose of the law should be ac-
complished. Thus '' when we were yet without strength in.
'hie time Christ died for the ungodly" (Rom.» v. 6). In the
meanwhile for individual .lieed was provided a way of
cleansing and forgiveness (typical largely, of necessity) in
which broken and contrite souls found hope of mercy. But
the system was. as a whole, a ministration of death an'd
-condemnation. v
And for this purpo.se the death which was the broad seal of
condemnation upon universal man was taken up and used in
the penal code of the divine government in Israel : man thus
having under his eyes a temporal retribution which would
witness to the most carnal (rod's wrath upon sin, and his own
condition as a sinner under it.
But that was not all the light shed upon the future, and
"^ we must look at what vet remains in some little detail:
• first, the prophetic landscape of the Old Testament, which,
is important many .ways with regard to our present subject,
- — -and then the meaning and character of its typical teaching.
k
I
PURIFICATION AND BLESSING OF THE BABTH.
237
CHAPTER XXIV.. :
XHEPUHIFICATION AND BLESSING or TEE EABTH. .;
«.pk to arrive at some definite conclusion as
tered through Its pages. ,m„ ,„fl extends neither to
First then, the horizon " . «»^t''!>':;"* ^^ ,o«ls of the
heaven nor to hell. It .s '-"S"-- *f^ I'J,, , ,,„d .
departed <*ist indeed » *- ^^^'.^^Vt^^ ^^
of darlcness unexplored andlrt^^ ^e a resurrection, and the
is recogn.7ied, too, that there wi ^^^^^ ^^
consider these hey^aft*^--- J^' o,j Testament range.
A text or t^o here w.l gne us the^^ ^ ^^^
First, f »y;«„P:;Xt Te .Tihls He giCen to th.
heavens, kve the Lord s , but rtateraent
children °' ^^ .^''I.J,'' Jt I ™.ter of fact, Enoch
■ rroTLtLtheLor^l had taken him; and Elijah, too,
had not died, but tne i. heaven. But there is
had gone up ^^^ ^"'^^^^^J^.^l^.er^n'.A.elii.i.
no statement anywhere *•>»*■ ""^^^ ^° '' „. .„ „ the righteous
; ,, «.Z dwells the^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (,^^
(cxxxii. 13, 14). u For evil-doerfe' shall
"T,
/f/
n
,»ijjiii^
FACES AND THEORIES AS TO A FUmRE STATE.
238
not be; yea, thou shalt diligently consid^ his place, and it
shall not be. But the meek shall inherit the earth, and de-
light themselves in the abundance of peace" (Psa. xxxvii.
9—11).
Again: "The righteous shall be ^recompensed in The
earth; much more the wicked and the sinner " (Prov
xl 31).
This is the univepal strain.' .The God of judgment is
going by judgment to purify the earth, and make it the
abode of righteousness apd peace. Transgressors hre to
'be rooted out of it. The whole earth, is to be full of the
• glory of the Lord .as the waters cover the sea.
These are the" promises. But whose ? Mark well, there
is riot one word yet of the l^^ither's house or of the heavenly
places. The inheritance is of earth only. The pros}pect is
what we are accustomed to call millennial. Whose then
. are these Old Testament promises ? If I take the Old Tes^ i
tament Itself, they are Israel's. ''Israel shall bud and blos-
som, and fill the face of the earth with fruit." " But in the
last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house
of the Lord shall be established in the top ^f the mountains,
and it shall be exalted abova the hills, and people shall flow
unto it. And many nations shall come and say. Come, and let
us go lip unto the mountain of the Lord, and to the house
of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and
we will walk in His patKs; for the law shall go forth of
•^ZwMi, and the word of the Lord ffom Jerusalem. And He
shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations
afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plow-shares,
and their spears i;>tff pruning-hooks : nation shall not lift up
sword against nation, neither shall they learn w^r any more.
But they shall sit every man under his vine, and under his
fig ^e; and none shall make them afraid: for the mQiith
of Qie Lord /)f hosts hath spoken it " (Tun. xxvii. 6 ; Mic.
iv. 1-4).
Thus sea l ed, w i ths^tehovah^ s seal is Isra^'s claim to the
Old Testament promises. If still we doubt, let the apostle
4
^1
fe,' ••■•^
PUEIFICAIION AND BLESSING OF THE E^B^H.
28d
■"»g;
„f the Gentiles assare os whether we «e to read the nam.
• 11 , r.torallvhere "For I was wishing, says ne,
^^Z^^^l^'i fro» Chrtat for my brethren ".y
that mybeu were a israeUtes, to whom
L giving orthe^w ^d t---- o^God...^^^^^^
PROMISES" (Rom. Ix. 3, 4). 11 ^ve nd
tn who were Paul's Unsmeu according to the fiesli, we c^ .
..rjfe off. For this she must of course be gathered
Zl Wm^- and so she shall be, but itns interesting and,
■iSt^otk W«« this national restoration and eon^^ "
"&ript™ leaves us in no doubt eitlier „ponthis||#
The s^e apostle mtimates to us, what .cbms sostrangTand
hardTbe received now, that it will not be by the gomg
forth of the gospel as at present; that the partial b mdness
of Israel will not cease, and " all Israel "-the nation as a
whor-wm not be saved, " until the fulness of the <^ntf »
ll co^e in " " As concerning the ,jospcl," he adds, " they
fve enemies for your sakes; but as touching the election
Teyare beloved for the fathers' sakes: for the grfts and
calling of God are without repentance "(Rom. XI. 25-29).
Thus the divine purpose holds, announced m the ancient
Scriptures. God has not disinherited the peop e of His
choice "Yet for the present blindness m part is theirs, and
ly^re enemies (God is holding them as such) with regard
to the gospel. Not till the full number of the Gentiles is,
brouaht in by it will " all Israel " be saved.
And then, how, if not by the gospel? Scripture answers
(Zech. xii. 10-xiii. 1): "They shall look «Pon mewhom.
-ihey have pierced, and they shall mourn for Him as one
moumeth for his only son, and shall be »f t*"'?^^^" ^.m
as one that is m bitterness for his iirsM>om: m that day
there shaU be a great mourning, in Jemsalem, . . and tM
r
2i40
FAiJTS AND THEOUIRS AS JO A FUTURE STATE.
> .
■»
■ i
land shall mourn, every family apart. . . In that cjay" there
shall be a fouritaiii opened to the house of t)avid, and to tho
inhabitant8*.of' Jef u><alem for Hin and for uiu?Ieanncs«.''
H7w.v/. shall thov soe'CluiKt thus, and how? With, the
mental eye -pnly, or actually ? That too is answered :— ^
" Behold, //i^ ennieth with clouds^ and every eye shall .See
IllCn, andjhey-aho yfKO pierced' Hrk, .and all kindreds of
the earth"- — or " tribels -of the land," as the Greek might
read — ^^ s^mlltr^il because of Illni.^''* .- . '< '•
Here then is Israel's national repentance, and how it is
produced. It ,is then, when the Lord Je^us comes, their
*eyes shall see Himj'aDd thus Israel's bfessing, and that of
the earth, follow^s, not precedes, that for which w,e as Chris-
tia,ns 'wafit, to "receive the fulfilment of-heaveply, and not
eartlhlyi promises. We thus see how it is that the gospel;
as now goiifg forth, will have to come .to an end, and the
fnlness of the Gentiles be come in. All is consistent here,
for it 18 true; and the present gospel dispensation is thus
seen to-be an interval in Israel's prophetic history^ a time
of the suspension of her pVomises, only suspended, to find,-
as soon as this 'has run-out, thek- full accomplishment.
And this is the uniform tenor (5f Scripture. The last
chapter of Zechariah proVes convincingly that tho Lord God
"and His holy ones will have coipe, and i||s feet have stood
oh the Mount .of Olives, before He is "King over all the.
earth," and "in-that diay slmll there be one Lord, and His^
Name one." . . ' '■■ - -^^^ : ■, ,..-■ ■ _ , -
^The second psahn also* speaks with perfect plainness of
the heathen being given to Christ for His inheritance, and
the uttermost parts of the earth for His possession ; but
often and rightly as that is quoted as a millennial prophecy,
■i> , _^ ' ' . ,
* Ko^ovjai In avrov jrddai at <pyXai rr/iyi/i (Rev. r. 7). It is
well knowji that iil Greek, as in some other languages, there is one word
which stands for " earth " and " land." I do not insist on the latter,
for it is quite according to the chjtracter of the New Testament to be of
greater breadth than^he Old. But the reference to Zech. xii. JO can-
fibt be doul>ted. • » > . %.
N
,■•■-■_•■ ■ ■*?*"■;
," ■ t
*>
«py.
N
MS not aiJays,a«naeariy se^t^^-* P;-^»t:;«:^ ■
^ith the W.tWsrod pf iron (ch. u^25-2^, ;^ ^.^. ^. .
• Thus again, therefore, when in *''^ "''°"' ° AesVei ■
, „f.hP hook the Lord is seen coming forth tromneavei. ,
Sl^St of Ihe e^^th (Rev. -)• '' '^ '^IV'^^tS
covering of the br.de .^r rpuV- rilwws' th*C millennial ' ■
"nshteoasness of samts.' Then tojiows '■*-,.
pLfuriwith whieh,we ninst. become mere familiar. »t a
- ''"I^ to"l« impossible to ><iilarge <>nnoW. Bnt iMeeds. '
tlnct from one another, in^ juugmcuy .
■5^"?^^|iSr6:d^
• • rRt*rr 5 SS^-^orthelivln^is the pimfica-. ■;
• is finally to give everyone pot a sharerm.Jhe_ first resur
V V ■'.
■"•..■^^
■ ■«■.■■ . ' . ■ - ■ ■ ■■ -■■^' *. I
■ ■
'\ ^ '-
■ :m
'■■ ■■
' ■ \ . ■: - ■
•^:'::-
. M'
>"Vfl,
2^' FAOTS AND THEOttiES-lkS TO A" FUTURE STATE.
-•■'"' . / . ■ ' r '
lennial times is righteous authoritative ruli , in which (if wo
are to take Scripturfc simply) the saints of the first resurrcc- "
tion reign with Ilim,* who is the manifest King of kings,
and Lord of lords. ^ v
There is one glimpse beyond, this millennial conditioti in
Old Testament prophecy f but it is only a gliin})se. The
Lord (in Isa. Ixv. 17, Ixvi. 22) announces* '''Behold, I create
new heavens and a now earth; and the former 'tehall not be
remembered, nor come into mind." T]ie next verses, return
evidently to the millennial condlf ion, before sin and death
. iare finally done J^way. Again, lie identifies the now earth
with Israel's pronijises : *' For, as the new heavens and the
new earth which I will make, shall remain before me, saith
the Lord, so shall your seed and your nani# remain." But
this verse, too, is parenthetical, and the hitfxt agaia returns
to the millennium. It is plainly, however, to these passages
that the apostle Peter refers, when he saySj " We, accordiiig'
to His promise, look for new heavensf and a new earth,
wherein dwelleth righteousness" (2 Pet. iii. 13). The only
expansion of this is in Rev. xxi. 1-5. We cannot dwell
upon it now. It is only adduce^ ^s giving us the full range
of "Old Testament prophecy. \l
. As I have said, it is to the purificatory judgment of the
* Rev. Hi. 21 may help some to distinguisli between a throne in which
Christ now sits, and which, being the throne of absolute Godhead,
the Father's throne, mere man can never share, and a throne which as
Son of man He calls His own (comi>. ch. i. 13), and which lie i)romises
to share with the ovorcomers here. "
The future millennial kingdom is thus clearly distinguished from the .
kingdom of Christ as Son of God (Col. i. 1.^) in whicli we now are.
That future Cfp^in when He takes^^Iis great power and reigns in order
to bring everything into subjeciiim to God ; and, having accomphshed ,
this, Het delivers it up to the Father (1 Cor. xv. 21).
One other caution. The reign of tlie saints with Christ over the earth
does not imply a return to a^t^shly condition, the gross Chiliasm''V
many of the ancients. The lieavenly and earthly spheres are always
se para te, w hat eve r th e links o f connection in that time whep th^ new
Jerusalem comes down out of hf?aven.
t Only the atinodpherieheaxtmH, which are dissolved with the earth.
^isA-
But
PUEIFICATION AND BLESSING OF THE EARTH. 243
earth which introducqs the millennial blessing, that a mass of
passages relate, which are brought forward to prove the ex-
tinction of the wicked. ' When only quo " day of judgment
is thought of, and that the judgment of the dead after their
resurrection, such passages do indeed seem to have force m
this way. But it is gbne as soon as we perceive their true
appUcation. And this is as true of some New Testament
passages, as it Is universally of the Old. It is only of the
Old we arc speaking now. Lat us consider some of these
-^texts, an^they will illustrate the truth of the statements we ^
have been advancing. ^ ^, t -n •
1 The Psalms abound ,in reference twthis time. Passmg
over the second and eighth, which connected* give us the
prophetic outVme^ let -us look at so|ie more detailed state-
ments in the ninth :—* -^
" For Thou hast maintained my' right : ar. d ray cause ;
thou satesffiin the thfone judging right." Thou hast rebuked
the heathen, Thou hast destroyed the wicked; Thou hast
"pat out theirname forever and ever. . .Buttlie Lord shall
endure forever : He hath prepared His throne for judgn^ent : .
and He shall judge th(; worlrl in righteousness, He shall
mmister judgracptto the people in uprightness. . .Sing
praises to- thc'Lord; which dwenethi*! Zion; declare among
the people His doings. . . The wi^kcd'shaU be turnj^ into
shcol : all the nations that forget^ GojL^ W
"vS second'psalm has been aheadjr referred to; the eighth is ap-
plied V the apostle (Heb.ii. 5^? to Christ's reign in the.;' world to,
come "" *rhat iliis term applies^o earth, riot heaven, this eighth psalm
witnesses as dues the expressiVin' of the apostle 'rr/r oiHov^uvff^
rvv A/^ilXovdar, " the . habitable ^earth) to c<^e;' the expre«sior^
translated "world 'in Luke iiit ; ' ' /> . *" ./
t Goodwyn's attempt at an argument, from/this word is a specimen
of the kind of criticism we meet with in sac|/writers :—
" David says bv the Holy Ghost, 'The i^icked shali be t>J.rned back
(shoov) into (sb'ol) the grave; and all tlie nations that forget^-God.'
Havin« been raised from sh'ol to appear before the great white throne,
■'■ '•■' ''fl
death relaxes not his claim upon tbem, but in the e ternal embr a re
the second', snpplefnents his temporary hold at the first."
This is pur'.' imaaination. TheTe is nothing: about the resurrection
k
.,M,
■ /; ,
I :::•
\.
/-,
^
i'K
244 FACTS AND THF0RIE8 AS TO A fUTlTRB STATE.
These words need no interpreter, if we will only read
them literally as they stand, and not supplement them with
other statements which have to do with a very, different
subject. #
The thirty-seventh psalm has been niore than once referred
to. It should be carefully read in connection with our
present theme. But pass on to the fifty-eighth, and listen, to
language which people quote of eternal punishment; it ia
again judgment upon living enemies :— , ^
" Break their teeth, O God, in their moojth; breakout the
teeth of the young lions, O Lord. Let them )neU away as
waters wMch run continually; when he bendeth his bow to
shoot his arrow, let them be as cut t>i pieces. As a spail
which melteth, let every one of tliom pass away ; like the
kirCtiinely birth of a womm^ that they may not see the sun.
Before' your pots can feel the thorns, He shall take them
away, both living, and in His wrath. The righteous shall
rejoibe when 'he seeth the vengeance; he shall wa^h his
footsteps in the blood of the wicked. So that a man shall
say, Verily th6re is a reward for the righteous : verily, He is
a God that judgeth IX THE EAHTii."
In a similar \Vay speak the 83rd psalin, the 101st, the
ll^th, the 14fitth ; but there is no use quoting testimony of
the same kind repeatedly. But we-must look a little at the
prophets. • •'■ ', ■'■,"■■'.■■ '^ ''-':'''
saiah describes in his first chapters " the day of the Lord
osts " upon the pride of, man, and here- again we find
similar expressions : — ■ ' ' '
■ ' Therefore. s'aith 'the Lord, 'the Lord of hosts, the Mighty
One .of Israel, Ah, I will ease me of mine /id versaries, and
avenge me of mine.)lenemie8 ; . . .' . Zion shall be redeemed
with judgment, and her" converts with righteousness ; and
of. the dead in the passage, but thp destruction of living enemies ; •
nothing about the great white throne, hut God dwelling tn Zion ; iwhile
the " turned hack " refers' to the 3rd verse, where the same word is used :
" when mine enemies are turned hack" i. e., from their assault upon the
people of God. ^ » •■ '
« »W« niir^RlNG OF TBE EABTH. 245 f
tUElFlOATlON AJfD BLLSSi^u wr i** .
?£ It™"!';;— - «.»> "«'"'"' "'"•■"7,1 ■
dayUiemckedr ?, , - ■ „" ._.„^e of mUlehniamrtace -
Thpn follows a well-known picture oi t , v,
T of the reL'ithering an.V reunion of Ephraim Sn.l JiKlah
ri:^, gve'u; ,he principle V these judgments and
,^ ii ™ ,„ PntVa (lealmas with Israel ; Bee espeQially.
r'r^i i But evl toVir'W the pa«ge« whlch.treat
«:s^:5iSSiESb
. go forth Mid £owp be ashes mider the
teRT
;,flJ;«ral d-mculty) with ,« the other prophece, of
f^ 2i0
FACTg AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STAT t,.
Wes!^ ''"^^ ;^^/«--^^'« JudgmeBt i^ order to earth's
toZ^fl'oTlV^'"' ''^'' ^-ring of the typical sys-
torn of the OM Teslament upon our pre«bnt subje^.
•■-■,■ ■§'-
, ^ CHAPTER XXV. ^ ^-^ —
OLD TESTAMENT SnADOWS. ■
r* r^ ,• / '""'"""^ '■*■'.?<' "<■ the Old Testament future
tim he bo ,ef„f the people plainly wont beyoml it. C
,^nly doe. ,1,0 opinio to the Hebrews toil „. ,hat Abraham
Isaac and Jaeob confossed themselves pilgrim. upon^arA'
woJ" f /'" " "•■™«"'y-«nt.y"".:,t alsoTe " y'
word used by our Lord for hell-Gehenna-seems toha7e
v^ ; :;a:" ='?":'''.""',P-Pt''«f<- -• T-ord-s tim. in that
TltZ , .u '"'' " " '"■'>«•'''''.?<' apparently in opno.
s.t.on to the statements of the last ohapters. B,it any one
.need only read carefully the first halfof the booko OeLr
^ be .pnte clear a, least as to Abraham tha, there 1, no
prom,se at all of heaven ,„ him recorded there. How hen
.d he obtam the assurane. of there being in stor Ir hto
a heavenly country " ? . ■'■mm
^ One of two things, could alone be supposed. There wa's
ether an unrecorded promise; or else ho must harbren
given to see very plainly the typical character of thbl^
^^^tTJ:T, T *'T "'"-^ -rVruths which X/
JNew Testament shows us he had received. Abraham'scall
to Canaan was the pcr/bct symbol-of our " heavenly t^Hn?;
It is
-iv«H-
tt i s <;
'> l l lll l/wt. l .. 1 ..< 5 1—. : ■ ^ -. " ''"^ — **"
ishna.
««-
a ''*"""*"''>' by the. Jenxshdoct<,r.s since ' It is no* «. a ■ ' ."
/ -.
V.
■"•^^
- ' ULl) TESTAMENT SHAD0W8.
but how be cQuiahavG understood it ao, wo may be at
lo«» to comi.r.lien.l. Yet Houie thiug« there were that raigh
hive aided' groatiy ii» thiw. ij
Man had been .hat out of Para.li»o two thousand ye^js
-heforo and ReveUtion ends with the picture of another
PaSU heavenly; not earthly, into which those that h^o
" washed their robes" in the blood of the Lamb shall be^^d^
Jtted. No one doubts, save an infidel, that here W-n ,
I first garden of God was a type of the other. Had jhe
-lecret then been shut up those two thousand years.-aHso-
lately shut up-tl.at there was in it some such meanmg <
Our suppositious in su.ha matter may not possess nf cl
value; but we are seeking to account in this way for alfac|
It lealt not to be denied, of-Abraham's havmj; a ''"''^''f f
of that which certainly does not appear upon the &ce <rt tno
inspired record. And, our attention being turned tol this
we camiot but notice how much the divine way w^s in Jhose
Trly flays to teach by type and figure. Did Abel know
notldn.' of the sig.,ificanco of that " more excellent sacnfice
liel^by faith he offered V And if the "seed of the
::„man-'p,.kc,aswek„owit did speak o. « ^^--^
,„,„e,lt spoke still in the language ot type ot the brms
;,;, of thJ serpent's head. In Abraham's yis.on.t was a
figure spoke, though with so«.c interpretation ^<"'- ^
So .Ta..obs ladder; and still u.ore the myst«,ou« n.ght-
X'stling, wi-,l> its couse,,«ence of a halting th.gh Joseph
.Ireams still exemplity this way of the divine .eaching: an.
so the drcatns which he interprets. I,, these and Lndar -
stances we find not merely the nse of type -'l J?-'. -
of these as things ©hose significance was knowr. *" th« _peo
IL whose time tSy happened. They show us that these
tre the language of the day, «-'->>• "''^f^^Xtv
- ligible when first uttered, however much the full mysterj.
waited for revelation, when the appointed ttme should be
c^ome.
^il more would this be so as the word -'^J^i^
gradually to its full proportion, and the meamng of tl|law
"T»~
i?^
%
iM'
T«iir
l^C*rs AND THEOBIES AS TO A PUTUKE StATK.
came to be untbMed by the luophotB, ])artial though the
'(^iiiohlirit; were. Aii«l thouixli the ]>eo|)le were hideed blind
- uud ^rnajj even thw would not hinder the attuinnicut of u
- fertain body of truth as orthodoxy, wliUe the pomt and
I'-ower of it as beariiig practically upon themselves might be
denied. Such exactly was the later Pharisaism which
carried with it the' mass of the people. And such, in
the higtory of the Christian church, was the Nic^ae ortho-
- doxy^ « /
-Wo may thus account then for a knowledgo^in Israel
. beyOhd the j^pparent measure of the revelation that had been
; made to them. We have only to suppose ( what is other-
,y ,. wise indicated also) that the great system of types which
thcMf law embodied was not wholly unknown to them; and
while the ministry of death and condemnation was allowed
to have its full effect, and the consistency of purpose was
maintained throughout, the light was allowed in another
, way to shine, even if dimly, through the wonderful imagery
in the midst of which they moved.
This was surely divine wisdom. But let us seek to realize
a little how far beyon<l tlie usual thought of it, this typical
character of the Old Testament books extends.
All must of course admit (who are not infidels) the figur-
ative nature of the tabernacle and temple service. Priest,
altar, sacrifice and sanctuary we must allow to have their
inner meaning, for the New Testament so reads them all.
But the Xew Testament finds such also in far other things:
in the details of Israel's history, their Passover and lied Sea
deliverance, the manna, the water from the rock. " All these
things," says the ai>ostle, "happened unto them for ensam-
ples (literally, types )l*^and are written for our admonition,
__ npon whom the ends of the world (or ages) are come"
(1 Cor, X. 11). But this typical teaching is not even con-
fined to Israel's hisrory : we have similar explanations as to
Adam and his wife (Rom. v., Eph. v.), the flood and the ark
(1 Pet. iii.), Melchize<]ek (Heb. vii.), Abraham's wives and
_ sons (Gal iv.), with more than a hint as to the offering up
f-"
m
and view tho rest of it
UH explanation rather
Lh
tiich. is applicable a'.l
fe bne hand, we must
^es given us by our Lord
, OLD TEHtABtBNT SUADOWP 249
of Isaac (Gal. iii. 16, 17). Thus theliistory itself (while
of course true and divine) is typical and prophetic also.
-Guided^thus far by the word of (lod are we to sop
*^»" * , 1 *• ^ .itj"" "••'» »ri"«r fhn rest OI It
where the actual explanation^^
as history simply ; or are w^^
as the estaiblishment of a pi^
through the historical books^
remember that many of the fa.- - „ -
„r.'ivcn without interpretation, and that we .re left to fi.M
thlln the figurative meaning of words elBewhere, «id the
Lrine of Scripture generally. On the other hand who
:,d ignore a deeper meaning in sueh a "t-X -;'-; ° .
JoseplCfor which meanmg yet no expreBH warrant of mspi,
r'ltion can be produced ? , . i *
It seems plain then that we are to apply the pnnc.ple to
the h Iry I general. And here what a field o research
presents iLlf and how marvellously light l.reaks out m
new and unlooked for places in the Old Testament ! _
From tho first Eden, over now six thousa.^«W». we ook
on to another, brighter and more blessed, diWown 1 a a-
I ° where the tree of life, in new luxuriance and beauty
hlnUits glorious fruitage over the, perpetual stream that
flows frorS the throne of God Itself. Who can m.ss the
comparison, albeit no doubt there is contrast .also, between
S two? Who can fail to see that the one ..s designed
to be the sha<low of the other ; and that the contrast .s but
to remind us that the first is onJy the shadow, and cannot
be the very image of that before whose transcendent beauty,
all pictures and forecasts fail ? The first scene >s the eartt
ly and the fleeting; the second heavenly.and eterm . tarth
is made the mirror of heaven, as indeed to mortal eyes (.t
1^ ITm seem) must be,- fo convey to us what "eye ha h no
"^ IZ nor e>i heard," but which "Ood hath (never, l,elcs^)
revealed to us by «« ^Pi'":",^ ; ^...:W.„.;„«»nt visi™. of
When .WO look fu r ther at tho New To^tnment vision
.the New Jerasalem, we find a new and most ^r>t<>ve.ms
link with the Old Testament. Let any one compare that
«>
#''
'is..
250 F VCTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTUJIE STATE. ' '
picture of future blessedness with which Ezekiel closes, with
this closing scf^e of our last Apocalypse, and say if the cor-
respondence hetween tlie t\yo can possibly be undesigned.
The waters flowing from the house of the Lord; in Ezekiel,
. bring life even iwto the salt sea ; " and by the river upon the
bank thereof on this sifte and on that side, shall grow all trees
, for meat, whose leaf shall not flid^, neitiier shall the fruit
thereof be consumed : it shall bring forth new fruit according
, to his months!, because their wJftersHhey issued out of the
sanctuary, and the fiuit thereof shall be for meat, and the
leaf theii^of for modicine" (ch. xlvHr'VJ). Who can rcfuso
the connection witli the account in Rcyelatiort: "And he
showed me a [>ure river of water of^iffe, clear as crystal,
proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In
: the niidst of tlie street of it, and on either side of the river,
was there tlie tree 'of life, which bare twelve manner of
fruits, and yielded her fruit every month, and the leaves of
the tree were for Ihe healing of the nations " (Rev. xxii.
'1,2). , , ^ r - . . ^ . .„ \
Yet there are contrasts also bp'twocii the two descriptions.
In the one case there are limits to the bles.sing which we
do not find in the otlu'r, as, for instance, thCj marshy"^
places are yet given to salt^(Ezek. xlvii. 11); and the one is
connected with an earthly city and a temple, while in the
" heavenly Jerusalem "' no temple is seen (Rev. "xxi. 22).
Thus here again wo find the true ch.-iftacters of OhVTesta-
mcnt types. The earthly is the pattern of t ho heavenly.
The law has a shadow of good things to come, but not the
very image (Ileb. x. 1). '
' But then this shows us that not only th6 past history but
the prophetic future also contaihs its types. And that the
millennial age, Avhich the prophecy in Ezekiel speaks of, ij^in
part at least a picture for earth's inhabitants of things. out-
side; of earth. Visible signs of divine pnver* will bVing
them face to fimc as it were with eternal realities. It will bo .
* So, Hoi), vi. .J, ii;iiacles are calleglVpowera of Ute world (qt ag e j'
to come.'
H ■ , n
'■• rtS. *
' «
OLD tESTAMEHT SHADOWS. '«'
251
■(I . I
■.:,**:■■
\ *"-,'
> ■ ■ \ ,
'•' ■■\ "\.
'V V;
}:'>%"
'■^VaI
■ '\: '■
M
i'! ;.
■',"l,.'
• ahnrt in a very importaut way, a anal dispimsation of >.ia'>t,
' fh„ ; mlSnt have b=cu o»V««A. Introduced, by
a, tho»c l'"-*-^""'?;. . ^,„, the .uanifestatiou of the risen
the appeann^ of C^"^'' ;"y;^.,,,„„,-„- uteousness will be
a„apertected8onBa»,Goa thV.u no y ,,^^1
irt: thl olwt/hattL in K.eJ.i pictured
t bless."! which reaect the heavenly and eternal one8,so
tthe other hand does Isalah.Bhow uathe shadow of .ts .
::M o;Ste, by wh,eh. men will be brought as .t were
face to face with " eternal judgment ;—
"Za it shall come to pass *=''«•»■"»"<' ^1 Tfleh
another.and from - «...bat^ to — ^^
Jr::ce to anot^r judgment of wh^^^^^^^^^^
^iClcfber^rwordlL^rse o/the Old Test,
ditteience D ^ ^^^^^^ ,^^ ^^^ blessing) a
rt rtween ^he oil T.taint and the Kew^ But in
no mere ngure, as Jii. A>'" . i?R„ m Thp sol-
i.^o Trinmnh of the cause of true religion. me soi
:::t:dr:7:o:.admitof,being e.plained m tb.w,.
It would not give them meaning but evacuate . Ani ye
■ what is surely a reality is also a symbol too. It is ttie ae
:g:dc:ntrit,ope„ly'ma„ife,tcdtoth;*eyesof^
■ day with the living witer aowingtrom Jerusalem JIure
■ ISfhe symbol ^ efei-nal life, and here the shadow of
rs^n/alt..^ &ch with its tale to ..U "! *-- °^
- the' milk,mnalnations,-thiH warning, that mv.tmg. Gods
lofit inrtCai to liian thi;: aide of eternity.
:;|^S^ay gives „. the OM Testament wirti^om.
nixd in full harmony \vith itself, atid with that
^f^
completeness )
■'•■;■ ■ »
]
N?
\
252 '' FACTS ANt) THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
later revelation which supplements, it, in which both life and
incorruption are fully brought to light, and also the second
deathkis seen to be what the first shadows, as it is that to
wliklifinally also it j^ives place. We must not even here,
howi'wr, expect to have done with tigurefe, for still we see
in part and we })rpphe8y in part, and the things with whicb
we have to do are still seen but " through a glass, darkly " —
in a riddle or enigma. ^
But whatever is given by inspiration of God is given for
our instruction, and we must patiently and humbly take
God's, word as He has written it, and see if it deals in "am-
biguous metaphors," and .whether perhaps we may not' find
there the truth of which we are in search. %
CHAPTER XXVI.
THE AGES OP ETERnItY:— THE QUESTION STATED.
We are again stopped, upon the threshold of the New
Testament. Stopped, by the need of considering £1 question
of the utmost imporiin^e to our present subject.^ It is
gravely asked whether we have any proper word for eter-
\ nity in Scripture, in the sense, that is, in which we ordinarily
understand the word " eternity." For even this the eccen-
tricity of a lew learned men would take from us by an
etymological sleight of hand which is sca,Tcely creditable to
them. " Eternal " is " ccy /ternair — age-lasting. So Mionh.\
Dr. Fart-'ar tells us, is " translated rightly and frequently by
' eternal,' and wrongly and unnecessarily by " everlasting.' "*
But again " everlastiiig " is in the same .dilemma, for of
coarse it only means " lasting ever," and "an ey^rgreenis not
a tree green to all eternity, but a, tree continously green
durinds its life."t ,. ■
— i — \ ^, •
* " Etfernal Hope," Preface, xxxiv. ^
t " Hist. Doctrinip Script. Roiribution," p. 128.
tH-
■«*r i
'ft
..^
TflE AGES O^'^l^BNlTY^ 253
So that we are in some doubt a8 to our English even
The word " endless " is getting to displace « eternal,^ bi^ as
„o word of exactly that m<?aning' is found in the New les-
tament hi any connection^^^f interest to tfe here we are
practically left without any t^vfe word in it for what for want '
of a better term I must still call " eternity," at all ' . .
Authorities also diffe- Mr. Oxeilftam thmks that the
« word al5zo, might be expected from its 1»oot a., to mean
^everlasting' m the stActest sense^^-* while Dr. Beecher
assures us that " in the lieW Testament aei is neyer used m
the sense of eternity ."t . - . . ^ ^ ^ ^^^
We must inquire, there^re, for ourselves ; although we
shall not refuse the help that those more learned than we
can pretend to be can give us iii the matter. ^ -
The words with which we have to do are m the Greek
buttwq; aion and aionios {dzM dta^vco,). They havi^been
Anglicised intQ *on and aeonial, a^d these terms, although
not naturalized in our language, we may find it convenient
' for our.present purpose to retain. -The phrases "forever
and "forever, and ever" in our common Bibles are liter-
ally •' for the «on," " for the SBons," " %the *Jna, of aeons,
and akin to terms in the Old Testament where the Hebrew
wx)rd "olam" taH.es the place of *on. ^^ « Etefnal and .
" everlasting "are both renderings gf the word " aeonial.
It is upon the ground of this phraseology that the argu-
ment is -built, that'aeonial cannot be in thecSltrict sense "eter-
nal ^ " For the aeon " cannot be " fo't eternity," because tlfere
are »on8, and aons of seons; and you cannot so reduplicate
eternity. Gonial, « beloning tcr the aeon," consequently
cannot imply a longer time than the " ^on " to which it be-
longs: ^oti, moreover, in> Scripture itself is translated by
»/orld" between thirty and forty times, and twice m the
plural by "ages," and. this lastvTord seem^ to afford the
^ Lst consistent.rendering all through.^ '^^Tt^iZ
L that case would be « the life of the age "or "the ttfe of the
world to come," and " eternal punis hment;' ofccour^p, must
•^
r
t "Hist. Retribution," p. I'i^.
* " Letter." \>. 17.
..\
-i'U.
li'.
■ • ■ ,:>'. ' ■ h
254 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE. ,. ]
be harmonized with this: it canuot or need not be an endless
punisiiment. . . „
Mr. Jukes, in his " Ilestitutiou of All TJiingsi," goes a good,
way further. He contends tha^ these ages of which Scrip-
ture speaks, and of which the -heathen writers understood
nothing, refer to '' Christ's nie(.liatorial kingdom, which is
' for the ages of ages,' and must yet be 'delivered up to the
Father, tJiat God may be allin ^il' " - , pl
•'Thci 'ages,' therefore (he says), are periods in which God
works, because there is evil and His rest is broken Ijy it, but
which have atP end aud pass away, when the work appointed to
be done in tliem has been accomplished. The * ages,' ^ke the
'days ' of creation, speak of a prior f all : they are the ' times' in
which God works, because He cannot rest in sin and misery.
His perfect rest is not in the 'ages, ' but beyond them, when the
luediatorial kingdom, which is ' for the ages of ages,' is delivered
np, anllChrist, by whom all thi;ags are wrought in the ages, goes^
])ack to the glory which He had ' before the age-times ' (2 Tim, i. 9,
Tit. i. 2), that God may be all in all. The words 'Jesus Christ
(that is. Anointed Saviour), the same yesterday, tp-day and for the
ages,' imply that through these ages a Saviour is needed, and
/"will be found, as much as to-day and yesterday. It will, I tliink,
too, be found, that the adjective founded on this word, whether
applied to ' life,' ' puuishment,' ' redemption,' ' covenant,' 'times,'
or even God Himself, is always connected with, remedial labor,
and with the idea of ' ages ' as periods in which God is working
to meet and correct some awfid fjdl. . . . Nor does this aflfect the
true eternity of bliss of God's elect, or of the redeemed who are
brought back to live in God, and to be partakersx)f Christ's * end-
less life ' (Heb. vii. IG), of whom it is said, 'Neither can tliey die
any m<jre, for they are equal uuto the angels, and are the children
of God, being the children of the resurrection ; ' for this depends
upon a liarticipation iu the divine nature, and upon that powder
which can change these vile bodies, that they may be fiwihioned
like unto Christ's glorious body, accordijig to the working where-
by He is able to subdue even all things unto Himsell" (Rest.,
pp. 61-G8.) •
This has the advantage of being very definite doctriiie,
-and as such it eafi be examined and compared with Scrip-
M
THE AGES OF ET?ERKltY.
255
tut:e. Thi# we hope to <loin rletail • presently. . ^ut first, it
seems, we^ave to look at these words outside of Scripture,
, und in their roots and beginnings Iti oi^diiia|;y Greek.
' Dr. Beecherhas taken up this subject in a rather elaborate
way, following 'out the suggestions of Dr. Tayler Lewis, '
which may be read in the « Gen^is "-and " Ecclesiastes " of
Lange's Comm^entary.* We may sum up Dr. Beccher's
statements in a much briefer Way without detriment (we
think) either to their' clearness or their force. ^
He first of all examines the proof of «iow meaning eternity
troH^^ Aristotle's (tcrivation of it? from -ael o7i {net qjv)~^
•' always existing." Two "questions arise fi-om this : is^ this
etymology cd^MectV and if so, is it ilecisive of the matter?
On the first pointh« concedes it to be correct for the sake
of arirument, although suflicient reasons could be given for
rejecting it, iinil Plato and ^ri^otle were very poor ety-
mologists. As to the second he objects t]^s^ael does not|
always, or even commonly, denote or imply eternity, and, in
this passage it manifestly does ndt^and to grve it that sense
mvolves Aristotle in inconsistency and absurdity, ,and in
a war with notorious facts^in th'e history of the .Gre^^n-
guage." , " 9r- -...-, _ ,
Thislasti^by itself decisive, ar|d we need* not look further '
at the question of derivation. The£^stant m,eaiiin_g of aion
in Homer is by all admitted to be^fe " : to "Jg^atbe out
. . one's «/oh" was to clie. ; >• • • , ^^- - ' ^
" iVom this flbstra^'t idea of ' life ' it passed to a concrete
form to denote a living spirit, an a ? o3 ;, or aeon." This mean-
ing occurs, not in Homer, but in Euripides,, and is found at
a'latcr period in Epictetus, who declares that he is,not an
){teon (a spirit) but k man. "^The element of time in any
form is not mcluded in these original uses of the word," says^
Dr. Beechcr.t '
%
t
/■
'I
■^
■ * Special Iiflroductioii to tlio First Chapter of ^fenesis. Part 3,; land ,
his excursus on " Olamic or iEonian Words in Scriptnre/'^cclesiastes,, ^
pp. 44-51. ^ '■ . ' ' ,
/ iHe would not deny it. I suppose, thm by Arrian's time, the meaning '.
*• V
-con- :
umda^ an* idea ot
MX
#1
»* gi^Ki
■ "^p
I^^I
Lv'fJ
i^-s''3^
nW^'^^M
w.
^ri
I wofi
JOU8. ti
irati^of \\^4
tbif reat po^t
^^ainan, also com^to denote
'ana thpn a period Arked with
ante/lUuvian age oMhe Mosaic
that pprM,BO'W«t^
■'ibovo*ei.turto V Biffih writers as HptW^i;, »»* ^e
iopHon ana Th'«cycttd«3i buV we <Jo not j^ct .<^e to the •
. '-'^ut Dr. Beochte admits tlktefterwards ^.-e do find the
^ - W i-The orisi^ial i%*of fife was {atriength) subord^
Isi &L.r disan^Wfed. *nd id^as of time alony^ook posses-
' VMfcmity: for time, ;,' wnen i.. .» 'l";'""^", "f , ", ''X; fi^t this /
Innlinir totality, acquires the sense oicterrtity. At tiist tins /
4Si.i--l^ctive was c.pre».ca; Jmt h/'degrees came to
'^ rSmes impUed and n,d.rstoo,l, and ">.«,» >M th^J.
■ .««tfew(«Wi«y, was used.lbt eternity .<"■ . ,^^
« J ^n timp thatlRforever, and to eter^MMr'Sncll ciw^
Cromer r^ U«Milean» 'for the f«ture|H|.£or all t^ne
Ke Batthis same form that may thusH^temlty, yay :
\ ^'":^;ro is still another^sc of «/o«, iutrfla^.M^o^to do-
\ notrkiud^of philos«phfe.a^..nity, from .Inch past. .pr.smvt.
1
n
(J
1
*
1
oven
.f ....Vnl; l.as entereVi,vto this "H'^'^^*'"" :^ "l;",;;^;^^^ ^
" ' '^' ■ '^"" ■ — . , . ...t Af a 1 things as an
„„rJ, are .--t am not a. .r.^. «« a n,au. fm^^^^^^ «,,
l,„ur of ihfrday, I must »ubsUt «» a" hour, audB^.a) as an How.
-f"^
*,if-l
r;>'
THE AGES OF ETERNITY.
257
m
r
future tiirie are eUminated, md absolute being only fe re-
|ied.r' ■/ v';- '■ "■■ :,
, •: I have ttius far followed Dr. Beecher, as his account of
Mhe matt^ seemsito be on the whole correct. I have n<rth-
'ihcr to' (X)ject, nor (at least, at present) anything to add.
The nei/tstepcarries us into Scripture, and there A^e g^t ttp^
more sSiisfactory as well as more familiar ground.
In the Septuagint the word aio7i is used as the constant
oquiValent of olam (D^il?), and it is easy to ascertain the
meabing of it therefore at the* time this translation was
made. Olavi is not the life of a man, and the Homeric sig-
icance of nion is not found. Olam is undoubtedly more
H ten Used for a limited time than for eternity. We have '
^een indeed that the Old Testament in general gives us only
the shadows of what are eternal things. And the shadows
are necessarily transient and to pass away. Yet to these
the term is constantly applied. The covenant with Noah
is a covenant of olam /and not less so the Mosaic statutes
arid ordinances, ^ij^h^ugh these plainly were to pass away.
So also even the Vmln of^oW" arc "men of olam' ; "the
(mcient landmark" is thfe "landmark oi 9lamV; Israel^
yoke had' been "broken from olam^' an* so repeatedly,*
Now in noTie of these cases do we find a parallel to the lim-
itations which the P.atl»r£JiCih''n.^'8 ^ "^ languages imposes
;n the terT^iNfe Sp^M^ii^^^ X^t leave it its full signi-
' r flounce ^^^tSEre. 1^ .|pci^^^^
which« beten t^m 'a%<i^ as inthe natui^ of thliigs it
coukl ; S so as to, tic rest. A# *h ^^pjes jp nunier- s«
' -fts. By no process of fair dealing then ,cat0tawi(oi^«o;i1n^^
. 'Is u^inthe Septuagint) be saidjede8saril)^4m6a^^ T
But'again, it iaused inthe^ural, wme we can sca^celjr
translate it otherwise than by " age#^ : ^sM^vii.-5, " th^.^
years of (^;f^ij ||^2 f^ ;^afe/Hhe m^mk'!^'*^%^^
•T5en7^r1^#i||HH 2i=?n JeV. u/20. ';'lt Is'fSu^ft " old " or
"of old" or 'Mn\||*lAe," in Deut. xXxiuT ; Josll, xxiv. "^jvJob. xxii.
% V
1
16; Prov. xxiuU<i; ilccV i. ip ;'lsa. )dvi. 9; ;ivH. U ; Ivi!^
* 5 **%9»'
fc,^
1%
.-*..
•vV'
! ■ V
-.v-
' =«?•
' I
."\"^
258 FACTS .AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURii ST ATK.
"the generations of old" are the " generations of ages."
^ Here the same remarks as before, and not less forcibly, ap-
ply- , ' ' r
Moreover, there is in the Old Testament a way of ex-
pressmg absolute eternity, which seems fully to recognize
the inadequacy of t>/«;n definitely to express it by itself
This is by the addition to it of a word which may be taken
as "and yet" : " for the olam ^? !/<("* showing that be-
yond the oteM there is a conception of time possible and
actual. This phrase occurs Home fourteen times ih the Old
Testament, aiid in one instance only it may have a more
\ limited meaning, Psa. civ. 5, and here really limited by tbe
\ nature of that to which it is applied.f • •*
This then gives us the sense (so far as the Septuagint
.ffoes) of botir;eon and :eonial: for *'ieonial" is the word
'they use in such cases as those where in Hebrew v^ld be
found the noun ohm with a governhig preposifTon. A
*' covenant of olam " becomes thus an " leonial covenant,"
and the "landmark of olam,'' the * :eonial landmark." No
one can avoid the conclusion, as it would seem, that olam
and leon in the Septuagint, may very properly.be taken^to
mean "age," and that iconial in the same way nfeans "be-
longing to the age, or ages." , / ' y •
* Dr Tayler L»'\vis speaks of it thus in Lance's Ecclesiastes : Ad " is
. tmn,nHoa' tr>, urnml,ana <;oincr h.^yond-^ passing beyoi.Otill fur-
' tlier on and'ofi. Tl.us it becomes a name for eternity. a4|ni thpse
remarkable expressions. Isa. ix. 5. nU ad, poorly rendered ' ev|rla%t.ng
Eatl.er,'and«/.(.c/a/. .nh ' inhabiting eterniiy.Msa. Ivii. lo ; vvf mvh.ch
compare Hab. iii. G. Gon. xlix. 26. and Isa. xlv.17. where we |^vfe the
same word as noun and ireposition-the mountains of ad, the progeni-
tors of ad-to the «ges of ad : to the ages to which other ages are to be
added indefinitely. Hence, thc^ preposition sense to, nftkmg it «igniti-
cantlv aswQllasetvmolo<iically..<iuivalenttotheLatin«rfc<,theOreek
4'rf Saxonr»<andfo.in all which tficM-e is this senseof arrival and transi-
Lion'. The idoa becn.os most vivid and impressiv.. in this Hehrev
phrase, nyi D^iy^j ■ f"'"<'^'f''" =""^ >■'"'•"'
"pShe other passages are:-Exod. xv. 18. Psa. x. IC, xxi. 4. xlv. 6
^•ii It.lii.H. cxix 11.. -xlv. 1.2. ::l.l)aM. xii. :}, Mic. iv 5.,
u-
THE \0E8 OF ETERNITY.
259
Here Dr'. Beecher stops short in his'&iquiry, and does not
follow it into the Now Testament. Nor does he sufticicnlly
recognize thu fact, that niUr all tlurtv aro passages in which,
olanT can scariH-ly si and for lesM tlian oternity, £lnd that
atojy is therefolvB alrej^dy used in tlu' St ptuagint in this
way.* His cxaminatiSn/is imperfect, and his statement par-
tial. The former lid^d^s not carry far enough to decide
the question, and yet leaves the full force of what he has
brought forward to bear Vpon the decision of the meaning
of the word as used by the Lord as to the condemnation ;Of
the wicked hereafter. This is scarcely candid. It is true
he warns us at the beginning that he do*es not propose to
discuss this question of eternal retribution, ^;it he does un-
avoidably produce ail impression by thepartial investigatioij
he; has made. Nay, he. would actually settle thepointM far
'^ as concerns the meaning of the words " eternal •'punishment^
and "everlastmg" fire. We may fairly demand of him,
why he has omitted what is absolutely necessary, to the
mere philological inquiry even V and why the question of
these words should bje' more difficult to settle in the New
Testament thaii it is in the Old? Nor only so, but as he
has shown us that the word aion did get to mean " eternity,"
and was used for it by Plato and others before the time of
our Lord, it was surely above all necessary to see whether
the New Testament might not use the woi'd in some similar
way. ' .
Dr. Beecher, J^ever, has not done this, and from this
point we mus<jj^pn without him. We have presented the
ajcuments and*conclusions to which 4ie and others have
'"^e, fullyy. and (we think) impartially. We shalj seek the
final solution iw>v wherp only we can find it, and where 'he
has not ventu^te yct.^ ^ . ^^^ ^ -
VPjkTii' 22 ; ail*! see Dent.
" cxv. l3/etc.
%
'^^w
* The very first uxeof both ahlirws this
xxxii. 40; Psa. ix.. 7 ; xxxiii.'U ; xc. 2; xcii. 8
L#
■** ■..5j'';i
/ ■
' i0f
%£"
r
260 EAUTS AKD THBOttliW AS TO A FUTUBfi STAtB.
ii*v .^■..
CHAPTER XXVII. - r ^
EW TESTAMENT SOLUTION OP THE QUESTION.
I|f^1i« NewVestament we find aian over and over again
tralislated "world,' and not badly, if we only think of
woVlds in tim^nstead of worlds in space, but more intelli-
gible to UB il,Y«ndered " age." T>ie "end of the ,oorklj^n
Matt, xiii., xxiv., x.'^viii. 20 is thus in all these places l^e .,
coranletion of;|^he age." In Heb. ix. 26, it is "-the comple-
tio^Wthe {igei'*r;^Ko we have " this world" and "the world
to come," "the children of this World," "the princes of this
world," and similar ei^tiressi^ns frequently. So again ^
have " ages to pome," aV wft* M^-e ages c|pipleted, and can
look back to a tim&bcforfealiesejaje^ began.*
* , Thus Scripture ^^ry Were r^gnizes the fact of these
successive ages, sorely not purposeless divisions of time, but
* eacjted step in the a^i8g|)lishment^f .di\finQ|pun8el8. We
liave in fact the very»exi)re8si(inpnd t^J it we sffall have ^
' i^n to return, "the purpose of tM«i«s ''* (^I^iiki^).
t% ages, then, are dispensatAal priorts, whqse e^stence
ami character are not ,UnimpapPit Aings^for the student of
the %ays^f Him whfese" goi^form have beeiT from of old,
Iplm everlasting." c|[t is to tlve " King of (these) ages " that
,^^e apostle therefore ascribes "glory unto the ages of
%ges" (1 Tim. i. 17). Him they all , serve in various har-
mony of the one everlasting anthem wherewith all His works
praise Him their jVIaker. » V '
, Eternity in Scripture we ( need hot wonder to find ex-
pressed in terms of these divinely constituted " ages." This
is done up a number of different ways, hidden Very much in
our version by vague and dissimilar phraseology, which ha»
little of the beauty and appropriatones tl ol the inspired orig
* Matt. xii. 32, Luke xviii. 30, xx. 34, 1 Cor. ii. 6, Epli» ii. 7, Col. ^
r 26, 1 Cor. ii. 7 (before the fif/en). . g, ' , , ^
50 again -v^
ted, and can
:pb» ii. 7, Col. ^
--^^W''.
'<
NEW TESTAMENT SOLUTION OF THE QUESTION. 261
inal. Tbe word aion is used nearly eighty times in this way
iu the New Testament, and above seventy times the word
Monios. We l»ave thus nearly a hun.lred and fifty occurrences
to test the Scripture use of these expressions. Surely we
should be able to arrive at son^atisfactory result.
Let us first look at the pastWges. Of course from our
poiltt'of view in time we can look at eternity as behind or
before us. It is but one and the same eternity, of course ;
for there cannot mthe nature of things be two : but to our
• 4K)nception there is a past and a future one. Let us gather
ufthe expressions^ of t)ie former first.
• at find tien that there are "ages "in the "ends "of
^ whSiJ^e art?v: for we read that ''all these things happened
unto^m for types, and are written for our admonition
upon who^gie ends of the world (literally, the ages) are-
come " (1 m' X. 11). We may surely connect that with
the passage t>efori cited from Hebrews (ix. 26), that "once
at the completion of the ages hath (Christ) appeared, to put
away sin by'Jthe sacrifice of Himsel£" These ages, were the
preparatory times of which we have been already thijg^jig,
when God by the ministry of condemnation and i-
ways was shutting man up to the grace which Chris ^
show. Thus " when we were yet without strength i?i- due
^/meChriBfr^ied for the ungodly." This grace lay .under
the veil thro^i^hout these ages— there, but lacking full ex-
pression. Tl^e "ends of the ages " having come, that ex-
pression has been found; and thus the " types " of Israel's
history, as well as the shadows of the law in a stricter sense,
cfive to us their full weight of "admonition." §
^ In Col. i. 26 again, we hear of a mystery hidden "from
ages and from generations," and in Eph. iii. 9 find a similar
expression. There need be no doubt that here we have thfe
• ' self-same ages as before. Nor again, when Paul speaks of
hidden wisdom "ordained before the ages, to our glory"
(1 Cor. ii. 7). —^
These ages th||p are plainly finite, and so is the whole
course of them- kit w%have two other expressions which
f^v-v;--
^!^'*i!'*fi^*9>lliiPV>*
262 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
aro different irom these. In them aion is used in the sin-
gular, and in one passage at least eternity must be meant.
" Known unto God are all His works from aion " (Acts xv.
18)^ where we cannot say "from the age." In the other
passages the expression may seem less decisive : God has
" spoken by the mouth of His holy prophets, whicli have
been from aion " ; and similarly, " by the mouth of His holy
prophets from aion" (Luke i. 70; Acts iii. 21); but in
neither case would *' the age " do at all. What age V " From
the beginning of the world" might suit the context, but
would be no translation : and outside that beginning of the
world is what ? Surely, eternity. In this sense then " from
eternity " would suit, and all the occurrences would bQ in
harmony.
Once more a similar phrase occurs in the words of the
man to whom the Lord gave sight (John ix" 32) : "^ From
the alfmwsLS it not heard that any man opened the eyes of
the blind," and here again the meaning is simply "it never
was heard." Thus wherever aion is used in these expres-
sions it cannot be spoken of a particular age or dispensation',
but seems invariably to imply eternity.
This is all we have relating to the past. As regards the
future we have more and various phrases, whidi we may
here again classify accordingly as aion is used }tn the singu-
lar or in the plural. The plural form we shall look at first
as being the most simple. We .have here three expi-es-
sions: — . ■ ^ ^■"■■-
1. Simplest of all, in Jude 25, glory is ascribed to God .
" both now and to all the ar/es." There is plainly no" reason
to limit this. "^ , \ ;. "
2. More often we have, and less fully, "onto the ages'."
This occurs/eighf times. Six times in ascriptions.df praise
to God or to Christ (Matt. vi. 13;'Roni.i. 25; ix. 5; xi.
36 ; xvi. 27 ; 2 Cor, xi. 31) ; onc6 the^ \a the statement Mr.
Jukes relies on, and as to the fprce of which we shall pres-
ently inquire,—" Jesus Chi|p, the ^nie yesterday, to-day,
and to the ages " (Heb, jtiii. ^\ : {\rid once it is said of Christ,
'fe;'
NEW TESTAMENT SOLUTION OP THE QUESTIOIT.
268
that" He shall reign over the house of Jacob unto the ages " |
Luke i. 33). In none of these passages is there reason to |
nuestion that a proper eternity is intended. _ - ^ . ^i^
S The third expression is a reduphcative form which
plainly conveys.a much greater impression of ^^^^^^'^y-
Lto the ages of ages> And this is five time's applied to the
life of God Himself: //. " ILveth unto the ages of ages
'(Rev. iv.9,10; v. 14; x. G: xv.7); once to the rcsurrec-
ion-life of Christ (Rev. i. 18) ; once to the kingdom of our ^
Lord and His Christ" (#ev. xi. 15) ; once to the re rgn of
the saints (ch. xxii. 5) ; ten times in ascriptions of glory to
God (Gal. i. 5; Phil, iv: 20; 1 Tim i. ^l \ ^ \^' ^^y
H^b. xiii. 21; \ Pet. iy. 11; v. 11; Kev.i.O; v. 3; vu.
12) • twice to the tormetit of the wicked (Rev. xiv. U ; xx.
10)- and once to the smoke of Babylon rising up forever
(ch xix. 3). These last passages we shall have again before
L, but if the duration of these ages is the measure of the
Ln life of Christ, ye^ of God Himself; surely its f^rce can-
not be questioned. : ' -xi. ^u^
• In all these cases the plural form impresses us with the
sense of vastness and immensity. Inthe c^xeswc Lave now
to consi.ler the use of the singular conveys the idea, of course,
of unity. Here again we. haje various expressionB.- ^^^
1. A very singular o^/% a'o" "^ *^ "'""j" """^^'^ "
is the duration of the rel.Vf<*e Son of God : "Thy throne,
O God,Ms for the aion of the '^lon " (Heb. 1.8), where we
havetheSeptuagintrcnderingoftheexpressionheforeno^^^
as the Hehrew on> for proper eternity aV\ Di.l», o?««
«„«?). Here then it does seem that aion (nust even m tne
Septnagtat* have this later but acknowledged sense. I lato
has it It is owned; and Philo also »» f -""""f^V^T'
■ from the verybirth-Blaccof the Septu^mt although of a
somewhat later date. " Here .he expression .s used for e^e^
nity.ana we can only translalo "for ^^-^if^-^^^^
• eou^a*) of eternity." -We have seu. a similar, use of a.on
J-
for the past (Acts xv. 18).
^ 7^^""~' Tl« v>ji ii" " " accord'm? to the course o| tUis
\varUl.' '. \ . ■, ;
/'
MX
if'
i
,
"* ^
1 „
■i^-'
264* FACT9 AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE. *
2. AgainV we have an ascripiiQn of glory to Christ,." for
the day of ^e>mty " (aion)' (2 Pet. iii. 18). Here onee'more
a limited meatving can scarce be contended for. - ,
3v Again, in'Ki>lv, iii. 21, we find,," Unto Him be glory in
the church by» Christ Jesus i«<<o rt// the (jeneratiom of th^-
(((je of the «//t'.s." liere no one, I suppose, \vould <^ubt ,
A eternity to be meant. It mai/ define what " age''" is meant
when aion is used alone : it is, the ' ' agd ' ' of the ages, the age
in which all ages are summed up. ." -. J ' .'
4. But the most commQu expression of all is that for which
no'm«;-e suited rendering can be fouml than " forever "—
for jthe ^iori, ' It is used twenty-height times ; ftiKl not in ^
single instance can it be proved to have a limited sente.
It too is 6sed for the duration of' the life of Christ (Jolrtixii.
34) I of the abiding of the Spirit of Go<l witlrMlis people
(xiv. 16) ; of Christ's" priesthood |IIeb. vil.) ;. the enduring
of tlie wor^ of God (1 Pet. i.' 23), ami of the doer of His
will-(4 John ii. 17); and of the believer's righteousness
(2 Gor. ix. 9). It is used' too" for the duration of the portion
of the ungodly, "blackness, of -darkness forever" (Jude 13.
. .2r^t.ii. 17). ; . ' ■ , "■ ^i^:
" Amid all this varied phraseology not one passage ;f an be
shown where our common translation gives some equivalent
, of •' forever," in which less than eternity can be proved 'to 1 )e,
meant. i'Mr. Clemance has hideed said : « An ^on may have
an end. . iEons of aeons may have an end. Only that which
lasts through all the leons is without an end, arid J5cri|i^ure
affirms* this only of the kingdom of God, and of the glory of
^God in tho^urch."* Canon Farrar quotes .this with appro-
bation; bPhe'has'not Mtempted tQ produce a^ingle'New
' Testament passage tliat I can iji^l, to prove the ^i>|rt^t^ p,f
, my assertion here. Instead of this, he goes to^t^^l ^^^'^-^
tament for his jjroqf, and of coui'Se quotes o//f™fetu?^
' ^ionj This'amounts to a confession thai': the. X c^JpstarnQnt
^' wdl not s^rve his purpose. Wo'uld he not liaV^roduced.
its testimony, if he could ? ,
■• • .* FntnrpPiifiishment.p. 86. quoted in' tlip pn4fi(r« to Ktenuil llopf
■,, • * .' ■'■ .. . ,:
M
^4
v';ri
■'.^c--i
w
NEW TESTAMENT SOLUTION OF THE QUESTION. 265
• ■ -
Dr. Bfeecher, too, as we have seen, avoids tlie New Testa-
ment. - Mr. Oxenham in^ his letter has nothing to say
concerning these expressions. ' Mr. Jukes, however,*^ comes
boldly forward, as we have seen, with a distinct^istatenffent
as to the nature and duration of' these ages to come. STohis
views, therefore,^ we must direct our attention. p
The substance of therti we have given before in his own
)i(rords. The ages, he believes, are periods in whicU God is
working in grace to meet and correct the ^ifect of the fall.
\l\s rest is beyond"yiem,.not in them, when the mediatorial
kingdom of Christ, which is for the,ages of ages, is given.up,
••\nd Christ, the AVorker of the divhie pui^pose in them, goes
back to the glory which lie had before the age-times, that
I*. God may be all in all. Throughout these ages Christ is
}..&, Saviour needed and found, as much as " yesterday" and
'Nov we have seen that over and over again it is asserted
[^^ God, that He '' livet^i for Ahe ages of, the ages," and 8c(
, of Christ as risen from the dead. Will Mr. Jukes say
.. .jt His " behohVI am alive for the ages oY ages" is not
meatit to convey the thought of the Englisft version, " I am
alive for evcnnore''' Y or that "God, who liveth for the ages
of at^es" means " God who liveth for the time during whioji
He is showing; grace ? ; -
Ao-ain,^ glory is over janH over again ascribed to God for
the ages ofi^ges or the age of ages, and not once (accorclmg
to tMs view jpf the mattar) fot a proper feternity at all !
How. bey oW measure strangfe that there should be.no
glimpse beyond ihese ages,- durhig whic^j, the smokp of tor-
m'ent. never cca.ses ! How strange that just when that long,
linf^ering purgation shall have come to an end, — when praise
should be most rapturous^ and joy complete*— thlit jlisf then
&4^"hl come to the end of ^11 that Scripture conteip-
^Ijttes df joy or praise,, or the very litg of God Himself, and
B. a note be heard, not, a raf of gljpry shine out of the
.«>
9
r;
si ■
J-
tentnl IIoi)P. ,\\A
« ■ , I
«»
■. -J^.
*^jMliMr. Cox," Salvalor Mundi," ch. v.^vi.
m
^"
, - -A . -'
A
\«.
■\
'-ffl
' .
1Mb
■ V'
i^H
i . i .
■1 . ,
'■
'">■
1
h. I-
FACTS ANI> THEORIES AS TO A PUTirRE STATE.
impenetrable eternity beyond! Who can believe this?
Who can seriously claim it as a thing to be believed V
But we are told tliat Scripture itself thus speaks of the
"purpose of the ages."* The phrase occurs, Eph. iii. 11, as
the Greek of what in our, version is >i eternal purpose." But
.what is this purpose, j^s Scripture, nc^t the .Restitutionist, de-
clares it ? Is ii not, so far as given in the passage produced,
" the intent that now unto the princiiJ^lities and p^wefs^ in
heavenly places itiight be known by the churoh the manifold*
^wisdopi .of God,' according to the purpose of the ages"?
'There is no mention heft of other beings than the angels and
the church; the lime for the \yisdom of God to Ue thus
made known is " now." -Can Mr^ 'Jiffccs show how this •
speaks 9f the recovery to God of those in a,n after-time
cast into hell V * If he can, at least he has not dc^ne it. .
But thai '* Christ's mediatorial kingdom is for the ages
of a'^es, and after these are finished, He delivers it up." Let
. us see what is the truttTpf this. | - ^
Now sitting upog,,the Father's throne as Son of God^ and
Mvmg "all authoia^y in heaven and earth," lie comes as
Son of/tidn m glory to take Jlis own .throne as such *" It .
is plainly this kingdom which He delivers up to the Father
(according to 1 Cor. xv. 24-28), having accomplished the
puri»ose for ,which He took it. . He reigns, says the apostle —
.until wliei\V "Till He liath^>w« all eiionks under Ilis feet." '
Is tbat conversion ? If it is, words have nO meaning. No ;
it is the sul)jecting ^by po^yer tho.se who could not '^e\
subdued 'by grace. Death i^ among these enemies, and
'• death, the last onemvy shall be destroyed.'' AVheri. V
Wlien death and hell (hades), having delivered up jLheir dead,
* So also Cox (Salv. Miin., p. 107) : '.' In liis epistle to tlio"Kplie.sians
fie both e.vpres.sly njun;';)» God's deUsrini^iation to save men by Christ
\aU riien 1] ' tlu; purj^ose of the. <ifj<>t,' tlie etid tlj^ was to bo wrought
out tlirough all the successions .'of 'time ; and mst(W|<>ly asserts tliat
this redeemin^j w.ork will take ages for its accomplishment./^' Ages to
come f Where 1 ' ^ . *'
•J-Comp. Rev. ill. 21i Dan. vii. l3 ; Matt. xxv. 31," etc. ,
v!i
t^
\
■, -i^' ■
v6, •
■ ■'..■II
■■ VIV
^■' NEW TESTAMENT SOLUTION OP THE QUESTION. 2&1
shall be 'cast into the lake of fire. When Gehenna shall
swallow lip hades, and the second death |)ut an end to
the first (see Uev. xx. 13, 14»). 'Then will the last enemy
be destroyed, and all be under the iee^ of Christ. Then, ^
therefore, will be the time when QhristVill deliver up the •
kingdoiji to ihe Father. *
But the ages of -hges s'treteh on beyond this : for the tor-
. ment for the' ages of ages in the lake of fire begins even'for
the devil himself bdt at tlie close of the millennial reign
(R,ev. XX. 10). The kingdom which Christ takes to piit •
down all enemie;B will be over. Dieath, tke last enemy, will
be destroyed. But the ages of agtes roll on their unbroken
coursJ^and Christ's' ''reign for the ages of ages " will of ^
. coiirse^o on also. - * -
^ It is„a very common mistake Mr. Jiikes has made, but it
becomeljpa very serious one when made the foundation; of a
doctrine sucli as his. ^-He has confounded the brief millennial
reign in which Christ" by power puts do#n His enemies
with the everlasting reign, of ChAst as So^^^pon t^^e Father's
throne, which never ' can be given Up. For Mt|| lU reigns
now before that kingdom is come. ^^\Jlt^B0hntY i& ills'
in heave9 and 6arth. It. will notjcJeasp^ %be Pis when that
coming :kingdom shaU be deUy^e<|;:^i) to th(? Fajher,.that
God may be all in alU ' \i^5 ^ -K '^^'^
• And that coming- rule, will It to^ifest is IVl^. jukesv^ould
intimate, a grace beyond the pre8eii$--at' least more prevail-
ing grace than now '? On the contraf y, it is the rule of " THE
RO©°OF IKON,"* and the effect as to His enemies; not their
Ijeiiig won by the grace of the gospel, but " dashed inpieq^
likp a potter's vessel." '' • ^* *'
•;. ?^oV in' Rev. xi. 15", to which Mr. Juk^i'^fe it iS indeed.
>said, "TheMJor^fZ-kingdomp/our Lord and of His Christ has
'^ome," and this dqesof couf se re^ to the setting up of what
is catted the millennial l^^dom j but it is looked at|iB a very
intelligible way) as the setting up of an authority S^s^ich wpl
jiever cease, aV?/"//?<? kingdom, " the kingdom ofonrXqr d, and
*■ ;,v;
* Psa. ii, 8,5) ; Rev. il. 26, 2|.
^■st-
•*
^
.J
. I
/ ";
<^^
% 268 *'ACTS AND THEOIIIES AS TO A PUTlTllK STATE. " ,.
of His Christ," and so, when it is added, " ftnd He shall reign
for the„!?%es of ages,' this does not affect the truth that- the
. m^te human form of the kingdom will be given up. " He
shci^ feign forever aiid ever."' Though He leave the human
: t^hlrBie to sit upon the divine, still "He shall reign." It is
' the everlasting prean rightly then begun.
Certain it is that if as man He reign till all enemies "be
under His feet, and then deliver up the kingdom" t^,o the
Father, and if death be the last enemy destroyed,— rA<?7i the
ages of ages of tormejit begin for most from thlf^ point^^in^
stead of ending here. And Christ's reign for the ages OjT
ages cannot end here eij^her. • "
— ^ — r— Thus Mr. Jukes' fbimdation is swept away Another text
// V
#•
upon which he relies, there is not even so plausible an excuse
for misinterpreting. For when the apostle speaks of '' Jesus
Christ, the same yesterday, to-day, and for the ages '* <Heb.
' xiii. 8), he is certainly cortnecting this eittW'r with the faith
of the Christian leaders,* of which he ha«. spoken • in the
verse before, or with the " divers and strange doctrines " of
the verse after, or with both. He is either showing the uu-
changeableness of Christ, as ansWering the confidence of
■ His disciples' fajth, Or else that He is ever the same, to
' rebuke the divers and strange doctrines. In either case,
therp is no question of His being the Savi<»ur'of those who
have rejected His salvation; and to ft^a^mtfitf!, ilie name by
which His people know Him. in; order to imiist upoii His
being an Anointed Saviour to those who on the contrary t^
fuse and reject His salvation,^— is nothing less than bold per-
version of a l)lessed truth.
Mr. Jukes' views ort this point need not then detaifi ijf
•longer. But we have yet to consider tl»e word qu}nm
, '^♦aeonial,' or eternal. n v '
Anti it is here that we find. the fnJTphalanv -of opposition
to the commonly accepted meaning of the te^me. Canon
FarrsAand Mr. Oxenham ho re make their stand, not per'-
c^iong thai the battle is already gone against ihem irreeov
'llT
v^^^^1^i^l7:'i:.\-.s 1-' '. -.; "'■.Jit-^4
> •-,
^ /
-/
IJEW TIStAMENJEHOLUTlON Ot Tltfe^ESTION. ' 9QQ
* f ,' ' ' ■ . " n-, ■
erably. Messrs. Minton, Roberts, and others, their oppo-
nents indoctriM-, coincide with them. But an answer to
«n«' will be J^t tlic same tlrtic an aBStrer fe ail the f^^^^^^
Aiotum, as derived from «««^*,-.Gf eou^e gets its meaning
from this^so. We have seen that aiow has two meanings
in the'$f.W Testament; one, that of " age " or dispensation,
ttie otber^ oT eternity in the commonly understood sense.
:Wc may expept tben that aionios will /eflect thisj double •
•'sense. And we shall find our antieipatidWs verified by the
fact. • Let us first listen, however, to Dr. Farrar. ^
-' "I now cpme," be says, in the preface' to his book, " Eternal
Hope," " to aiaivioi, translated rightly and frequently by Eter-
nal' an4 wrongly and unnecessarily by 'everlasting.' I say
wrongly on grounds which c'annot be impeached.^ 'If in numbers
' of passageslthife word does not and cannot-menn ^endless,'— a fact
which none but the ^rbssesfc and most helpless ignorance ran dis-
j„ite,— it cannot bo right to read tliat meaning into the word,
because of any a priori bias, in other pkssages^. All scholars
alike'admit tliatiii many places dtwv can only mean ' age,' and
aiSvto^oxdy ' agfe-long,' or (tn the classic sense of the word)
secul^ which is ofteU equiyalentto ' indefinite.^ Many scholars
who have a good right to be heard, deny that it ever necessarily
means .^ endless ' though it is predicted of Mindless things. "^ ^ -
■-' In a note he gives as his authority, so far a^ the Xew Tes.-
tament is concerned, as to n^r^^v.t no reference, and as to
J^^y^o^ three (Roni. xvi. 25 '2 Tim. i. 9; Tit: i. 2)'. He
adds, " He who said a^o^^rtov «»> (eternal fire) use* the.
word a few hours after In a sense that had nothing^ do'
\\{itbtime (J. xvii. 3)." ' ', ' '
\Thi8 sense he mentions in his sermon on hell as implymg
somethiBg' spiritual,'— something above and beyond time^
. i
" llial ' endless
Sert. v., on T)r
* Doctors differ. Mr.'Oxeiiliam m )v • LettPr '' says
^nsey'- Permnn. ' " , , , ■ .u
t By a ^JPrirn! onor Ajr^y nnri ^u.^r,r^i ],av^ rhaiipftd plaC^^ »" thft
noil" • < y . , , r.
tDocto.'S <l*'flfei- h^r^. al^'- Mr To? w-liw di^ciElo Vr. Farrar
TYiainly is. yel ijpeaks o^' th'f^ '^th'or \v> -f .hniu nuA ixic.ivxvi^.m
■9^.
1
r
f
h
■ 1...
:*
270 FACTS AND THEOKIES AS TO A FUTUKG/STATE.
— ^as when the knowledge of God is said/ to be eternal
life." lie proceeds :— •' So that whert with /your futile bill-
i^^^ou foist into this word the fiction /of endless time,
m do hut give_^ the lie to the mightjr o^th of tl*^t great
^t, w^ho set one foot upon the soa and one uj)oVi tTbe land,
1^ with hand uplifted to lieavon, swore/by Him that liv^tia
bvc-r and ever, that time should be n6 more.'"* ' j^ W^
'"^^iVis excnrsus.upon the word, at thp end of the boo1i:,he
is us that — ' . / .
Vs",,!)
If-
'■>■ ' t
. "it is not worth while once, moi-c to discuss its meaning,
when it has been so ably proved by so jhany writers that there is
no autJiorifj) ivlmt ever for render iii(j\t [pnerhtatiari,'' and when even
those who like Dy. Pusoy arc such earnest defenders of tho doc-
trine of an endless hell, yet admit that the word only rdeans
V* endless within the sphere of its own existence,' so that on their
'&ym showing the word does not prove their point."
Ik ; V ■ " f
' And he adds : — /,
** irmay be worth while, ^however, once rnore to point out to
"less educated readers, thai dioDv, d too vio^, and their Hebrew
equivalents in all combinations, are repeatedbf used of things
which tiave come mid- shall come to an end. Even Augustine
admits (what indeed no one can deny) that in Scripture aicov,
~- aioij'io? must in many instances mean 'having an end,' and St.
Gregory of Nyssa, who al least knew Greek, uses aiajyio? as the
. epithet of an interval." ' ^ ^ ,f
i • /" That the adjective a/'&jVT'dS IS ,fl,pplied to some things which
„iire * endless' does not; of cjours^, prove that the word itself
' meant endless ; and to introduiStf) this meaning into many passages
would be" utterly impossible and absurd. . : ..Our translators
, have naturally shrilnk'from such a phrase as 'the endless God.'
,; - ,. '^ worlds w.hi,cH^^^^ txelieve I.eah,^»lrow yon, w/arj'ro?
' ^/" tehhilbJs above ti)]^, or Ihjti \\if,^^^^^^ oQ^tiast time, are saturated
.- ^ .0 througli and tl<r«>ugll, ^Vllh tli© tliought and el^nmnt of time *' (Salvator
•y^:; .;>>;. iiupFdi,. p. 100).''' ,: ^^ ' ,■■ ''■'■,.:■''' '■'.■'„•„ " ,■ ■ ■" ■■^■■' "...."' ' *
K,^.;;.^'^' ",..■■■%■. '■'♦■Br.: iFiirrar'Sliovc^" How, jie ,<:an Iri'fle; v(}fii" Scrijilure .by admit^g; in'
r.y--^:.^: ^ ; »4np>ttf llmt'p^ may meani^-^as it mast cert?),in1y do©s_meanr*-
, ,^^" jr^ : „ ?^' tlkt^nb fiir^^ de1ay^sfttoittt' ini^ene. - Ef th^pe- be^ #;en a^ possi-
": - 1 "> /hilttjr <St tlMs, ^by ar^cefas abd^te^ij^m y^^afc Isi]^^ ,i«>t what
"<c'f',it..'- ,he^u6fes:i- ,.„ „'„..■;'> ":■■■■; P'- '-■:: „;.•■^:, •■".::■''■:":. : -■.- „- ■/•.:■■'>■:
'■ ■ ■::' »m" "** ■■ t/ ■ ■*'
^ ■■ ■[< ■■" - '•*■', ■■■ ■■- ■■ ■.•■\ ■ '•■-■ ■• :. ■-■■■.•■-'."" " ■..--■/...-„'<..»....■'..
■' " ■■«„■'•' „ ^^ ■,..»■■»■' " ■••.•,.. •■•■\i> <»--■ i|.V-.-':iv'"»,'^'' ;.■"':;-■:- "" ".:' ■•..■.,...■.;;■
...... rt."",, .
■ V^
NEW TESTAMENT SOliUTION OF THE QUESTION.
271
The utter dearth of metaphysical knowledge renders most people
incapable of realizing a condition Avhich is indejiondent of time—
a condition which crushes eternity into an hour, and extends an ,
hour into eternity. But the philosophic Jinvs and the greatest -
Christian Fathers were qiiite familiar with it. 'iEon.'saysPlulo,
•is the life of God, and is not time, but the archetype of time,
and in it there is neither past, present, nor future.' "
This is Dr. Farrar's whole arfjuinent. It is not all he
says, of course ; but it presents fully his thoughts. We may
now compare his thoughts with Scripture.
And it is remarkable how little his appeal ia to the New
Testament. He refers largely to the Old, that is, to the
Septuagint version, but as to the New, three passages of an
exceptional character, in each of which occ^irs the phrase^;
"seonial times'' constitute reaily his whole appeal 1 We
have seen, to^, that as to the phrases in the New Testament
for "forever," etc., he does not venture one single appeal I
This is the final result after so miich erudite research, out
of near one hundred and fifty passages to be consulted, (^le
phrase recurring in three of them is produced I
Dr. Farrar's will to produce more, if he could, need not
be doubted. His learning is not for jtic to question. Hi»
mind is enlarged enough to apprehend that metaphysical eter-
nity of which we shall have more to^say by and by, but ^hich
the unmetaphysie^l part of mankind can so little realize, and
which Dr. Beecher calls, somewhat otherwise interpreting the
&ct8, " to common sense minds, nonsense." Y^t after all,
this, is the r(^«ult, after weighing (as we must give him credit
for doing) one huntlred and fifty passages, one phrase in
three passages where aionios cannot mean " endless."
. . And let me put the force of that a little plainer ; for it is
a kind^of argument we have before encountered in the
mouth of some with whom Dr. Farrar would not perhaps
, : like to be associated, but^ which needs to be made plain to
be duly appreciated :-: * "- % £,- ,. t 5 -
I^etmia cannot \k^ "spirit " ^n the first clause ot Johnin.^
"g-; it ought not therefore to >>e^';^ri"* " '" *^^ ^^^^ "^^ ^*
/ the same -verse. 4 '^^
.^*..
' ^- \
'h
&
I'
II l»
t iv
i;.-
'U:
f ^
^
272 FACTS AND THE0K1E8 AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
Psudhe is over and over again used for " lifi?," where to
translate it " soul " would be an impossibility. Therefore
you cannot insist upon its being " soul " where the Lord
speakB of man as bt'liig uiiubU; to kill it.
Let us put the parallel :—
Aio)iios cannot mean '* endless " in a passage where it Avould
read " endless thiitsy Therefore it cannot mean this when
(jrod is spoken of as the ''eternal God."
I can quite understand that Dr. Farrar will not own his
argument in that shape, but its only shame with him is the
shame of its nakedness. He has clothed it with fair words,
which after all cannot prevent its halting badly.
Why does he not show us that aionios cannot mean " end-
less" in some of the pa.ssages in which we affirm it does,
instead of taking up those in which we are as clear as he is
that it does' not f Why does he avoid the real issue, to
create a false one ? Dr. Farrar's animus evidently obscures
his judgment, fatally to the argument he maintains. " Even
Augustine," he tells us, " admits {tchat, indeed, no one can
deny) that in Scripture, «7&ir, diojvto'i must in many instan-
ces MEAN 'havhig an end.' " I do not believe myself the
only one, by some thousands at least, who would deny it.
Nay, I must believe that it is merely careless writing when'
Dr. F. affirms this. Aionios nevej; meant " haVing an end "
yet, and pone should know it better than himself. It IS
affirmed of thuu/s icldch have an end, and in those cases of
course cannot mean " endless." No one will deny that : and
that is all (I suppose) that he means to affirm.
A moment yet as to the Septuagint. ■
>¥ Dr. Farrar ignores the necessary change of meaning in
words in lapse of time, and which Dr. Beecher's history of
it (certainly from no point of view hostile to Dr. F.'s theory)
so plainly shows as to the word. in question. Even the Septu-
agint does not refuse the later meaning of aion by any means
altogether, while the X.ew Testament shows this later mean-
ing almost superseding the earlier, as the time-sense in the
Septuagint itself h.as superseded the earlier Homeric. It is
it
i^Mii.
.^f
NEW TESTAMENT SOLUTION OF THE (iUESTlDN. 2t6
well-nigh as vain to bring up the Septuagint to settle the
case for .the New Testament, as to bring up Homer to settle
it for the Se[)tuagint. ' ;
And, comparing the Old Testament With the New, where
have you the leolam vaeil? of the Hebrew reproduced in the
Greek ? That expression which does indeed imply a " be-
yond " to the oUuu is never nised for the New Testament
aion. Save only a word twice used (and where hi one pas-
sage out of the two, people deny for it also that it means
"everlasting"!), there is no other expressio^i for this but
aionios; no other for eternity but some phrase compoun<led
of aion. The question is one of blotting or l|Ot evary phrase
for eternit^ijr out of Sqripture. /, .
I beg Dr.. Farrar's forgiveness, 1 must modify that state-
ment. ; He will allow us to say '■eternal' if only by that
we do not mean ",' everlasting." But doeyytot he*know that
we of the less learned see no difference l^ween the two?
Of course I do not disi)ute his right to gjCr'baek to deriva-
tions and to speak of r/'6v///i -or of -^e^^.s, as he will. The
derivation of a word is one thing ; its actual nm is- another.
Do we use eternal in any other sense than vverlasting really?
As I have saltt^ it really comes to this, thJit the expression
(in the sense we have received) mu.st difftppear out of the
English language— for aught I know, out of every other
too,— as well as out of Scripture. Dr. Be^^er will not let
usf have " everlasting " any more thin' Dr. Rfi^ar will *' eter-
nal," and with just as good reason. So serious is the ques-
tion. And we can only conclude that If learning and sense
are so oppose*! as tlwjy seem to be, we may as well retain
the latter and dij^miss the former, ^
We might thfen perhaps as well^BIrn to simplicity and"
* Dr. Farrar takes even" this term a^ not illjpl^
the one exception is nieroly a liinitat^on fr|^
spoken of, which in no wisse shtt.Ws a limitation .e*^
even ^ the-" everlasting "hills so often urged,
Farriploubt what we mean hy " everlasting " 1
t "^'''^^"S, Rom. i. tJO i Judc 6.
fcr\ie eternity ; but
,itre of the thing
•e; If we speak
that make. Dr.
"f
i
1 I"
r
I
I
:n
A «
u
■^
tion too, of cour
added to exprc
That textual
Ivill heli> us here
#'■.'■■'
274 FACrtJ AJJD THEOEIE* AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
English, but we must not copy the example of those whom
we have taxed with neglect of ascertaining the New Testi^-
ment use of the word. We must seek ourselves to ascertain
it ; and out of C8 passages remaining to , us, omitting the
three produced by Dr. Farrar, we may surely discover the
ordinary sense attaching to it.
, But first,, what of these three passages? what does the
expression mean— " iconial thacs'' ? Does " leonial " there ;
speak of limited duration ? I think we may very fairly argue
that it does not there sjieak of duration at all. "Times" is
the word whiph th«2^„ implies duration, and limited dura-
/:c .»..-„iJli^'-},y t]jcn should another word bo
le thing?'
deprecated so nmch by Dr. F'arrar
have Ibefore heard of a mystery " hid- .
den from (ifjes and generations,'' and now made manifest to
the saints (Col. ,1." 2C), and we have seen that the ages here
are those of preparation for Christ's coming, an(J closed by
His death ; so that how upon us the ends of the ages are
(*ome, and we have the full admoiiition of what happened
unto them as types. ' A reference ^ Rom. xvi. 26 will show
that to these " leonial" or ''age-times " the apostle refers :
times which had the character of " ages "' or of dispeii^atlons.
This is wh^t "a^onial " here signifies : not the limited dura-
tion of the ^inies, which as " times " are necessarily limited,
but thpir being special, divinely constituted, times. ^
Gonial here then strictly means " belonging to the ages" :
it gets its meaning from the first sense of aion. But inas-
much as aion has the sense of eternity as well, we may ex-
pect to find it ^Iso signifying " eternal;' " belonging to the
age of ages." Let us see how far we can prove this mean-,,
ing to be in aionlos, i^i\. how far general in the New .
Testament this meaning is.
. Now, one \|ery plai*!! passage, one would think, to show-
that it means,/' eternal,'! is th^t in which it is contrasted with
what is tempiral: "the things which -are seen are temporal,
^but the thingl which are not seen are eternal " (2 Cor. iv.
verse pre-
eternal in
NEW TESTAMENT SOLUTION
liy. Hero limitless duration must bo
limited.
With this the " eternal weight of
ceding must be connected ; and also "
the heavens " of the following one.
So a^ain in Philem. 15 the apostle writes : " For perhaps
he therefore departed for a season ^ that thou shouldst receive
\x\m forever {dioovtov avvoy aVi"^;/?) . , . a brother beloved ;"
and here the limited duration expresse<l in aionios is again
contrasted with the limited " for a season."
Thus simply is it proved to have the sense "eternal.'*
And why then should its force be doubted when wd have it
applied to God, to His "power " and "glory," to the
" Spirit," to the khig^Iom of Christ, to the saii^s' " life," " in-
heritance," " habitations," '* salvation," " redemption "? And
this covers all the occurrences in the New Testament save
those relating to tl\a^ future judgment, and two others
perhaps somewhat lessSecisive. Of these the " everlasting
covenjint" we need not doubt to be'strictly such, only refer-
ring to the past, in our human way of speaking, the " covenant
from everlasting" ; while " the everlasting gospel " gives us
a case of necessary limitation by the subject to which the
term is applied, and which our English words, while incon-
testable as to their meaning,, equally admit.
I do not see how the New Testament could give us much
more assurance of " aeonial" being (save where ^necessarily
limited by the subject) " eternal " in the fullest sense.
But Dr. Farrar believes this is only because of " the utter
dearth of metaphysical.knowledge " which renders us "in-
capable of realising a condition which crushes eternity into
an hour, and extends an hour mto eternity." We Nioubt
sincerely if Dr. Farrar can realize it. " Eternity crushed i^o
an hour," and that when time is eliminated from
thought, we believe to be simply a very gross absurdity.
How can what is not time at all be " crushed into an hour'' ?
And how can an hour which is "time," be extended into an
eternity which is not ? Perhaps we should get on no better
^r-^TT--
- \ '
. 1 '■' V.
■ '^;i-|*- ■■'
■(■■ ■' ' 1 " ' .
'•*'; '
■.#'-;;■'■
. - '■■,-.?"■■•■■•■ '■ .. ■■■'■■■■• v:-^#-,.-: •'■
:■■ ' V. "■ "-.'■
*
■ ■' ■ -'-' ' ■ "
■•■' . ■■:: ,,;j^4f^J\:^--\^ ■ ■;,<■.
■,/ ■'
' - '' -J^':.-"-
i: : /■■:.-.,
,-•/ '^- -,.-., ■; ■ ■■■ ■^-.- .. -^i;
"■'
•' ':■
'■ '..''..'J'''
-
- - -"''^' "'.'■■'■■■ '
■■ /.-;"'■; ,: /■ ;/■:■; •,,.--f" ■-■ - .: ■■■■■' ' ..■
-".""
. • ' '■ .-'
*■ ■ ■ ""
^
■■'---•,.• ■■ -... ''■, '
■■■-■-fef'.-"''^' -^^ ■■■'"•.■-/'I
"■■' f
\:T "■>
-
■'■' y . \': ■■y\'-^^^^^^
- . ■■. - ' » ' ■■ -. ..'it'
■ ■''■■■ " \ ■ ■'■'>." ' \-. ■■"r/ . -■ .''' '--iry ■ .
'^■r ■
-"■.■'•■■■ .^ ;
. . ■ . . -^ ■
■ . ' \ 'V ■.-^'■'.■:^ ''' ■■■■■■.■■■■ ,^ '■ ' :
- -^-y' ■ '■ :" -■■' ■: '^"•'^■;
■ ^
■ !'.,,■'•
*
■ i':
"■ '-'>
■-■-■', ■■,■■.- ' './•■-. /V
'"-■■■ ',"■."■'- * -'■ .
.!?. ■
■ - ' '.''--
■ ■ -'■'■■' "' ■/ ■
>
■..
y [^'^ ■yyy^K:^''
■.■"*"•<
'-
■
>'•■..'-
; Jr'y^
i>
ft
/ ■■-,
:l^
^i.
«
:*
t '^^
* .-:
m
ci
ir'i'K >-•;.-.l■:^Jjl;iB■>■-^■ -•■>' -' ■-.'>'" -T~<^..-.v<
v
t
a
it
As«ociatien for Information and Imaoo Managamont
1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1 100
* Silver Spring. Maryland 20910 ,
301/587-8202
k
A
O
.<t
'^'
%0
ii9
^'s
Genti meter
1 2 3
Ji i^ i|ii )i |i i | i|ii|i | ii|ibi|i ^l /i |il ) ip l^ ^^
Inches
10 n 12 13 14 15 mm
2 3 "* 4
\.0 it.
1^
I.I
IL25 i 1.4 li.6
**•*
*;*
w
1
m
•.t:^:i^
''»«S«.-/ ]■
MRNUFRCTURED TCT AlIM STfiNDRRO'S
- PY RPPLIED IMRGE, INC.
4l^ ^
n
ft-
ft'
i
a;
if
n.
m
II.
it K-
276 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
« " ■ ■ ■ ■
with Philo and the Christian "fathers." We do think
there is more of Plato than of Scripture in their thought's as
to this, and tierhaps it is this at bottom which ^)#kes Dr.
Farrar reject the ^^w Testament "ages of ages"^ as being
'■*the true expression of eternity; for here^in pity to our
human faculties it may be, but still the el^ient of time is
not eliminated from the idea of eternity ; eternity is just
illimitable time. And we may thank Ood He does not
writ,e merely for metaphysicians, but for " babes."
But then a^^ain we read that aionios " is in its second sense
something ' spiritual ' — something above and beyond time,^
as when the knowledge of God is said to be eternal life."
. Does l^r. Farrar really mean thW; ^' eternal " here signifies
•' spiritual " ? Or does he mean to refer it to that metaphys-
ical eternity which maybe crushed into an hour and be
eternity all the same? If it be the latter I have said all
that is needful ; if the former, I scarcely need reply. Why
should not aionios be " sorhething " holi/, because " eternal
life " is that; or anything else almost by the substitution of
whiph the obnoxious sense of eternity may be most thor-
oughly blotted out ?
CHAPTER XXVm.
THE KEW TESTAMENT SCKIPTl RKS AS TO THE JUDGMENT OF
THE WORLD.
We are now free to enter upon the New Testament, un-
embarrassed by the questions which would otherwise divert
us too far from the study of the special texts which we shall
now have to consider. And in order to pursue our study of
the subject with more clearness, we shall first seek to separate
from the texts which speak of final judgment thpse which
speak of the judgment of the living when the Lord appears.
We have already looked at this from the side of the Old
Testament, as it is indeed a point of main concern through-
THE JUDOMEXT OF THE WORLD.
277
iGMENT OF
out it. But the New Testament, while going beyond the
Old as far as the literal sense extends, doejg not by any
means lose sight of the coming judgment at the appearing-
of the Lord. The millennial blessing as to the earthly part
of it is indeed very briefly touched on, and the blessings in
heavenly places are substituted for this, Christian promises
instead of Jewish ones. And in accordance with this the
judgment coming on the earth is more a solemn warning to
the impenitent and unbelieving, than as conni>cted with the
hope of the saints themselves* > ,-^ •
The Jewish promises being earthly, necessarily, for those
who are to inherit them, the earth must he delivered from
what defiles and destroys II. Israel's foes miist be put doAvn
with the strong hand of power, that they may be nation-
ally saved, and inherit the earth. Christians, on the other
hand, rightly expect to be with the Lf)rd in heaven in the
Fathers house according to His promise- (John xiv. 1-3).
y/ieir part in the millennial kingdom is to reign over the
earth with Christ, but this is not to be Confoundefl with liv-
Y^.
mg on It.
It is not, of course, possible here to dwell upon the points jI
in controversy between so-called pre-millenriialists, and the . ^
advocates of a merely spiritual reign. Still it will be found
that the connection of truth is everywhere so Intimate in
Scripture that a wrong view as to th^ millennium may con
fuse many an otherwise clear passage of the gravest impor-
tance as to the present question. As already said, th« putting
off the Lord's coming to the end of the millennium confounds
together two wholly differenti, epochs of judgment. But
what has been already urged as to this must suffice us now.
Tl^e texts which apply to the judgment of the living in the
New Testament in general present no special difficulty.
(1.) First, in the Baptist's words* we have Israel, I doubt
not, purged by judgment at the coming of the Lord. "He
will thoroughly purge His floor, and gather His wheat into
the garner, but He will bum~up the JchaS with unquench-
able fire." It is a figure of judgment wholly inconsistent -
ir
u
I
■ft
W
.11
?,'f
■H
It
i^
V
%!•-
■^'
.^
278 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
with hope for those condemned as " chafiF." Annihilationists
would naturally claim it as a figure of utter destruction, andf-
So it is. But then a figure and what it figures arc as differ-
ent things as here the " chaff " is from tW^ncn compared to
them. This is what these writers constantly ignore. They
argue from the literal effect of material fire as if the fire,
< the thing subject to it, and the cfect itself were not all in
some respects as much contrasted as compared. Material
destruction is not a figure of material destruction. It niust
y/</fnc something else. ' , /;'
Not of course its spiritual opposite : 4ind here it is that
universalism of all gradtes so completely fails. Material de-
straction cannot -figure spiritual restoration. It is wholly
and absolutely opposed to this. But it figures spiritual de-
^strUction on the other hand, and not material; and here
annihilationism of all grades Tails as completely.
When God's wrath is the fire and man its objecf,- who c
argue that, the necessary effect will be his material destruc^
tion? Certainly it must be argued at least on some othfci-
ground than this. And this has been attempted according-
ly, Isa Ivii. 16 being quoted in the random and cai^less way,
I must say not unusual with them, to show that "the spirit
would fail before " His constant anger, " and the souls that
He had made." '^But this is said, in the style of the Old
Testament which we, have befilfre insisted on at length, of
death as the effect upon mortal nrian here, and has no refer-
ence to that judgment which is beyond death itself The
argument is therefore inadmissible.
I have shown befoie what man's utt^r destruction is..
It is his perishing from the place for which he was naturally
made and fitted, and \his by the wr^th of God because of
sin : this solemn judgment it is that may fipd its figure in
the chaff burned in the fire. No material destruction can
be argued from it. '
. Here the perishing even from the earth ml^y be intended,
for a similar figure is often used in the Old T^estament when
God's wruth takes away living men. And to the judgment
struction can
^.
THE JUDGMENT OP THE WOULD.
279
of the living the words hereaip^ply. Yet^ this case eternal
judgment is so closely connected with it, Uiat I sec no use
in separating between them. < '
(2.) In Matt. xxii. 13 we are again warned of the judgment
at the Lord's coming. The time is when the khig comes in
to see the guests invited and presenting themselves at the
marriage-feast. The scene is earthly : no guest will find his
w:ay into heaven and be turned out. But 'here there is no
figure even of destruction. The judgment is, " Bind him
hand and foot, and cast him into outtr darkness : there shall
be weeping and gnashing of teeth." I need only refer to a
similar picture in ch. viii. 12.
Here " darkness'' is not » annihilation, even in figure.
There can bo none as punishment jjvhere there is no eye to
behold 4ight if it were there. In ch. xxv. 30 the unprofitable
servant is adjudged th the same thing ; and in Jude 13, we
shall find it again in stronger language used for an eternal
doon). f "
(3.) 1 p:;ss over the separation of the sheep from the goats,
because although it is i-eally'tlie judgment of living people
when Christ comes, the terms of it connect it plainly with
the final iud'jrment. We shall examine it therefore in an-
other place. ' Luke xix. 27 again refers to the Lord's cOming,
and presents no difl^culty. ,
(4.) Luke XX. 18 is again one of those pictures in which
material destruction figures another thing. I need scarcely
repeat what I have just now said about a parallel case.
(5.) We may pass on now to 2 Thess. i. 7-9, upon 'which
we shall dwell somewhat longer. It manifestly speaks of
a time " when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven
with His mighty angels, in fiaming fire, takhig vengeance on
them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our
Lord Jesus Christ : who shall be punished with everlasting
destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory
of His power, when He shall come to be glorified in His
saints," etc. ,
Mr. Dobney has the most fully of all writers that I know.
■«1
--s?--.
x.;-.
\
I It
^ It
If
t
■
m
J' Si
-/
1f
'X
280 FACTS AXD THEORIES AS TO A PUTURE STATE.
examined this passage in behalf of annihilationism. I shall
therefore follow his argument as to it. He brings Whitby
and .Alaeknighyorward to shpw that the " literal sense ' aj)-
peared so mai^iestly the trueX^ne to these expositors that
even they "had to adopt it to the fullest extent their mental
philosophy* would allow," and admit that' the " utter d^-
struetion of the bodies [of the wicked] without any b<ypeof
their regaining new bodies" /« mvolved in. the passage.
, And Mr. D. presses that '' beyond dispute, the sinner in his
entircness ca7i be destroyed literally'; and if the word has
any literal foree at all in 'this passage, it eomes in all its
tremendous fulness against the wliole man, and not merely
against a part of his nature."*
Now here is an^ in^stance of the value of a little knowledge
of what tlie J^ible savsjisjo^dii^close of the pr^^^^
of things. Had Dr. Whitby been ,i pre-millennialist instmd
of being as opposed to it as it is Avell known h^\vas,he
would have understood the absolute impossibility of " ever-
lasting destruction " being what he Avould make it. P^or the
passage says plainly that this takes place at Christ's appear-
nig,— />f/or6 the millennium therefore, and more than a
thousand years before the resurrection of the wicked. In
this last all the dead not. raised a:t the first resurrection are
to rise. Tt is iinpossible then that the.se coul4, Jiave been (in
that sense) eternally destroyed, and so never to rise, a thou-
sand years before. To any one who holds therefore to a true "
millennium, and Christ's coming before it, this text alone
should be <lecisive that " everlasting destruction " is not an
nihilation. Thus error is linked with error, and truth with
truth.
I need not follow Mr. Dobney iii his further remarks upon
the expressiun " from the presence of the Lord and from the
glory of His power," as I do not take this to mean ''away
from." I am quite content to accept Mr. Hudson's reference
to " the times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord"
as a paralle l instance of the use of that .phrase. In either
* Sciii»tui.' I)(.(t. of FlU. F^uiiislinieiit, up. -JK), 217. '
ATE.
9m. I shall
Jg8 Whitby
1 sense " aj)-
ositors thai
iheir mental
" utter d^-
my b<ype of
le passage,
inner in his
e word has
8 in all its
not merely
knowledge
esent brder
ilist instmd
h^ was, he
y of " ever-
it. For the
st's appear-
ore than a
v'icked. In
rrection are
ive been (in
"ise, a thou-
ire to a true ^
text alone
" is not an-
truth with
marks upon
id from the
ean '' away
's reference
the Lord"
In either
17.
THE .lUDGMKNT OF THE WORLD,
281
case the "presence of the Lord " is what bringsVhether'thc
judgment or the blessing. But I (Mnnot allow so easily his
remarks upon " evcrlastiifg." I believe with his Eelectio
reviewer that "the apostle in speaking of c?JcT/a.s/<V/ de-
struction, means to describe something Avhieh has continu-
ance as a state of suffering, and not extinction of boin<^."
But I must be permitte*! t6 state my own reason for this,
which is outside all Mr. Dobney's argument. For, suppps-
ing this awful penalty to l»o inflicted n/fer resurrection,
" destruction "alone would be sufficiont (if a material de-
struction) to convey thcVholelhought, and thp additiftn of
" everlasting" would be redundant. Annihilation would be,
(tflfer resurrection, necessarily everlasting, for- there is no
repetitiop of resurrection, and " everlastinij annihilation "
has no proper sense. If fh-fon' resurrection, then, as I have
said, the resurrection afterwards would sufficiently show it
was not "everlasting." ' •
I have shown besides that " destruction " is not what Mr.
D. and his associates mean by it.
(C.) In the next chapter we have another Judgritent which
takes place at the sanie tune, but the special destruction of
the "wicked onc.^^ Without entering too much into par-
ticulars, which would divert us too from our ])rosent aim, it
is evident that we have in this " wicked one " a person
exalting himself above God, and claiming to l>e God Him-
self, and whom " the Lord Jesus shall consume with the
breath (rtvevMa) of tlis month, and an nnl {narapytf^ei) with
the manifestation (or appearing) of His presence {e.Tticpavem
Ttji jcapov^iai). The words are a i)artial (juotation from
Isa. xi.: " and there shall come' forth a rod out of tTv^stem of
Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots ; atid the
Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him; .... with right-
eousness shall He judge the p<ior, and reprove with equity
for the meek of the earth ; and He shall smite tlie earth with
the rod of His mouth, and with the breath of ^is lips shall
He slay the wicked (one)." If any 6ne doubt who or what
is in question here, let him follow on this quotation, and
FACTS AND THEOUIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
h^ will find a, familiar picture of millennial days when " the
wolf shall dwell with the lamb," and also Israel and Judah
be brought frorii the four comers of the earth and finally
united toj^ethor.
Thus we have, both in Isaiah and Tliessdlonians, a pre-
millennial judgment of this " wiclied one."' In the latter we
are distinctly told it is at the appearing of Christ's presence.
Words could hardly more' emphatically declare a personal,
not a merely spiritual, coming. The wicked one is t^ien to
^e "consumed" and "annulled," in the day when the rod
of iron shall smite (and yet to heal) the earth. ♦-
Now, if we turn for a moment to Ilew xix., we shall find
there (as I have before briefly argued) Christ's coming to
the earth. It follows the marriage of the Lamb in heaven ;
and upon the white-horsed warriors Mho follow their Head
and Lord we see the same white linen which before clothed
the bride, and which is interpreted for us as the " righteous-
ness of saints " (ver. 8). It is a figure of course, but a very
intelligible figure, of Christ's appearing with tlis saints;
and, as the sword out of His mouth to smite tlje nations
answers on the one hand to Isaiah's "rod of His m(^th," so
among the objects of the judgment we have two leaders, one
of which (it does not matter for our purpose which) is gen-
erally allowed to be " the wicked one.'* Indeed, it seems
hardly possible for one who believes in any harmonious
interpretation of the word of God to doubt this. The his-
tory of the beast and false prophet is given in the 13th and
17th chapters of the book, in close correspondence with what
is said in Thessalonians, and there could hardly be a third
person at the same time on earth, who could take the place
that these do. Y
But what then Is the " consumption," or " annulling," or
even " slhying " (phtting to death) of this wicked one ?
"These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burninofwith
brimstone," and tliere they are found still alive a thousand
years afterwards ! ,
We shall have to return to this again. But hern at least
ifiliX^
THE IIESURRECTION OF JUDGMENT.
283
sv'c shall find
how fully evident that to be "consumed," "annulled," and
"put to <li'ath," oven, when applied to the final judgment of
the wicked, do not mean material destruction or annihdation
at all. Let Mr. Constable and others, instead of indulging
in a priori c^soning as to the force of the words, only ex-
amine the interpretation of them by the facts of Scripture,
and they will soon have indisputable proof that the general
sense of Christendom has not been so far astray as to these
common words of not very recondite meaning. Nor are
they badly suited to convey just Avhat they have conveyed
to generations of at least ordinary intelligence as to Jhe
every day speech they used.
I do not know of any other passages referring to the
judgment of the living Avhich can cause any difficulty, save
one which has been reserved for future consideration.
CHAPTER XXIX.
:, THE IIESUIIKECTIOX OF JUDGMENT.
The Lord, in the 5th chapter of the gospel of John, de-
clares as distinct the " resurrection of life " find " the resur-
rection of judgment." I have before noticed that the word
" damnation " in this place (as in ver. 24, the word " con-
demnation ") is the ordinary word for "judgment."
Dr. Farrar, it is well known, has raised the question as to
whether the former word and its cognates reajly occur a^ all
in the New Testament. I should aijree with him entire
in discardincj them in favor of a consistent rendering; of the
Scripture words all through.* But he metms that this
should go a good deal further, and evi<lently to expunge, if
possible, the thought of what we now mean by " damnation "
hero at least
* In such passages as 1 Cor. xi.- 29, 1 Tim. v. 12, Rom. xiv. 23, the
ordinary rendering is impossible and misleading, as he rightly urges.
284
?MtS AND
THKORIES AS TO A FUTUKE STATE.
I!
\if
k
from Scriptii*ealabg with the word. But " damnation " is
only eternal judgnu-nt, in i\\v true (not his) sense of "eter
n:iiy and "eternal judgment " in assorted in the fullest, way.
And when he tells us that the 'judgment of Gehenna" is
" something utterly «liti*ereut "from the " damnation of hell,"
we must entirely diflfer from him: but this will come up
anon. The fact is that ihe uiiuttlerahly solcihh meaning now
at t aching to damnation has onJy grown out of the impres-
sion whicK that eternal Judgment has made uponthose who
helieved the Scripture statements.*
But in some places '' danmation " is even inferior in force
'to that wonl "jtidgment,'' apparently so nmch le.ss strong.
In thatlwfore us for instance its use has obscured tlie solenuu
' Veality that none cau^ome personally into judgniei'it before
> God, except to be cotidenmed. This is everywhere what
Scripture asserts, and here with a force perhai)S little less
than that "^f any. For it is only'' they that have done evil"
who come fortli to a ''resurrection of iudirnient" at all.
How plainly this should tell us that the saints cannot be
* Mr. Cox objectH, that if any •' take thtj ' judgment ' of God .as e<^,ul v
alent to ' daianation,' tliat can only be because they conceive ot the,
divine Judynjeiits as though they were contined to the future Hfe,
wlierea^s the Scriptures constantly allirra that God judges all men, good
and had, every day and all day long ; and because they wholly nnsa,p-
prehend the character of the divine Judge and Father " (Salv. Mun., p,
61, Amer. edit.).
It 5s Mr. Cox who does not apprehend the difference between the
judgment of the Father, now for our pi*(jflt, and the judgment of the
day in which " the Father ]nilgf^i\i no man." The two are contrasted
by the apostle : " The time is come that judgment must begin at. the
house of God : and, if it firSt beain at us, what shall the end be of them
that obey not tfie gospel of God 1 And, if the righteous scarcely be
-aved, where shall the sinner and the ungodly appear 1 " (1 Pet. iv.
17. IS ; compare ch. i. 17, 18; John v. '22-24 ; 1 Cor. xi. 31, 32).
But God's ju(lgment ha.s with Mr. Cox no such meaning as would
bring terror to an ungodly soul. Of a sensualist living prosperously in
the world he asks, " Where is the judgment \)f Godl Whereas it?
Why, tJiere in the man himself, and in, his base ca i Ue i U with a lot no
h<ne'\r (S. M., p. 02).
inatioii " is
! of " I'tC'l-
iilli'sl, way.
•lu'iiiia " is
on of holl,"
I come up
waning now
ho inipres-
tliost* who
ior in Ibrct'
ess strong,
tliu solenuK
lei'jt bel'ore
vhvTti what
1 little less
(lone evil "
nt" at all.
cannot be
jiodas e<^,uiv
iceiv<' oT ttic,
J future life,
ill men, good
liolly iinsa,p-
alv. Mun., p.
between the
ment of the
•e contrasted
begin at the
1 be of tlieni
.scarcely be '
" (1 Pet. iv.
1,32).
ng as would
>sperously in
Vhereis it?
'/Hlh a lot 80
5^^-
miK RKSUKRKCTION <)P JU DUMKNT.
286
numbered among ttiose Hpoken of a.s raiHed for judgment
according to their works before the '* great whiUt throne"
(Uev. .Y.K. 11-15).
Vet this very pas.sage in the gospel has been assnme*! to
prove a ^tvitra/ resurrection (!>f saints anclifinners together,
because it i.s said •• the hatir conu'tli in w)iit;h all that are in
the graves shall hear His voice and shall come forth," etc.;
while a simple comparison of three verses before this would
demonstrate that the " hour " in which the Son of God has
been <)ui<;keningdea<l souls has lasted n<nv eiajhteenbundred
years from the time He sj)oke. Jfhe Ltjrd merely asserts
here the general fact that all shall hear His voice, while He
, contrasts in the most absolute w.iy the character of the two
resurrections to which He sunnnoiis them.
People imagine that but one obscure })assage (which is
not obscure however) in a book of visions is the oidy one
which can be brought forward for a '* first resurrection " of
the righteous, whereas in fact aln;||^|MPvery pas.sage that
speaks of J?jDsurj»«ct ion infers it in soimy^hape. .There is oven
.a speciat pTiraseK)r it, " the resurrection out /rom the dead "
(*K veKfjoor), as to which the di.sciples (who knew j>vell the
general truth of re^rrection) inipiired "what the rising
from the dead should mean" (Mark ix. 10). It was of this
'special resurrection the Lord spoke, whtm in answer to the
, Sadducees He said that " tliey which shall be counted worthy
to obtahi that world " — -the world to come, — ■" and- the res-
urrection y'/o/M the dead, neither marry nor are given in mar-
riage, neither ©an they die any more : for they are equal
unto the angels : and are the children of God, 7>f/;?</ the
children of the resurrection " {Luke xx. 34-36). How could
people be " counted worthy " to ojjtain a general resurrec-
tton which no one can lose ? or be the children of God as
being the children of a general resurre'ction ?
Then again, where the apostle is expressly speaking of
4he order of the resurrection, he gives it as, " Christ the
first fruits ; afterward, they that are Christ's at His coming."
What more misleading, if all wore to rise at the same time?
J
.M.:a
280 PACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A PUTUKH STATB.
«)
11
11.
i4.
n.
u..
Once irtore, ill 1 Thcss. iv. 1(5, wVieii the Lonl Himself
Hhall <leHCi'n<l (Vom lu'uvcn witli :i Khout, wo arc told, " tins
«leji<l in Christ sliali rlsi'^ iirA,"' tlu!ii tlu' liviiit^ saiiiJs Ixj
chaugcd, an«l all oaught up ttigji'tlier to iiu't't tlu' Lor4 in
the air ; and U^is before lie appears to tlie world at all : for
"when Christ who is our Life, shall appear, then shall ye also
appear with Him in j^lory" (('<)1. iii. 4).
The passage in llevelation moreover is not obscure.
\Vc have « vision ; then the interpretation of the vision,
" I saw thrones, and ihey §^t upon them, and judi^ment was
given nnto>itheni- and f saw the souls" of them that had
been beheaded for the witness of JeSus and for the word
of God, and wliicli had not worshipped tlu- ]»east, nejtljer
'his imaj^e, neither had re<-eived his mark upon their foreheads,
nor in tlieir hands, and they lived and rcii^ned with Christ
a thousand years. IJut the rest of the dead lived not again
till the thousand years were finished." This is the vision:
and so simple in character that the interj)retation repeats
much of it over again, "This is 'tlie^ first "resurrection.
Blessed and holy is lie that ha'tli part ili the first resurrec-
^ tion : upon such the second death hath no power, ^but they
shall be priests of God an<l of Cijrist, and shall reign with
Him a thousand years." -m. ■ •
Thus the millenninm is literally such, and tTO resurredion
te\ literdl, for these are given in the interpretation of the
vikion, not the vision itself And, after the thousand years
arc\ over accordingly, we see the rest of the dead rise, and ^
h«r<5^ plainly is the "resurrection of judgment," in whjch by
thdrt'very fact the saints can have no part. All is thus con-
sistent, clear, and intelligible. For all is true.
There is little said as to the resurrection of the unjust in
Scripture; The fact is affirmed. Tlni nature of it is
nowhere spoken of It would seem therefore the only pos-
',„':r' ; ■ — ^ — ^ — — ^^-—
* fir. Carson, in a violent attack, more mo, on pre-inillennialism, has ^
urged against literal r«Kuneot ion, that we cannot say, "the souls of "
people, without meaning literal souls. Bui it is an entire mistake, as
we have seen long ago Tt is a very offmmon llfhrais^n. ~~
VTE.
(I HiinHolf
told, " tlu5
; suiiits Im;
II? Lor4 in
at all : for
mil yc! also
^ obscure,
'ho vision.
i',uu'nt was
II that had
• the -word
!»st, nci-felier
' foreheads,
kvlth €hrist
I not again
the vision:
ion repeats
.'surrectton.
it resurrcc-
ir,Jbut tliejf
reign with
esurrec'tion
ion of the
tsand years
id rise, and ;.
n whjch by
is thus con-
le unjust in
e of it is
le only pos-
eunialisrn, has
the souls of"
re mistake, as
TlIK KKSLUUIC'TION' OF .IIIU<»MKNT.
-%
iM.
287
sible thlnn; to say nothing about it. Hut as Mr. Constablo
proclaims it a i»oint "of prime conseciuence ." to know tho
tuirevealed, and has \Vntleu rather a long chapter upon it
in hiis work so often cited,* we must m^eds follow him into
the darkiu'ss. His argmneft4s apply so jittle really to the
view (»f tlrings which we have taken, that we need dwell
comi)aratively on v<'ry few of them. '
He first of all professes l>is firm. belief in the resurrection
of the wick»'d, but holds that they are raised to die again.
Hen* lie is opposed to Scripture as we have si-qn. In Scrip-
ture .resurrect ion is the final endof death, for '' it is appoint-
e.l unto njen o/,niio die, and ^(/•/•r this the judgment." He,
on t!ie contrary, holds ttiat the liodies of the wicked are
raised, "still natural bodies as they were s«wn, resuming
with their olHitb their old mortality, as such subject to
pain, and as such sure to yield to that of which all pain is
the symptom an<l precursor, physical death and dissolution."-
He rests this conclusion '' inainly on tht5 mipposition that
W) chanire passes u[)on thetn at their resurrection . . . if no '
change pass»'s upon them they must needs yield to the
bitter pains which accompany the second death."
He urges that the " Augustinian theorists" p,dmit this,
and so have to alVirm immortality and incorruption of the
wicked as raised. They therefore have, to apply the lan-
gu'iige of 1 Cor. xv., where the corruptible puts on incorrup-
tion and the mortal immortality, to the resurrection of the
ufagodly ; and when asked upon what grounds they do so,
they answer that there canjiot be a resurrection without a
chau'^c. This he disproves by referring to Lazarus and
others, and as to 1 Cor. xv. insists that it applies only to the
resurrection of the just.
He then tiirns aside for a short time to show that the
resurrection of the just' is the only one- which is a fruit of
redemption ; and if Christ says, " I am the resurrection and
Ihc lifej" He thus proclaimsllimself the source of the " res-
surrection ofltfe" alone. ^Ir. Constable identifies then (as
* Nature and Duration of Future Punishment,, cli. viii.
4H|
ft
•'! I
If
1 ^-
288 FACTS A:< 1> TUJiOltlKS AS TO A FUTUKE STATK.
WO have done) the resnrrection from the cleacl with this, and
further states that the quickening of tUo mortal body is «x-
dnsively confined in Scripture to the just, o.sp.'cially rel'er-
ring in proSf to the " if " of Kom.'viii. 1 1 : '' //'the Spirit of
Ilim that raised up Jesus from tiie dead dwell in you, lie
tliat raised up Christ from the dead^hall also quicken your
mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in you." Thus
" the resurrection of the just is the fruit of redemption : the
rcsuri-cct^on of the imju.st has notliing to say to it . . . Christ
cam6 to g'lve'^io M.''^ U'P ^>^l>'t:h should force everlasting
exi^steftcil^on myriads who asked not for it, anc^ would
bun it wWi ^11 thei^ hearts."
Thus the resurrection of the wicked being no part of re-
demption, Paul could not, in 1 Cor. xv., include rt at all.
This he proceeds to prove at length, but, as we fidly believe
it,- there is no fieed to follow him in his proof He con-
cludes that the change to iqcorruption' in the case of the
wicked is essential to the theory of everlasting misery; and,
since there are no grounds for holding, this change, the
theory which requires it falls to the ground.
Thus an immense argument is built up upon the two props
6^ ignQrcOice ami supposition. Mr. Constable occupies a
number of pages wit^ what we have reduced to perhaps
three times he number of lines, for reasons already stated,
"but we have I given the substance. There are two or three
considerations which hinder out acceptance of his argument.
We grant fully that the resurrection of the just is distinct
in character from the resurrection of the unjust ; and that it
is the former alone which is the fruit of Christ's redemptive
work. \y;e shall have more to say of this when we examine,
as WB hope to do, 3Ir. Birks' view. We fully believe also
that the resurrection described in 1 Cor. xv., does not include
in any wa-y that of the wicked. " It is raised in power," ** it
is raised in ^lory/' " it is raised a spiritual body," could not
apply to any but " the just." ' Mr. Constable is tvrong, how-
^ever, upon one poip,t : for the " change " the apostle speaks
of is not said of the risen-saints, but of those who are alive
THE RESUURKCTION OF JUDGMENT. li89
',■■■■ . -^
and remaining when Christ comos. " The <A'm/ shall be
raised incorruptible, and we "—the living — •" shall be chmujcd.'h
For this corruptible (applying; to tho dead) shall put on in-
corruption ; and this mortal (referring to the living) shall
put on immortality." Mortality cannot be affirmed of the
dead, and here certainly, as in 1 Thess. iv. 10, 17, the two
classes are recognized. The " ch^inge " appj^ to the living
alone. '^ ^'^ \, - ■ .
We dissent, from Mr. Constable's' view of the matter, in
the first place, because his ar^fximcnt pnn^cs too, niKch. If
the wickesd are to be raised in a condition of mort.ality, it is
of course impossible that they could exist'forever, that is,
in the JxHly. But it is equally iin possible that they could
exist for " the ages of ages," as to wliich certainly Scripture
affirms their torment. He must reduce these indeed to a
minimum in order to harmonize them with his theory.
Nay, more, a resurrection which is a mere restoration to a
present condition involves certain things of which we must
all be fully aware. It involves the being sustained by food
to repair"" the continual waste of a corruptible body : and
thus he might have forcibly urged that hell would be soon
"cleared by starvation, except upon the supposition of such
a supply as we are certaiiily in no wise justified in making.
In any way " ages of ages " must be a myth, a dream, an im'
possibility in the nature of things, as great as that of eternity
itself
. But again, Mr. Consta.ble's view ignores the true nature.,
of death, as I have shown it, a necessarily temporary pro-
vision in view of sin's entrance into the world, and to be
finally done away, when " death and hades are cast into the
lake of fire;" and also that '■^ ajler death" is "the judg-
ment." If death be this exceptional temporary thing, it is
plainly a false view that the resurrection of the wicked even
will be to a condition of mortality ; or thJit, if not, it must be
the, fruit of redemption, and a work of grace inconsistent
with eternal judgment. On the contrary, " a resurrection
of judgment " it is expressly sta^d to be, and not grace, but
- 1 -■
si.:
'U >
■r I
290 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTUIIB STATE.
the pursuance of the original creative plan, only suspended
for a time and for-a purpose.
This in no wise, hinders the ''resurrection of life" being
due to Him who is " the resurrection and the life," for the
" image of the heavenly," the likeness of Christ in which the
saints are raised, is something immeasurably beyond whkt
man naturally, if sinless, would have attained.
That there should be difficulties in connection with a sub-
ject of which Scripture says so little as it does about the
resurrection of the unjust need not surprise us, and will not
those who consider but the mysteries which surround our
present life. It may be true that " incorruption " is not the
state of the resurrection of judgment, and this not involve
at all what annihilationists insist upon. We know too little
to say much ; but to bring our ignorance to bear against
what is clearly revealed is at least wholly unjustifiable ; and
this is what Mr. Constable is doing in this case, -—
Mr. Hudson has somewhat upon this subject which while
we are upon it we may briefly glance at. He says of the
unjust: —
"It is hard to believe that they are raised up by a miracle
which ends in their dqptruction, or that accomplishes nothing but
a judgment, which in this view must appear simply vindictive.
If they have no immortality, why are their slumbers disturbed ?
But if their resurrection is connected with the redemption, by a
law that finds illustration in analogous facts, this difiiculty may
be removed. Damaged seeds that are sown often exhaust them-
selves in germination. And we have noted the fact, thaf of in-
sects which pass through the chrysalis state to that of the psycho
or butterfly, many, from injuries sufiered in their original form,
utterly perish in the transition. Now the Glad Tidings of
the Redemption, quickening and invigorating the sovd with
new life, may so far repair the injury done it in the fall, that
even the unbelieving, who derive many benefits therefrom in this
life, may not altogether perish in the bodily death. . . May not
such truths, as food to the souls (>ven of those who do not cleave
to Him who is the Truth and the Life, cause death itself to be
divided, as the proper effect an^ token of the Redemption ? And
.;#^:
judgment: when and what?
^1
for judgment, it is as if the unjust, hearing the voice of God in
the last call to life, should be putting on a glorious incorruption,
and should perish in the iw!t. "*
This is a step Ueyoiid Mr. Const ul)le, and it seems hard
to understand how in this way tile wicked rise at all Cer-
tainly judgment upon tliese abortions would be scarcely
possible. Nor is the resurrection of the wicked either an
effect of redemption or a blighted natural process, but atr
act of divine power alone. It is " God who quickeneth thp
dead." Nor again docs it appear on this ground haw th0
heathen could ever rise. But it is useless taking up seriously
what must be the idlest of speculations •in the absence of
revelation. Tliey that have done evil will come forth tb
the resurrection of judgment. That "is revealed; and thajt
death will be over and ended when judgment begins : arid •
this alone completely negatives the conclusion of amiHiila-
tionism.
CHAPTER XXX.
judgment: when and what?
We must now proceed to what comes after death. And
here, before we can come to details, there are some miscon-
ceptions as to the Very idea of judgmeM which we must
examine by the light of Scripture, and seek to remove.
In Mr. Constable's volume upon h^des, so often referred
to in the earlier stages of our inquirv^ Ke has two chapters
of considerable importance to his argument which we have
as yet scarcely glanced at.f Their subjects a*^ respectively,
"The Time of Judgment" and "the Time of Retribution.",
The general object of these is to show that neither judge-
ment nor retribution can take place tmtil the resurrection,*
* Debt and Grace, ]){>. 2G3. 264. t Chap, xiii., xiv.
m. A^tr-p.
w
\>'
ill
m,\
-f ' )
«'!):,'
292 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATB.
and we shall quote some passages that we may have a« clear
, view of the issues before us,
His first arguments, grounded upon his peculiar views of
death and of the nature of man, I may pass over. lie next
brings before us what the Lord says of Sodom and Gomorrah,
Tyre and Sid/)n, as to a future day of judgment (Matt. x. 15 ;
xi. '1'1\ Mark vi. 11), and " what Ho affirmed of these hea-
then He also affirmed of the Jews living in His own days.
Moth avQ to be triGtl rn this coming judgment day. And
what He says of the Jewish cities of His own time, we sup-
pose to be equJllly true of the Jews of all previous time. . .
We are thus told that for four thousand years there was 7io
sucli thing asjfuhjhKj men when they were dead.''''
This judgment of. the great, day, Mr. C. argues, our Lord
tells us-" is when 1% returusr frpm that right hand of God
where He now is. lie jtells us this in His parable of the
talents. It is 'after £i long time the 'lord of those servants
Cometh and reekontHh with them.' * There is no recjconiny
with yood or xoith wiched servants until the Lord comes."
Mr. Constable goes on tp show us how— ^
" our Platouic theology has virtually nullified this great trutk of
Scripture. It hus not denied iu words the great day of future
judgment of which Cluist and His apostles^spcak, but it has
robbed it of all its significance and meaning by telling u* that
there is unotlmr judyimut ln'/ore it rt}hicJt effect !i for every man sep-
arately iiihU ihe final judyme lit has to do." He quotes in proof of
this the Roman Catholic " Key of Paradise " and Poole's Com-
mentary, the latter of which "tells us that ♦ after soids by death
are separated from their bodies, they come to judgment, and thus
every particular one is handed over by death to the bar of God
the great Judge, and so is dispatched by His sentence to its par-
ticular state and place with its respective people. At the great
and general assize, the day of judgment, shall the general and
uuiv<}rsal one take place, when all sinners in their entire persons,
bodies and souls united, shall be adjudged to their final unalter-
able land eternal stJite.' "
Further, as to retribution, Mr. Constable quotes 2 Cor. v.
10 as—
judgment; when and what?
293
)tes 2 Cor. v.
•' decisive that wo retrijmlioa mhntHoHmtr, be it reward or puuisli-
meut, tiikuH pltnH! before the re.surreetiou and the judgment.
There can be no question that ' made known or manifest ' should
bo the "translation of the Greek verb in this verso, as it is its trans-
lation in the next. Bengol expresses its s(^nao when he says that
it means not merely that we should appear in the body, but that
>p, should be made known, together with all onr secret deeds. . .
"The judgment scat of Christ is that judgment seat which He sets
up whKn He comes and raises up the dead . . . not until then mil
retribution take place ; not until then will the sinner be punishe(l,
and the saint receiye his reward ; /. e., it is in the body, and not
out of the body ^hat retribution takes place . . . Paul w'as here
only following the teaching of his Master. Nowhere in the teacli-
ing of Christ are His disciples taught to expect their reward, or
any part of it, when they are dead. The very idea of dead men
r('com2>onsod is enough to excite scorn against the school of
thought which has taught it, until, from the perpetual repetition
of the nons(>nsc, we cotild not see its folly. But not to the state
of death, but to the resurrection from that state of death, does
our blessed Lord teach His people to look. ' When thou makest
a feast,' He says, ' call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind,
and thou shalt be blessed ; for they cannot recompense thea ; for
thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the jjist. . .
But are there, according to our Platonic theologians, anyjjassages
of Scripture^which do directly state that before resurrection retri-
bution of any Ivind, reward or punishment, takes place ? Yes,
they say, ther is one. Where is it ? In Luke xvi. 23. 'What
do these words form part of ? A parable ! What are the words ?
'In hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth
Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in liis boscm.' "
lie then has the usual objections to employing a parable
to teach doctrine : all which we have already looked at.
Now there is truth in Mr. Constable's obj'ections to the
common doctrine here, as we shall see. The statements he
objects to are not clear — do not distinguish between things
which it is important not to confound. Especially the Ro-
manist quotation (which I have not given, and which applies
2 Cor. V. 10 to the intermediate state) does clash entirely
with Scripture. But thvn Mr. Constable's error on the
• other side is as plain. He meets a false issue with a partial
I
294 FACTS AND THEORIES AS tO A FUTURE STATE.
:'i:
truth, and is certainly no less superficial than those he is
opposing. The lull statement harmonizes all Scripture,
parable and all else, instead of arraying (mo text against
another.*
The very chapter last quoted from, as we have seen, bears
witness, not in the last parable but in the lesson which our
Lord deduces from the first, that when the righteous " fail"
(that is, at death therefore, not resurrection) they are ''re-
ceived into everlasting habitations*' (Luke xvi. 9). And
this the last parable shows, in whatever figurative language,
with regard to Lazarus. And it is in exprcftfi cimtnist to
this that the rich man hi hades is tormented, as he is " com-
forted." Thus there is no room to doubt the meaning of
the solemn words. The rich man is certainly 2nctnred (and
even Mr. Constable cannot deny that) as receiving retribu-
tion in hades, before the resurrection and the final ju<lgment,
and if the Lord did not mean tliat. He would not have used
words which every one must admit give that impression,
without one word of warning., It is useless to talk of trees
speaking, etc., in the same breath with this. By the one no
one could be deceived. In t"he other the Lord would be
coming in with what men represent as false and heathenish
ideas actually in the very, mmds of Ills hearers: for He
spoke to Pharisees. And we are forbidden therefore by
our reverence for Him, who was never anything less than
Incarnate Truth itself, to allow that He could so trifle with
falsehood, and help to confirm in error the souls of those
He came to rescue out of it.
Thus far 'as to the parable. But as to the righteous at
death being received into everlasting habitations, we cannot
so ignore the direct teaching both of our Lord and His
apostles, as to allow Mr. Constable unchecked to assure us
that we have no other Scripture than that just looked at to
establish such a doctrine, Jle may believe that when our
Lord' said to the thief by His side, " To-day thou shalt be
with me in Paradise," He meant only that he should fall
asleep for perhaps two thousand years, so that it would be
■<<<-
JUimMENT: WUEN AND WHAT?
295
no matter to hbn whether that promise was kept or do !
>(What matter to ht'm in<lee(l, if he did not wake up for-
ever? That quiet "sleep," in which the sleeper vanishes,
altogether, would not know one uneasy dream in conse-
quence !) And so he may please to interpret Paul's desire
to depart and be with Christ, and similar things. All this
we have before examined. Hut then we must believe that
we hftvo some Scripture for a truth like thi^. ► ,
Mr. Constable may say, perhaps, •' I am stating you have
only one Scripture for refrlhidion in the death state." Wefl^
but the o)ie i/iroloa/i the othf)'. The righteous ffie, and the
wicked. If death be extinction, the righteous could not be
"comforted" in it, any more than the wicked "tormented."
Mr. C. himself quite rightly puts both upon the very same
footing. We should at least want proof of a difference, if
difference indeed there were. We should need proof -that
the wicked were not tormented, if we were assured that
the righteous were comforted.
Thus every text for the one is an argument for the other
also ; and when* the language even of a parable comes in to
sustain the prior conviction, we "must be permitted to think
that it neither stands alone, nor gives an uncertain sound
either. We do not expect that it should be much dwelt
upon. We have just been considering how little even the
resurrection of the wicked is. Enough is given to establish
the doctrine. Warnings and ]>rorai8es alike may be expect-
ed to be connected rather with a final and everlasting state,
than with one necessarily to pass away. Yet we do npt
accept Mr. Constable's statement as to there being only one
text. There are others, as Isa. xxiv. 21, 22 ; 1 Pet. iii. 19,
20, the first of which speaks of the " kings of the earth "
whom Revelation (xix., 10, 21) shows us "slain with the
sword " at Christ's coming in glory, while Isaiah speaks of
them as prisoners shut up in the pit, to be visitfed aftpr
many days; i. e., at the judgment of the dead, afler the
millennium. While the latter speaks correspondingly of
those disobedient in Noah's days, as now "spirits in prison."
29G FACTS ANU THEORIES AS TO A FUTUKE STATE.
Both texts assure us of retribution in "the intermediate
state.
But Mr. Constable wouM allege (loubtl<j8a, as be has
against the views of others, that " retribution before judg-
ment is contrary to all the principles of the divine and
human law." I allow it fully. What lie fails to see is that,
as far as the settlement of personal (jiiilt and condemnation
is concerned, man— the world— is ALREADY judgcd^already
condemned: a thing which, if it be not plain to him, as it
would seem it is not, is none the less abundantly plain in
Scripture.
We have already seen that God by the ministry of death
and condemnation was for centuries pressing home upon
man his lost condition, and that the apostle could speak for
Christians in saying, " we know that what things soever the
law saith, it saith to them that are under the law, that every
mouth may be stopped, and all the would become indlty
before God." Is that, or is it not, a sentence of God ? and
is it to be passed, or passed already ? Certainly, it is long
smce passed, and this sentence of the law was, as we have
seen, only itself the affirming and confirming of a prior sen-
tence, of which every grey hair in man was witness.
It is true, man might, alas, prophesy smooth things to
himself, and dream of being able to face God about his sins,
and on the other hantf it is blessedly true that, wherever
there was real bowing to the sentence, the mercy of God was
ready to manifest itself: real "repentance" is always •* unto
life." But it needed no judgment-seat for Ilim to manifest
such mercy, wherever He knew a soul had bowed to own
its guilt; while with all others judgment had not to be pro-,
nounced, but had been. This is w|j^t raakes so solemn and
so blessed that great truth of EcclesiastiBS, the settlement of
the question of the book : "the spirit shall return to God
that gave it." Not yet indeed the judgment-seat, where He
would " bring every WOKK into judgment," bid the assur-
ance at least then, if never before, of personal acceptance,
or of p&rsonal rejection.
,x
jouoment: when and wuat?
297
Mr. CoiiHtttble docs not see,— as many do not ,— the ditter-
cnci! betwet-n thcvso two thiug-s. W(; muHt look at, them,
theretbre, more in detail, and the Scriptures which atiirm and
illustrate tliem.
Personal acceptance with God is nhvku on the ground
of our works. " By the works of the law '—in which all
good works are summed uj),— "shall no flesh living be justi-
fied." So the word of God decisively saytj. On the one
hand not the most perfect upon earth (as Job was in his
day) but must, with Job, put his hand upon his mouth in the
presence of God, or open it but to say, " I am vile: " " I
abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes."
On the other hand, let any soul but take this latter ground,
and "if wc confess our .s/vw, God is faithful and just to
forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteoas-
ness."
The future day of judgment (whether we speak of saint
or sinner) is, therefore, never in Scripture for the settlement
of personal acceptance or the reverse. We have already
seen that personal judgment for a sinful creature before a
holy God can onlf/ be condemnation. The saved are saved
bete and now, and do not " come into judgment." The
doom of the unsaved is determine<t'in the present life also,
and if men ignore it here, the spirit returning to God cannot
remain ignorant. It is a " spirit in prison," already with the
consciousness of wrath upon it, if not received into "ever-
lasting habitations." This is the rich man's portion, where
the wrath of God is tlie consuming fire by which he is tor-
mented, and yet resurrection plainly has not come.
Does this set aside the reality of the j^Lnent to corny
By no means. It onl^^affirms the realit^Pf the judgm^i^
pronounced. The judgment ^o come is the judgment of
works, and there is what answers to this even for the saint.
But he comes to it in resurrection glory, and in the image of
his Lord. Can he be put u^on trial to decide the fu-
ture of one already (jloriJiaU Clearly not. But he does
stand before the judgment-seat of Christ, and receives for
if«!P
mm
298 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A PUTUllE STATE.
the things done in the body, as a question of reward obtained
or lost. Eternal life is not a reWard, but the free gitl of
God In Ohrint, and justification is by His blood alone
Sonship, meiubership of the body of Christ, a home in the
Father's house, are all fruits of the same blessed work, His
and not ours. And these can never be brought in question :
judgment never is brought in to settle these. /
Similurly then as to the lost. The judgment to come
does not settle that they^ are lost. If they come forth to a
resurrection of judgment, it is not a judgment which is to
decide if they can stand before God or not ; but they are, as
the saint is /io<, "judged," themselves personally, " accord-
ing to their works" (Rev. xx.*'13). 'fliey get a measured
recompense, as the saint does, but a recompense of judgment
and nothing else : " few " or " many stripes," as the case
may be ; an absolutely righteous apportionment for the sins
committed in the body. This is the Judgment of works, as
distinct from the settlement of whether lost or saved as is
the reicard of works for the righteous.
What has helped to confiise the minds of many has been
a question of prophetic interpretation ; and k helps to show
how little there can be a thorough settlerile^nt of the ques-
tion of eternal judgment without a previous settlement of
what many judge so lightly as " th^millennarian question."
Failing to see the Lord's coming as antecedent to the nail-
lennium, and the purification of the earth by judgment in
order to the blessing, the separation of the sheep ft*om the
goats, in Matt, xxv., has been looked at as the same thing
with the judgment of the dead more than a thousand years
later. It ws^^ inevitable in this way that the latter should
be supposed (yet in :t)ppo8it ion to the plainest passages
elsewhere) one in which righteous and wicked would stand
together, and the former be discriminated from the latter T5y
theiiwworks. ,
itimould be plain, however, that in Matt. xxv. 31-46, we
nave a judgment of living nations when the Lord comes to
eanh an4 sets up Hi^ throne there, and not a judgment of
■".'^W ■
judgment: when and WHATVi
200
the dead, when ' the earth and the heavens are fled away ;
and also that the account of the taking up of the saints to
meet the Lord in. the air in 1 Tliess. iv., before lie appears
to the worlds^^t all (Col. iii. 4), is quit^Unconsistent with
such an interpretation. There is no hint of resurrection in
our Lord's prophecy at all. And the nature of the investi-
gation differs much from that in Revelation. The truth is,
that " the nations " in the former Scripture are those who,
after the taking away of the saints of the present dispensa-
tion, and during an interval which takes place between that
and His appearing with them, have received a final call by
the preaching of the coming kingdom. It would be too
lengthy a matter to enter upon here. But the broad char^
acteristic differences between this and the Apocalyptic
vision, should be suflScient at least to prevent their being
confounded. _ ^
J Into Judgment he who now believes in Christ can never
come.' So He declares. ".4.<» it is appoirited unto men
once to die, and after this the judgmei^, so Christ was once
offered to bear the sins of many, and to them that look for
Him shall He appear the second time, apart from sin, unto
salvation." If " God has appointed a day in which He will
judge the world by that Man whom He hath ordained," the
saints whom He declares to be even now " not of the world "
even as He is not of the world," shall (not be judged with
it, but)' "judge the Vorld " with Him (1 Cor. vi. 2). They
are thus seen upon the throne in Rev. xx. 4-6 as having part
in the first resurrection ; and not till a thousand years after-
wards does the judgment of fhe dead take place. God has
taken care to separate thus widely between His people's
portion and that of those who hate Him.
The truth is what alone makes all harmonious. Present
judgment has been passed upon the world- The very cross
itself, as His portion at men's hands, has only confirmed
finally that^ sentence, to be executed when He comes.* Out
/^f it God in His grace is calling men and saving them. His
^ * John xii. 31-8.3; xvi. 8-11.
300 FAOtH AND TIIEORIKS A8 TO A MfTURU STATIi.
Haved arc upon the ground of Chi'mt and His work, not their
own. The unsaved arc still under th«! universal sentofue
already judged ; tlie judgment of works, the full measure-
ment of eaeh man's due, being still to come. This is not a
<luestiou of personal acceptance or rejection, which is on
other ground, Imt is the solemn and exact awanl of dee* b
done in the body, as Scripture says. 'Che doer and the
deeds are questions, however connected, still distinct.
•^x
. ciTAi'TKu xxxr:
TTIK DOOM J) F SATAN".
THEvery personality of Satan is, as everybody is aware,
denied in m.-l^iy <iuarters in the present <lay. The oidy peo-
ple with wlul^we have to do jjist now, however, who deny
this, are the followers of l)n Thomas. With these iiven,
self-consisiently enouudi, the devil is sirnplNyi persotiilltjitlon^
of sin, which, however, may be represent etTCpparently l>y J
variety of IJ^'ing agents,/in wrder to get rid of the distasteful
idea of sep!irat^4}erso.|iality and yet meet the texts in which
personality js^ t/j&fi|^ani.fest to ' 1 >e denied.
I may be allo3.vil Hfc|i4li)/ >mt being thotight to wander too
far from the *^'di|l^H^^y^fo lo<*k brieHy at this pouit.
Now, we read B^pwiP"'*' ^^^^fej,.,*'"'* who, when "the
son?f of God (wn(^;^:l<vi»n^'<ent theirweTves before the TiOrd,"
*' came also among them." Tie isex))re.ssly ealle<l Satan, and
is a true "-<levir" according to the meaning of that wor<l,
•' a false accuser." ^ ^'
These "sons of God '' are spoken of by .Tehovah in the
same book as present when He lai«l the foundations of the
earth (xxxviii. 7), and therefore are certainly not men but
angels. Among'these :ingels then the acrenser (•otnes,ns one
of them: surely not a man among angels, and hardly a per-
sonification of sin.
'i«
-^
;:i-
UE DOOM OK BAIAN.
!0 of the X.onl ho go«8 fortli to exort;lHc
uiuiaii powor aj^aiiwt Job within divinely or-
limitx'. lie is hero clearly on angelic, yet a fallen
vil beii'Iff.
In the book of Revelation wo have a being figured as a
• <lragon,"' and exjUaineU to be " that old serpent, which iu
the devil and Satan " (xx. 2). "That old serpent " of coiirHe 1
HbAjIrs to Eden, and tells us who warf the real tempter hid
under the form of the irrational creature. Here too the
w^tf-ds of the Lord ftpply : " He was a murderer from the
beginning, antl abode not in the triitli, because there is no
truth in him. When he speaketh a li^ he speaketh of hitf
own ; for he is a liar, and the lather of it '' (.John viii. 44).
As a tempter we accordingly again find him assailing the
Lord in the wilderness, One in whom there was no indwell-
ing sin to seduce or personify; and there too he is called
the devil and Satan, and appear|i as one who claims' the
kingdoms of the world as his. And he departing from llim
for a season, the Lor,d speaks of his return in a wjjy which
suits Ahis obim of his: "the prince of,tliis world /t'ortii'^th^
fl§||liath nothing in me; '' and of His own 'crosi/ as that
which was his judgment, and "woubl ensure his cast inj^ out
(John xiv. 80*, xvi, U, xii. 31). In all w}n<h we travel tjidck
once more to E<len, and find fulfilling the words to the old ^ -^
serpent, " He shall braise thy. head, antfthou shall l^^^ hi^ w*>
heel." \ f :■ -*• ' ' " ■ -. /:•■■
We find hik being and powerN»o recognized among tfie" ;
Jews that tHe J*hari8ee8 impute the Lord's casting out of v a
devils to Beelzebub the prince of th«> devils; and the Lord
r«4mkes them by asking, " Can Satan cast out Sati.ay'* and^
recognizing the fact of his having a kingdom, asks in that T""
case how it shalU stand ? Tlic devils He casts out, know ,
Him in turn, call Him the Holy One of Giu\ and ^on of
God, and^beseeoh" Him not to torment them before the
time.
Everywhei^crfti the Gospels the power of Satan is a thing
fis maTiif<™st as mnllirmiv, A wrrv. ■ u-Myyi i'.i: 'p InT.-c'r
.«
m
f3>
0-'
T
0A
■I '.
. /
4^f>|Sk;/^'i..),A-;,,
(I
()
-,Vi '.
» ■,!•'"
K:
■*.■
.« t. V :
'((- ■>■■
''•*C
302 FACTS AND THEOKIES AS TQ A FUTURE STATE.
eighteen years, and it is Satan that has bound her. He pdts
into Judas' heart to betray the Lord ; and in the apparent
zeal for Himself of another disciple Christ discema Satan
also. He. sows the tares in the parable, and these springing
up are the children of the wicked one. Among the signs
that follow those who believe is this, that they cast out
devils, " ' ,
In the Acts the workings of the same ma^jgnant spirit
are as manifest. Satan fills Ananiai^' heart to lie to the
Holy Ghost, and keep back part of the price of his land.
Cases of possession are still noticed, and as a common thing.
Paul speaks of being sent to turn men ** from the power of
Satan unto God.'' In the Epistles he is th'e constant adver-
sary of the- people of God, whether openly as a roaring lion,
or transformed into an angel of light. He is the spirit that
works in the children of disobedienee ; the god of this
world who blinds tSip minds of those that believe not. If
resisted he flees, but the shield of faith is that by which
alone the fiery darts of the wicked one are quenched.
"Shortly," we are reminded, according to the first promise,^
" God will bruise Satan under your feet." ,
All this is but part of the testimony of the word of God as to
the reality and power of man's old enemy. If words mean
anything they assure us of his true personality, with that of
numberless evil spirits, " his angels," possessed of superhu-
man power, which is used to obtain dominion overmen's
souls and even bodies, and from which nothing but divine
power can deliver. I need not pursue this further now.
But we shall have to consider some common mistakes as to
.. Satan which it is of great importance to rectifir, in order to
have clearly before us the Scripture vieir^'
Satan has been considered commonly (as one finds in the
Paradise Lost of a great poet) to be here as a prisoner
broken lopse from hell, into which he had been cast immedi-
ately upon his fall, a hell in which even now he is supposed
to reign, iand to reign there eternally over fallen spirits and.
lost men, the divinely appointed\tormenter of those Avhom
'El
THE DOOM OP SATAN.
303
he has made his prey. For no part of this is Scripture re-
sponsible, and its grotesque horror has been tlie reproach of
orthodox theology. What would be thtmght of a govern-
ment which allowed its prisoners so to break their bounds,
and which employed the chief criminal to torture the lesser
ones ? --.^
There is in Scriptur© not'tlie sligntest trace of a reign in
hell,* or of Satan tormenting anybody there. He will be
there, doubtle^ the lowest and most miserable of all, but
he is not yet m hell at all. Strange and startling asit seems •
to many, instead of being in Jjtell^iieas in "heavenly places,"
and instead of reigning in hell, reigns herey the prince and the
god of this world. ,
Thus we are exhorifed to " put pn the whole armor of
God, whereby ye may be able td Stand against the wiles of
devil; for we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but
, against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of
the darkness of this world, against the spiritual hostsf of
wickedness in the heavenly places" (Eph. vi. 11, 12). Our
translators have shown how foreign the thought was to
their minds by putting " high " into the text instead of
"heavenly." But here the devil and his angels are looked
at as the antitype of the hosts of Canaan with which Joshua
and Israel wrestled. We have long lost the type in losing
the antitype.
But in Job we have already seen Satan among the sons
of God; and the " heavenly places " were surely his original
%dwelling-place. And //' his casting down to hell has not
yet taken place, he will be still naturally there where he be-
longed by creation. Now his casting into hell belongs to a
time plamly yet future (Rev. xx. 10), and everywhere in the
Gospels, :we find the devils anticipating their coming doom,
but knowing it was not yet come. " Art thou come to tor-
* It may^have arisen from a misconception of Rev. ix. 11. But the
" bottomlesjs pit," or " abyss " is not even hell at all.
t Alford. " Hosts " is not expressed in the Greek : it is " spirituals."
.M^
304
FACTS ANI> THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
, I,'
1
ment us before (he time ? " they a8k| It is plain then that
hell cannot be their present ])ortion.
The binding of Satan precedes necessarily the millennial
blessing. How could there be righteousness or peace in a
world in which he was still as active as ever ? Immediately,
therefore, after the appearing of the Lord, among the other
foes that are dealt with, Satan and his hosts are not forgot-
ten. The fate of the beast and the kings of the earth is first
shown us at the end of Rev. xix., and then Satan is bound
and shut up in the abyss a thousand years. The account
may be given in figurative language, and is, no doubt, but
yet with perfect simplicity, and Isaiah, eight hundred years
befoi'e, gives us the same things with almost equal plainness,
and in perfect harmony with the obvious meaning. For ** it
shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall punish
the host of the high ones that are on high, and the kings of
the earth upon the earth " — the two classes of which Revc:
lation speaks; "and they shall be gathered together as
prisoners are gathered in the pit, and shall be shut up in the
prison, and after many days (plainly, the millennium) shall
they be visited. Then the moon shall be confounded, and
the sun ashamed, when the Lord of hosts sK}all reign in
Mount Zion, and ip Jerusalem, and biefore His ancients glori-
ously " (Isa. xxiv. 21-23).
"When the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be
loosed out of his prispn." And this post-millennial loosing
seems again to stumble many. It is evident that the object
is to distinguish between the true subjects and the concealed
enemies of the Lord, still such in the face of the long reign
of blessing and of peace. That there are these is plain from
such intimations as that in Psa. xviii. 44, 45. And the effect
of Satan being free is soon apparent. " He shall^ outn to
deceive the nati^s Which are in the four quarters of /the
earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to batittlej
the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they
went up upon the breadth of the earth and compassed
m
the camp of the _ saints about, and the beloved city; and
he millennial
' QEUENNA. 305
fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured
them." ' o j
Then comes Satan's final judgment. " And thfe devil that
deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone,
where the beast and the false prophet a^^ and shall be tor-
mentibd day and night forever and ever." ^
^^^j|feerning the nature of this punishment We are now
if^^o^tb inquire.
:^-
CHAPTER XXXII.
■ --r- GEHENNA. ;..,'■
Gehenna is twelve times rendered '* hell " in the common
version, and is essentially* the only other word so rendered,
beside '• hades " already looked at. The rendering has, it is
well known, been the object of special attack by Canon
Farrar in his Westminster Abbey Sermons, as one of the
three words (the others being " damnation " and " everlast-
ing ") which in his opinion ought to he expunged out of our
English Bibles.! ' , /
Gehenna, says Dr. Farrar, "means primarily the vaUey^of
Hinnom outside Jerusalem, in which, after it had been poV
lut(jd by Moloch- worship, corpses were flung, and fires were
lit ; and is used, secondarily, as a metaphor, not for fruitless
and hopeless, but — ^for all at any rate but a small and des-
perate minority — of that purifying and corrective punish-*
ment, which, as all of us alike believe, does await impenitents
bpth here and, .beyond the grave.
"But, be i£ solemnly observed (he continues) the Jews to
whom and in whose metaphorical sense the word was used by our
blessed Lord, never did, eithejr then or at any other period, nor-
* Once, referring to a class of fallen angels, the word raprapooda?
is nsed (2 Pet. ii. 4), ai>d translated " cast them down to hell," literally
" to Tartarua.*^ \ — • —, —
t " Eternal Hope," Serra. 3. _ /
H
M
h
j^.<.
306 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
mally attach to the word Gehenna that meaning of endless
torment which we attach -to 'hell.' To them, and iu their styh;
of speech — and therefore on the lips of our blessed Saviour who
addressed it to them, and spake iu terms which they would un-
derstand — it meant not a material and everlasting Are, but an
intei-mediate, a remedial, a metaphorical, a terminable retri-
bution."
To this is appended a note in which the Jews as a church
are'statPed never to have held either (1) the finality of the
doom passed, or (2) the doctrine of torment, endless, if
once incurred. For this he quotes various authorities,
among otters as the most distinct utterance of the Talinud,
one in which it is said "that the just shall rise to bliss; ordi-
nary sinners shall be ultimately redeemed; the hopelessly
bad shall be punishe4 for a year, and then annihilated."
In aijother placie, "Gehenna is nothing but a day in whiph
the imgodly shall be burned."
' In his fifth excursus at the end of the book he adds other
testimonies, among which is another from the Talmud, to
the eflFect that " after the last judgment Gehenna exists no
longer." His testimony ^of the Rabbins concerns us very
little. He does not notice the views of either Pharisees or
Essenes, who both held eternal punishment, as Josephus ex-
plicitly affirms.
Mr. Hudson has made a similar appeal to the Talmud,
naturally laying the stress upon the annihilationism con-
tained in it, that Dr. Farrar lays upon the restorationism.
Both allow that there are some passages which may be
pleaded against these, although they believe not really
against them. I do not lay any stress upon it, nor propose
at all to take up this line of argument. I leave it to those
more competent to do so, and shall confine myself entirely
to Scripture.
It is of Gehenna that the Lord speaks when He asserts
God's ability to " destroy both body and soul in hell."
We have seen how little the text can be made to mean
annihilation. — It would seem to be no less decisive ag a inst
Dr. Farrar's view. iJideed he gives it up explicitly, if to
r-g^.-.
GEHENNA.
307
be taken as jmplying that God will put forth this pow^r
that He claims. The passage, he says,* " merely attributes
to God a power which we know the Omnipotent must pos-
sess. He can destroy the soul, but it says not that He
will. If any think that this is implied, it seems to mp that
DO logical choice is open to them, but to embrace the theory
of conditional immortality:" *
But surely the Lord holds out no vain warning here. Iii
a parallel passage in the same way He says, " Fear Hun who
after He hath killed, hath poioer to cast into hell; " and we
certainly know that threat will be fulfilled. If He never
wills to do this, men need no more fear it than if He had not
power. And how strange a thing for the Lord thus to
claim for Him a power none can deny, and which notwith-
standing He will never exert! We do not at all on that
account believe in the logical necessity of annihilation, but
we f^o believe that God will fulfil the awful warning, and
destroy both body and sotil in hell.
Mr. Jukes indeed thinks even this to be for eventual sal-
vation : he asks, '
" Is not the ' losing ' or ' destruction ' of our fallen Ufe the only
way to a better one ? Does not our Lord Himself say more than
once, that the way to *save our life ' or 'soul' is 'to lose it ' or
' have it destroyed,' in its fallen form, that it may be re-created ?
These last words," he answers, " should of themselves settle the
question, for m one place they occur in immediate connection
with those other Avell-known words as to 'fearing Him who can
destroy both body and soul in hell.'. . . And yet, in the very
closest connection with those words, our Lord repeats this self-
same word ' destroy ' to express that death and dissolution of the
soul, which, so far from bringing it to non-existence is the ap-
pointed way to save it. "f .-'-''''
But Mr. Jukes can scarcely make so much out of the texts
he cites. The destruction in them is not the destroying of
the body of sin, or of the oid man, with whichiMr. Jukes
^1'^^^^ confounds it. For he goes on to say, " Christ *
» " Eternal Hope," Pref., p. xl. f " Restitution," Appendix. y7l72.
■ a
308 -factsXni* theories as to a future state.
saves it,'aft' w&jhave seen, by death ; for being fallen into
sii^ what i« needed is, that the ' bod>r of sin should be de-
stiyod, that henceforth we should not serve sin.' "> This
'. . is not, I say, the destruction spoken of in Matt. x. 39; but
the Lord is speaking of oiw t^fcing up the cross— o?<r cross-
in face of the opposition of the world. Is this the destruc-
hon of Our old man, or what really, in the spiritual sense,
saves' us ? The Lord is not then here speakirt}^ of " Josing. our
life, or having it destroyed in its fallen form," that it may be
re-created," There is nothing about either destruction or
re-creatioii, iii Utat sense ; lie does not speak of " that dej^th
or dissolution qf the soul, which 1^ the appointed way to
save it." ' ■— . \'. - - ' , ^ '. ^ ^"^
Nor does Scripture anywhere speak of such a thing eithei4
bissolution of the Soul is nowhere mentioned, nor its death
> as a way to save it. Similarly as to destruction; can Mr.
■ Jukes point out one instance in which the destruction of the
souljs the method of its salvatigjif^ , lie cann^; a'nd his
words are mere delusion. " Christ saves the soul by death,"
he tells us, "for the body of fib*, must be destroyed," but
that is not the soul lie says again, "The elect, that is the
first-fruits, are the living proof of -this. A ' new man ' is
created ip them ; and the ' old man ' dies and is destroyed
wiiile yet he in whom all this is done remains the same per-
' s(m:" But if the new man is created in people, he is not de-
stroyed first, to be created ; and if the " old man " dies and
is destroyed, A<; is not re-oroated at all ; nor is the pertion
* destroyed in whom this takes place either. Mr. Jukes adds ;
^' it is pnly the riddle of the cross, that*' by death God de
.stroys him that has tie )>ower of death.' " But then is he that
; ^ has the power of 'death destroyed also in order to his salva-
tion ? Certainly there is not such a thought in the pa.ssage.
It is in vain then for hiin to seek to escape from the force
■ of the words. What- folly," indeed, to suj)^08e the Lord
saying, " Fear Him who is ablf to destroy both soul and
T.nrly^ Wi order to save them." No; it is'tfti possible to read
J the thought of salvation into its very opposite, the awful de-
BlP.'
" OKIIENNA.
809
he awful de-
struction hopeless of delivoranee, jiint because it is God who
"destroys," and destroys not to save, but as the altennUii^e
n/salmitlon. Anniliilationisni and restorationisni tail alike
and fail utterly here.
But then Gehenna is the place of this utter <lestruction,
and though the terms used may be more or less " metaphori-
. cal," a " remediable " and " terminable " retribution they do
'/K>^te9lch. „,
Not- does Dr. Farrar lit tempt to produce Scripture to
establish his position as t(i Geheiuia. It is the Talmud and
the Jewish doctors that are to «ijkline for us what the Scrip-
ture means, and Dr. F. even brin.i^s in the thoui^dit of " the
pleasant valley of llinnoni,"* as if to l)ear its f^rt in trans-
muting darkness into light, and making tolerable the wrath
of God itself.
"In- tlL pM Tostanunt it is m.rdy the ploasuut viillov of
Hmuom ((Uc'Hinnom), subsc,,u(.jitly .l.'secrat.'a'by iaoLitry,"iiud
•specially iW^Moloch worsliip. ,,,..1 .lofili'd by Josiah on this
account. Used, nccordii.K to J.uisU trudition, as the common
sewer of tho\city, the corpses «.f tlu- worst criminals were flun^
mto It unbm%l, and fires wen. lit to purify the contaminated air'!
It then becanu;\i word wllicli secondarily implied (i.) theseven^st
judgment whichV Jewish court could pass up(ui a criminal- -tlie
casting forth of hk unburied c<»rp,se amid the tires and wcn-nis of
this polluted vaIKy\ an.l (ii.) a punishmi-nt wliieh—to the Jews
as a hoay—nerer nWnt . an t>ndless punishment beyond the
grave. " \
As to this we have sWn, lu.weyer, what, the Lord affirms
of It, in a threat accordiW to Di». Karrar never to be exe-
cuted. The destruction of body an.l soid can har<lly-],e this
side of the grave,^nd canntk consist with restoratirm. Dr.
P^arrar's words, too, are contr^lictcd explicitly by Josephus,
as is well known, both with rejV^ird to the Pharisees and Ue
Essenes : a testimony he never eVen alludes to, and which as
strangely Mr. Hudson sets aside afi inneliable Rut let, uslee
now whence the Jews dr.>w (or might have drawn) tlieir
* Preface, x.\xii.
t-
-i-
\ V.
:i'i!|
Ih
ii.
Si!:
i-
310 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FITTURK STATE;
views of Gehenna. We have the Old Testament as they had,
and from it alone all right views, such as the Lord could
Himself adopt, must surely he taken. Revelation alone
could be a light beyond the grave.
To one of these Old Testament passages (Isa. Ixvi. 24) we
have already referred, in which we find "both the fire and
the worm attributed to the valley of Hinnom, and which
more certainly ai'e the basis of the well-known warning of
our Lord which we must almost immediately consider now.
As millennial and not final, it may be concluded to have
given risen to thoughts of the temporary nature of Gehenna,
which Dr. Farrar's extracts have so much of, as well as also
to have furnished argument for the annihilation doctrines
of the day, in behalf of which also we find them quofmg
Mai. iv. 1, quite as do the present anriihilationists.
The main passage beside is also in Isaiah, and here
Tophet, the valley of Hinnom, is expressly named as the
place of judgment for the Assyrian, where thfe breath of the
Lord like a stream of brimstone ^cindles the pile (xxx. ^3).
Here, while the literal Tophet might furnish the terms of
the prophecy, the language points to something deeper,
which the fuller revelation could alone perhaps make plain.
We must now look at the well-knov/n passage in the Gos-
pel of Mark (ix. 43-50), which I quote in full : •
" And if thy hand oflfend thee, cut it off ; it is better for thee
to enter into life maimed, than^hftving two hands to go into hell
[Gehenna], into the fire that neVer shall Jt)e quenched [or rather,
the fire unquenchable], where their worm dieth not, and the fire
's not quenched. And if thy foot oflfe^ thee, cut it oflf ; it is
>etter for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to
recast intc/Tiell [Gehenna], ihto the unquenchable fire ; where
their worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched. And if thine
eye oflfend thee, pluck it out ; at is better for thee to enter into life
with one eye, than having tWq eyes to be cast into the Gehenna
of fire ; where their worm diteth not and the fire is not qftenched.
For every one shall be saltM with fire, and every sacrifice shall
be salted w i th sal t . S a lt i^ good , but if th e saltlfev e lost its
saltness, wherewith will jh season it ?
and have peace with one another."
Have salt in yourselves,-
>.• , "^^^J*""
GEHENNA.
.811
,It was to be expected that annihilationists should have
stumbled over this passage as they have. The admitted
borrowing of phraseology from Isa. Ixvi. 2 1, and the word
Gehenna, with the associations whloli we have just been
looking at, are taken to show that the terms used in these
verses imply the " utter destruction " (in the new sense) of
the ungodlyl
Mr. Constable, appealing to the passage in Isaiah, s^s :
'' A moment's glance shows us that both the worm and the
tire are alike external to and distinct from the subject on
which they prey ; and also, that what both prey upon are
not the living Out the dead*. . . These most solemn words
of the prophet, so solemnly endorsed by Christ, assert a
state of eternal death and destruction, not one of eternal
life in hell, as the destiny^ of transgressors in the world to
come.''*
Mr. Minton thinks it —
*' difficult to conceive of any two images that o^fr Lord could have
put together, more hopelessly in'econcilable with the idea of
never-ending misery, than the worm and the fire. " And he adds,
" It is contended that the worm not dying and the fire nof being
quenched, implies the continuance of being of that on which '
they prey ... If the worm could di^, or the fire be quenched, -
before they had done their work upon the body, it might possi-
bly be rescued or left half consumed; But if neither the ravages
of the worm, nor the burning of* the fire, can be checked, then
nothing can save the body which is exposed to them from C0151-
plete extinction of being. If it be asked, what becomes of the
worm and the fire after the body is consumed ? it is ptough to
J reply, that we have nothing whatever to do with that . . . And
«I will venture to say, that no one would ever imagine the idea
of an eternal worm to be contained in this passage, if they did
not bring to it the assumption that it is an eternal being who
is preyed upon by it. Without that assumption the image is as
plain and simple as possible. With it you have the monstrous
incongruity of an eternal worm, and of a human body which is
b e ing e ternally devoured by it, but yet remains forever as whole '
and entire as if the worm had never touched it. . . It is no re-
* Eternal Punishment, \). 195.
312 FACTS AND TIIKOUIES AS TO A FUTURE «TATE.
ply to Hjiy that tlu) piiiiislmioiit represented is not merely tlmt,of
the Ixwly but of tht) Hoiil also, or even, iiH some would now fcuiy, of
the soul only. ForHho figure tised to rei)reMent it is the eon-
sumption of a body by worm and by fire ; and that figure docs
reprosrnt destruction, but does not represent eternal existence."
He further refers to Jer. xvii. 27 : "I will kindle a fire in
the gates thereof; and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusa-
saleni, and it shall not be <juenc/icd,'' which, he adds, " can
hardly mean that Jerusalem will continue in tlaraestwall.
oternity."*
Mr. Hudson again says^ " It is not the immortality ^4he
individual soul, but the muUitude of those who finally .g^l<?h,
that challenges the nnquenched fire and the unfailirig
worm."t ' "
Other writers speak very similarly, but it is not necessary
to repeat more of what they say just now. The' first thing
to be noted in answer to Mr. Constable is that he makes no
difference between type and antitype ; yet it is scarcely the
literal valley of Hinnom of which the Lord is speaking, an<l
as for Isaiah, " the carcases " which he sees a prey to the
worm and fire are surely not those of all the wrcked, who
are only raised from the dead at the time the earth and tlie
heavens fiee away. " Gehenna," as we have seen, was in
point of fact used by the Jews in our Lord's day in this fig-
urative way, as the Talmud has at any rate shown us. The
ty])ical character of milleimial things also I have already
pointed out. Consequently the carcases, fire, and worm are
all the figures of deeper things. Does Mr. Constable even
himself suppose that all tlie Lord threatens men with is
that fire and worm should consume their carcases ? This
would be infinitely less than extinction itself, and instead of
ifc(Bing the picture even of destruction, would be a picture
merely of what would happen after they had ceased to suffer,
anihad been in faCt destroyed !
But then, Mr. Minion argues, we must take the words at
any rate as a figure oi aestruction, not of eternal existence.
* Way Everlnstiri2, pj). .'><), 51 , 5;^ f Debt and Grace p. 109.
« •
GEHENNA.
818
«•
flaraes t« all .
he words at
il existence.
Surely nobody colitendH that it is a fi^irc of the latter,
'i he question is, is it eousistcnt with eternal existence ? and
t. at is a different thinj?. Now material destruction, if a
fi- ure, should be a figure of something else, and not of itself.
T1 e material should figure the spiritual : and spirUnnl de-
^ Hti 'ction may be, nay, is, entirely consistent with continued
"existence of body and soul. If the fire were materialfirc,
and man's body the prey, according to its present consti-
tution the body would come to an end. If the fire be a
figure of divine judgmeilt, however, this will not be so per-
fectly clear; and as a figure fire does "^sure^y sp(?ak of this.
I have already so fully shown that the destruction of the
sinner is in fact not annihilation, that I may be excused from
Voing afresh jpto the proofs of this.
The- WKntenchnble fire may have been, as to the mere
force of the phrase, unduly pressed by those against whom
]Mr. Minton contends ; and I concede fully thnt the fire in
the gates of Jeru'ialem could not be '' everlasting." He
must be aware, however, that " everlasting fire" w spoken
of by our Lord elsewhere: if (that is) the New Testament
has any word for everlasting. But if he Avill look even at
the passage in Isaiah once again, I think he will find reason
to own that unquenched fire does there imply at least |)er-
petuity. If " from one nejv moon to another^ and from one
Sabbath to another," all. fiesh, as they come up to worship
before Jehovah, " go foJth and look upon the carcases of
those that have transgitssed against" Him, ^///.s- imi)iies a
perpetuity of the awful spectacle surely. And the words
following give the reason for this : ''/or f/wh- tror/n shall
not die^ neither shall their /ire be. queiiche<J, and they shall be
an abhorring unto all flesh." The fire being unquenchable
is not then given, as Mr. Minton argues, as a reason for the
utter consumption of what it preys upon, but on riie other
hand for its abiding before the eyes of all flesh SalJl>ath after
►Sabbath and month after month. In the scene whieli Isaiah
pictures it would matter little for the carcases themselves,
whether the worm died or not, or the fire were quenched or
~:s'
if
it
if'
Hi) .
•■11 "
if'
>3
ilk
814 FA< TH AND THKOKIES AS TO A FUTUKK STATE. '
not. Their bein^^ " carcasen " doomed them to destruction,
apart from all question of wor^i and fire ; and these are
Kuroly added, not to bring them to any more speedy or cer-
lain end, but to intensify the solemn picture of judgment,
and their being *• an abhorring unto all flcHli."
Tlifts eyen as to the passage in Isaiah, Mr. Minton's argu-
ments are only plausililc when the words he comments on
• are divorced frZmv^ their context, aiid looked at as mere
' isolated expressions. Take the whole passage, and they bo.
. come worse than unmeaning. For worm and fire make no
more certain the destruction of a carcase fjlready secured l)y
simple natural law ; and instead of being given as hastening
the destruction, the undying worm,*and unquenched fire
give assurance of the perpetuity of an awful spectacle, which
abides indefi,nitely' before the eyes of ipen month after
month. ^
Still more do the arguments fail when we compare them
with the passage in the gospel : fc^ here the Lord is "plainly
not speaking of a spectacle before the eyes of others, but
warning those wbo might suffer from it themselves. In
-Isaiah it is "they shall go forth and look," from one new *
moon and one Sabbath to another, for the fire shall not be
quenched. In the other case it is in effect : J'\'ar if* for the
fire shall not be quenched. And a* these words in Isaiah "
announce the perpetuity of the judgment, so must they do
when traffsferred to the passage in Mark.
On the other hand who could call that " severest judg-
ment which a Jewish court (eveq) could pass upon a crimi-
nal,"— as Dr. Farrar puts it,—" the casting forth of his un-
buried corpse amid the fir^s and worms of the polluted
* Mr. Tipple, quoted approvingly by Mr. Cox, says, ' The flame of
the yalley of Hinnom cannot be made to represent the awful suffering .
ihst&fe forsin; it can only fitly represent the certain <rowj»?mp<ww of sin
to be feffected by thp Mhai-pucHH of the fire " {Eckocn of Spoken, WorcU).
Thoy Were to find tho certain consumption of sin, without sufTerinii!
A nd this biicaust' ll i o fiivs of
res of Gehenna w e r e not light e d to inflict pain find
anguish ! The same might be said of the burning up of chaff* and all
Other figures I Cannot a figure figure anything but just itself 1
„V:;-
j' ^5*i^J 1»^, ',,
OlMENKA.
S15
valley," a " purifying and corrective," or "remedial" retri-
bution ? None, I think, who were not under hopeless bias,
with which reasoning becomes impossiljlu. Nor, us far as
the Jewish court was concerned, was it " terminable " either.
Of course it could not hinder the resurrection of those whom
it adjudged to this ; and in this way no human sentence
could be eternal or irreversible ; but it could represent this
notwithstanding : for )a final sentence, irreversible and not
terminable by any alter human one, would be the proper
tigure of irreversible and eternal judgment if divine. And
only of such divine judgment would it h^ the proper figure.
Dr. Farrar's facts are hopelessly against his inferences.
But the 49th verse in the passage of Mark adds some-
thing more ; and Mr. Jukes has made what use he could of
it for his purpose: "Take the ordinary interpretatioji," he
says, "and there is no connection between never-ending
punishment and the law here quoted respecting salt in sac-
rifico. But as spoken by our Lord the fact or law respect^
iug the meat-ofifering is the reason and explanation of what
is said respecting hell-fire,—' for every one must be salted
with fire, and every sacrifice must be salted with salt.' "
Then after explaining the meat oflfering as shadowing the
fulfilment of man's duty towards his neighbor,* he goes on
" The passage which we are cousideriug begins with this,
man's duty to his neighbor, and the ^eril of offending a little
one. Then comes the exhortation to sacrifice hand or foot or
eye, lest we come into the worse judgment, which must be known
by those who will not judge themselves. « For,' says our Lord,
thus giving the reason for self- judgment, 'every man,' whether
he likes it or not, if he is ever to change his present form and
rise to God, *must be salted with fire.' This, may be done as a
sweet savor to God ; though even here 'every sacrifice is salted,
with salt, '—for even in willing sacrifice and service there is some-
thing sharp and piercing as salt, namely, the 'feorrection which
tnith brings with it to those who will receive it But if this be
not accepted, the purgation m'ust yet be wrought, not as a sweet
* The meat-offering applies (like all other offerings) in the first place
to Christ, the Bread of Life. Is this what it signifies as to JThn ?
■«,.*
\
I. (
■ttjt .
A'\
il _-■-
I
^1(B FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
savor, but as a siu-ofifering, where tUe bodies ore biirnt as un-
clean without the ciiiup ; ' where their worih dieth not, and the
liri- is not quenched ' (th^ ' worm ' alluding to the consuuipticju
of those parts which were not l»iu*nt \AW\ Are) ; ' for,' in sonic
way, ' every one must be salted witlHii'e,' even if he be not u
sweet-savor 'sai^riflce,' which is 'salted with salt.' > But all this,
so far from teaiphing never-ending punishnaent, only points us
hack to the law of sacrifice, and the means which must be used
to distroy sin iul the flesh, and to make us ascend iiva new and
more spiritual foiTU as offerings to Jehovah. " ^ ; ' ' ~
- This is decidedly a new interpretation. Mr. Jukes throws
Gehenna and the passage in Isaiah of course asi^ie or
else applies tlieni as type^ parallel to' thiir***faii>i^''8in-
olfering ! ° But here he can find no " worm,'' so he iuvcntH
one, to consume what the fire ought wholly to have burnt !
But we must look at this further.
The Lord certainly says " Gehenna." Is this in any way
connected with such a type as the sin-offering,, or are they
not in every sense contrasts y ^ ' . . ^
The siriiffering was a thii^g " most holy." It was an>
ott'ermii /or sin, and therefore *' without blemish," to be a
fit type of such an one as alone could make atonejnent.
The fat upon the inwards was put upon the altar of burnt-
offering, and thus linked with those sweet-savor offerings of
which Mr. Jukes speaks. The blood on the day of atone-
ment went into the holiest, and at ordinary times was
sprinkled before the veil, and anointed the horns of the
golden" altar of incense. That blood made atqnement for
the soul.
Dare Mr. Jukes apply all thia -to the abhorred Gehenna
judgment of the unholy and unclean 7" Dare he include
under one figure the One who bare judgment suffering for
others only, and those upon whom, because of what they
are personally, God's nvrath abides? Dare he connect the
"worm" of corruption with the type of God's Holy One,
wlio therefore could (even as to His body) know noneV
Will lie say that the sui-offbring figures a corrective jinlg
III.
iDill
nient purifying, the victim offered ? •Will he make the blood
-afe"
ke the blood
GEHENNA.
317
of the sinner an atonement for hi^ sins? Carry his view of
the matter out, and he must do all this. He may say (and
I trust would) he has no thought of carrying it so far. But
then the whole is one consistent type, and a type expressly
of the putting away of sin : that is its proper force — its use.
If Mr. Jukes is but applying language used of the sin-offering
to something wholly ditterent, let him say so, and then take
scrupulous care how he does apply it. But what he says is
very different from this. He says distinctly that if a man will
not judge himself about sin, "the jmn/ation must yet be
wrought as a sin-offering." Now this is what in the very
nature of it he could not be. A blemished beast could not be
offered. And here, if I take his words in their simple force,
the sinner becomes his own offering, his own Saviour ! The
worm and the fire point us back {o " the law of sacrifice,
and the means which must be used to destroy sin in the
flesh, and to make us ascend in anew and more spiritual
tftrm as offerings to Jehovah ! '' r/m ^
i'Siip in the flesh" is just what the sin-offering did not,
and could not, typify, but thi; very opposite, a Holy One
bearing sin not His own. *And therefore, while the fire
had its place, for the AVrath^of God Christ bbre for us, the
" worhti," bred of corruption, could not possibly enter into
such a figure. In Gehenna there are both : the torment of
God's wrath upon sin, but the torment also bred of the cor-
niptlon within.. The two things are essentially and wholly
distinct. Even as to jthe body God's Holy One could not
see corruption : and these are types, whose significance and
power become more and more realized the more we consider
them.- Gehenna judgment and the sin-offering are in their
nature opposed.
" Every one must be salted with fire,"* the Lord says.
* Morris and Goodwyn prefer another rendering : " But the word
' pas ' in the Greek may mean every one permn or every one thiiKj, and
the word for fire is in the dative, pvri /and the real force of tlio pas-
sage is this : • For every one sliall be salted to or for the lire (that is.
\'::i
i:
'ill
'■■■■ ■"
l
I ■'.
■5
Jill
»: 1,;
318 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
Mr. Jukes adds, " if?ie is ever to change his present form and
rise to God,'^ and thus assumes his whole ground. There
is nothing of this expressed or implied in the passage.
" Every one must be salted with tire ; and every sacrifice
must be salted with salt." Here salting with fire and with
salt are distinguished. Salting is the figure of preservation.
"Salt," which, as the Lord says, " is good," and always ^as
a good meaning in Scripture, is the figure of that energy of
holiness which preserves for God by keeping out corruption.
But salting with /re is a widely different thing from salting
with sa/<, fire being as always the figure of divine judgment.
Npiv emry one (it is quite unlimited) shall be salted with
jire — even the saint, for he needs the discipline of it, and it
is for his preservation as such, and salvation (comp. 1 Pet.
iv. .17, 18). But the ungodly will have it after another sort.
To them it will be "unquenchable" fire, because of evil ever
needing to be kept down i repression by judgment, where
judgment alone will avail. The Lord adds, " And every
sacrifice shall be silted with salt." There is the point of
transition, at which he begins to speak of the saint alone.
Mr. Roberts finally has still another sense : he says :
"The meaning of Christ's words is made perfectly plain by
Paul when he says (1 Cor. iii. 1^5), 'The fire shall try every
man's work of what sort it is, and irspiiy man's work be burnt he
shaU suflfer loss ; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.'
Through this fire of judgl^ent every man and all his works \^11
pass, and this fact gives the strongest point to Christ's exhorta-
tion ; but the action of the judgment-fire is only preservative on
certain kinds of men and work. The judgment justifies and
- makes such incorruptible ; the others are destroyed."
of the altar), even every sacrift^ shall be salted with salt "(What is
Man 1 p. 93).
There is no ground for this :" ?ra5, standing dlone as her», can only
mean "every person," and the word "salt" is jusi as much in the
dative (a/lz) as " fire " is, so that there is as piuch ground for saying
" salted TO or for the salt.'" Put without article as here, itvpi and d\i
a r e both dati v es of inst r ument, and exact pa r allels : '* salted with fire,
" salted with salt."
iiii
THE APOCALYPTIC VISIONS.
319
This is fatal false doctrine. Mr. Egberts does not yet see
that if a man comes into ^ndgiaent, judgment can never justify
him : "'Enter not into judgment with thy servant, O Lord,
for in Thy sight shall no flesh living be juiitified."' How
could a man, if judged according to his works, have his ^ork
burnt up and yet himself be saved, as the text he quotes
says ? Plainly he could not. The man is saved because
building on the foundation, — on Christ, — and not because
of itjhat he builds, which is burnt up ; he is saved not " by
fire," but " throwjh the fire," and in spite of it. But this
question of judgment we have already sufficiently examined.
We must pass on now to other testimony of the word as
to the final judgment.
, CHAPTER XXXni.
salt "(What is
THE ArOCALYPTIC VISIONS. — 1. • -
At the very mention of Revelation there is a well-nigh
unanimous exclamation. The cause is believed almost con-
fess^;^^ hopeless that appeals to this book of symbols for its
support. It is principally, of course, with reference to it
that Canon Farrar enters his vigorous protest ^gainst " the
tyrannousj realism of ambiguous metaphors," and he is only
giving ff^esli^ utterance to protests that have bopn again and
again put forth by writers and speakers of every grade of
orthodoxy or ^ts opposite, in every case perhaps in which it
ever was appealed to. In this regard the minds of many,
who otBerwise listen with reverence to the word of God, are
under a cloud of unbelief which forbids their seeing some
of the very plainest things that were ever written. While
we look then particularly at these Apocalyptic visions, let uf
remember for our encouragement, that the title of the book
is *' the Revelation of Jesus Clfrist which God gave to Him
to show unto His servants things which must shortly come
!v:r
>B1 ; ! ''
I
1:111
FACTS AXD'THEQIUES AS TO A FUTUUE STATE.'
to pass ; " and that He has- added, « Blessed is he that read-
eth and^ they that hear th» words of the book of this
prophecy, and keep the things that arc written therein."
/Plainly we have nowhere else in Scripture the full and
orderly' detail of "last things" which we have in this one,
book of New Testament prophecy, -the priceless gift of a
love so, little realized, for which we have -been so little
thankful. Nowhere, are' eternal things so vividly pictured
to us, " the city which hath foundations" on the one side,
^the awful solemnity of the '^ lake of fire" upon the other.
Glad would Satan be to withdraw from us the joys which
beckon us forward in it, the judgments which warn men to
accept.the grace that naw beseeches. Has God written it
so badlras to be .unintelligible ? Are the metaphors am-
biguous ? Shall we not at least look, into it earnestly and
reverently, before we thus dishonor the blessed Master and
Lord who caUs it His " Revelation"?
k . • -^ ■■ .,■./" ■ ■ ■■:,-■■ , ■ ■ n ■■
e have already traced the outline of the 19th chapter,
and iia^vd seen how, after the marriage of the Lamb in heaven,
the armies' thfere, clothed in the fine linen, clean and white,
which is tie righteousness of saints, follow the white-horsed
Leaderto the judgment of the earth. The beast,.the felse
prophet, and the kings of the earth with their armies, are the
objects of the judgment. The mass are slain with the
swofd, two beingXexempted ftom this to share a special
doom,'being " cast aUyje into a lake of fire burning with Mm
'stone." . \ ' -'" '; " ,': J r .
' The ^next chapter shoVs us Satan bound and shut up m
the bottomless pit a thousa^ years^ while for the same time
Christ and his saints reign together, the \vicked dead not yet
being raised. • \ -
M the end of the thousand yWs Satan is loosed out of
his prison, and after having decetXed tlje nations, and the
iudgment of God overtaking his follWej?s,hc is again t^ken,
- lake o f . fi r ^ there we are told
THE APOCALYPTIC VISIONS.
321
cast in, " the beast and the false prophet are,"* and it'is added
of thenif "and they shall be tormented .day and night unto
the ages of ages " (vcrr. 10): ,
No\jr, if the lake of fire be extinction, how is it that two
men repiain in it a thousand years unannihilated, and that
then we are told they are to be further tormented for eter-
nity? The expression is "unto the ages of ages," one of
the strongest expressions ever used for eternity, as we have
seen; and, if it were not so, as far as annihilationism is 6on-
eerned, the use of such languagte would at all events pre-
clude the possibility of reasoning, as this class of writers love
to do, from the nature of fire, and the present constitution of
human bodies, that it must imply the total consumption of
♦ those condemned to it. For if a man could live there a
thousand years^ why not ever so many thousand? if * for
ages of ages, why not for a proper eternity ?
Details we are not now attempting, but only seeking to
g^t hold in the. first place of the general outline of what is
here presented, and presented with abundant plainness. It
is not from any peculiar difficulty in these chapters indeed,>
that people stumble at them, but simply because they do
' not harmonize with the views they have elsewhere learned.
V But the" plainest reading of these Scriptures is what is in
most real harmony with all others. We have assured our-
selves of this in part already. We. may yet find equal as-
surance as to all here pre8entie<l. x
Map, unsaved man, then, here shares the destiny appointed
for the devil and his angels. That destiny is ''' everlasting
punishment " in " eve;rlasting fire.'" Quite.'true, we have not
as yet seen all the unsaved sharing it. But that this twen-
,^ ♦ "Are " is not in the original, but riece.ssarily implied there. The
word '' they " is also oniStted in the common version from the next part
of the verse, wliich ruiti, " and shall be tormented." The difference
between this and what I have given is, that the ordinary translation
' seems to confine the torment to the beast and false prophejt, while mine
includes the devil in it. The Greek is capable of ■either, but th^ <;on-
nection calls for the sense -given. ' * * .-
. i|
«#■
V
1!
i
322
PACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTUKE* STATE.
tieth chapter gives : /* And whosoever was not fouu^ written
in tihe book of life was cast into the lake of fire." This is
^spoken of the dead, standing in 'mass before, the great white
throne. ■ • • •
tnt© this lake of fire " death and hell," or hades, are also
said to be cast ; and people claim in this case (and many un-
thinkingly, too, concede) that this must at least as to them
mean theiif coming to an end.,* It does not do this ' at all, as
we may see, on looking more closely at the words. " And
thejsea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and^
hell (hades) delivered up the dead which were in them, and
they were judged every man according to their works."
Thus death and* hell were emptied i(it is " hades " as we-^have
seen) and emptied of inhabitants, who, standing before God
to he judged on the ground of their natural responsibility,
"according to their works,*" come forth only to hopeless
condemnation. Long, before have the saints ceased to be
tenants in hades. Kor does Scripture seem to speak of
death for the saints living during the" niillennium:* Th
result woul^l be that, as none but the " blessed ** have part
in the fipgt resurrection, so none but the wicked have part in
the second. It is thfe resurrection of judgment. And it is
thus, as figUFatively presenting their inhabitants, that death
and hades arc cast into the lake of fire. t It is immediately
added, as if to show that the people are intended, " This ds
the second death : " of course, not of death or of hell, but
ofi those represented by them. And I press it again, that
the second death* is the lake of fire ; not extinction, for if
there has been no first extinction, there cax be no second.
Yet so the first death (death, as we ordinarily call it) ponies
•to an end. The last enemy is destroyed. The second
^eath is deathless, and yet the "ages for ages" for most
fiave but just begun. , '
♦ Comp. Isa. Ixv. 20: _^^
\ t See Isa. xiv. 9 for a similar putting of " hell " (sljet>17 for jts inhab-
itants.* It is the constant thing when speakins^joftlties : " .Jerusalem.
that killest the prophots
etc.
\ ,. ..■
'\ •• »•
V.
rSTATE.
" ' THE' APOCALYPTIC fVlSIONS. / ' 32^
If would seem that all t^iH was clear, slmjll and conclu-
sive. The metaphors are not ambi«||j^s, an^ l their « tyran-
nous realisra " amomits <n.ly to thi.^, tiiat t/h^y are in' fact
very positive in whjrt they ri4)re.sent, l.ocausfe ^o clear. We
shall have, however, to consider, with a cari ih some degree
commensurate with their importance, the ccim^ent.s of those
who read^'them differently, and in so dofe| we shall learn
the f9rce of them still better, and find wh^t ambiguity there
is in them, if any. / . /
As they have usually preceded, we m/y jive precedence
still to the advocates of « conditional imWrtality," and
then listen to Dr. Farrar and the restorkio^ist'school.
W^ may begin with xMr. Dobney. jua ^ays on Bev. xx.
"On the present text I- anbmit^(iy) that the wi-itcr simply
affirms that the devil shall bo tormonted fdre4?r and ever • which"
whatever be the legitimate meaning /cono/^ing which 4e need
not mquire) no one dilutes. [!J * At/lh events, I am not disposed
to embarr^ my present 8ul,joct with any inquiry into the fate
. of faUen angels. . What I have undortakeii is sufficient. And so
I simply remind my reader thatWiis text says nothing at all about
^mners of the human race. / (ii.) Wfiatcver this lake of fii^e '
may really symbolize, it i'^b^ore the gr^at day of judgment that >'
thedevil IS represenled a^ast into it. It is moreover that into,
which the beast and the/also prophet were previously- c«tst, lon^
before the final close c/human history/ Now the beast and false .
prophet are not mOtviAwi] and historical persons really.* They
aresymbolicper^s. ^fnu/e.cposlt6fK (ell nHha.t they symboU^
a system whiplf is to come to an utt^r end, rather than partici/lar
iadividuakX^so.theidt.iof torment is not to be literally/un^
(lerstoodr But tins I jptnrkplfdf/ef/U'.''* , > *
^ fr. Dobney is careful not to commit himself tooti^ieh
where he is evidently not sure of his ground. The>.om
of Satan he admits-to.be tormoht forever and ever, and does
not want to '^embarrass" the doctrine o? annihila4n by
considering it. No wonder, because Satan hipiself 4 to be
' destroyed," and if that, ma y consist with
r
"'4
. /■■
M
eternal /torm e nt.
Script. Doctrin«>, pp. "220. 280^
if'' ■■■■/■'
324 F^CTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FtJTUBE STATE.
it would "embarrass" an annihilationist. ' But then man is
to 8har4 Satan's doom : how can Mr. Dobney refuse to con-
sider Miis theti ?
"Again, (ii.) no men are concerned \n this judgment. The
beast/and false prophet are personifications and not persons.
At least " many expositors " tell us so, and Mr. Dobney
will/ accept their judgment upon a point so immaterial as ,.
this ! Why, Mr. Dobney, not " many " but the mass of ex-
positors tell us that eternal torment is the portion of men
ai^o. Are you satisfied to abide by this ? Surely not, if I
,n believe your book. Why are you more credulous
lere ? ■
It seems to be immaterial whether or not two me?i are
here said to be tormented with the devil forfevor and ever !
But Mr. Dobney prefers to believe that the personal devil
shares the lake of fire with two symbols, and is literallytor-
mented, while they are figuratively tormented in the self-
same fire ! Surely Mr. Dobney cannot blame us if we read
the facts the other way. We should argue that, if the
devil be a real person, and th5 torment leal for him, his
associates must be as real persons and as real sufferers.
But he does not tell us what these *' symbols " mean, and
we must wait till another does, before we examine this.
He dwells more at large upon ver. 11-15: —
" Orthodoxy ingeniously connects this IStli verso with the one
we have just considered, and pronounces thus :— 'The lake of
fire is the symbol of tlie torment the devil shuU undergo. . This
torment is to be day and night forever and ever. Into this
lake the wicked are to be cast. Therefore they also are to be
tormented forever and ever therein.'"
To this he objects :—
" (i.) The inference is not a necessary one. Because in, the
lake of fire the devil shall be tormented forever, it does not neces-
sarily follow that quite another race of intelligences, cast into the
same lake, must therefore exist as long as he does, and endure
the same torment. If the orthodox use it, it proves too much-
forthem. . . they musi affirm that all men, even the least^guilty,
■IpE J APOCALYPTIC VISIONS.
825
will endure preelsefy^tlie same tomlent as the devil\ himself, see-
ing that the leasts guilty of the lost aro cast into |)recisely tho
sjime tiro as the devil. If they shrink from thjs. . . they surren-
der the entire ease. If it may produce different effects, it may
torment tho one and desti-oy the other. " ' v\
" This is somewhat more like argument. But to it \ an-
swer :— > _ ^ : . . .v;;^ ,
Mr. Dobney is not putting all the facts of the case. V^e
have seen that death is forever gone when the lake of fire
(for most) begins ; and that " the second death is the lake
of fire." If we are to learn in any way therefore what the
lake of fire is, wo look back j>f course to the prior account.
We find two men — we must take them as such, till they
show us otherwise — a thousand years in it alive, and then
the dev]^ sentenced with thepe to eternal torment in it. We
argue, necessarily, this is no repetition of the first death ; nor
could it be, for the first death is over, and* not existing still
under another jjame. If the second death is the lake of
fire, extinction of being the lake df fire is not. Can any one
show us the fallacy of siich a conclusion ?
But, says Mr. Dobney, every one must suflfer then " pre-
cisely the same torment as thedevil himself." There is not
the least reason for that; for if the lake of fire mean tor-
ment forever and ever, all may suffer that, and yet in almost
infinitely different degrees. " They were judged every
man according to their works."
Mr. Dobney is thinking and arguing really about material
fire. In a material fire for eternity it would be natural to
say all would suffer alike— the degrees could not at least be
very far removbd. But then how could the devil suffer in
material fire V Doubtless it is a figure and to be explained
by the use of such a figure elsewhere. It if indeed the true
ignis sapiens^ the discriminative Wrath o^MHod which must
be the portion of all the impenitent, yet not alike to each.f
The Lord has Himself taught us to speak of stripe^ few or
many, of judgment greater or less.
As to even material fire and its effect, it is not conceded
.\
•iMi
w
i 1
Fill' V
326 FACTS AND THl^OEIES A9 T() A FUTURE STATE.
that the devil is in s?/c/t sense of " quite another race of in-
telligences," as to be less susceptible to its action tiiaii the
spirit of man: while as to his resurrection body, we can
argue nothmg, for we know nothing about it. But material
fire we may be sure is not meant, as these very consider-
ations show. \
Mr. Dobney*s second objection is -.-^
, ," (ii) The inference is not a fair one. . . What does the being
cast into the lake of fire mean, in v. 14 ? It denotes the utter
,, ceasing to be of death and hades. There is to be no more death.
And this plain fact is poetically set forth by the striking image
of death cast into a lake of fire ; fire being the acknowledged
symbol of the prophets for destruction. So ' death, the last
enemy, is to be destro^red.' This is the undisputed sense of v. 14.
' When then, in the very next verse, sinners are represented as
cast into the lake of fire, is it not obvious and legitimate to re-
tain the sense necessarily attached to the symbol of fire in the
* verse before, rather than to overlook the near and go back to the
remote passage ? "
This olbjection ha8%een already met. It is strange hca^
little Mr. Dobney can see the fallacy of anltrgument whiph
asserts death to be destroyed "when cast into the lake of
V^^ fire, and yet that death is to reign still in that very place!
It is quite true that death is in fact destroyed in that very
way. Not as if the fire destroyed it, but its prisoners being
given up finally, and cast into the lake of fire, death exists
no more; but thfit is not what casting into the* fire as a
symbolmeans.
Mr. Dobney reinforces his argument by reference to the
^ book of life, and the threat of being blotted out of it. This,
too, we have lopked at, and need not return to it.
Mr. Hudson's main argumept* also turns upon death
and hades being cast into the lake of fire, and he says that
if Satan, the beast, and the false pt-ophet are immortal in
it, by parity of reasoning deMh and hades ought to>^.
"Death and hades, Symbolical personages, are supposed to
* Debt and Grace, p. 213.
3f
^'^as-
THE ArOCALYPTlO ViaiONH.
327
ceaso from being; While their subjects/ the dead ' . . . .are
supposed to be immortal ! Who does riot see (he asks) that
hades and.thanatos are only other names for the dead?".
That is what I believe and contend for, and that the pas-
sage docs not represent their ceasing to exist at all. It is
quite true they do so, but that is inference only, although a "
sound one ; for if all who make them up are gone Irom
them, thcf/ are, of course, gone too. But if death be gone
at the beginning of t%)8e ages of ages for which the tor-
ment of the lake of fire lasts, how can its subjects ever
"die"?
Mr. Hudson filso regards the beast and false, prophet as
symbols of systems, and that they must comd to an end '^^
with those who are their worshippcrsj-.but this again is not
proved but taken for granted. If they are systems, come
to an end for lack of supporters, how are they tormented
for the ages of ages V "This might be said," he answers,
"of the beast and the false prophet as impersonations,
henceforth without power or worshippers." Death 'might
indeed symbolize that, but it i^ t/ie very thiny they ik> not -
suffer. They are cast " alive " into the lake of fire, and\e- .
main alive a thousand years, and still to be tormented on
forever and ever. How can there be life in systems with-
out power or worshippers forever ? Mr. Hudson does not
even himself believe it, for he adds, " But we think the lan-
guage describes their utter and irremeable destruction in a
dramatic form,"imd he compares.'it to Isa. xiv. 9-12: that"^
is, the welcome given by the dead to the dead king of
Babylon! , ; . .
As he gives no reason further than this, we have not
much to answer. As to. Satan himself^ answ^s the ques-
tion, "Is h^ mortal?" by saying, 'Hhe prophecies all look
that way." He produces but two, however : one, " that the
seed of the woma^ shall crws^i the head of the serpent; " the
other, Dan. vu. 11, 12 ! His proofs are perfecUy conclusive
as to the imtenableness of his position. ^/
ii
,13
J
328 FACTS AND TUEOltlES AS lO A FUTUUE STATE.
As to the secoad death,* Mr. Hudson (juotes various
rabbinical statements to show that for the rabbis t^io phrase
. meant annihilation. If so, it would only .show tliat Scrip-
ture in the most decisive way reverses their judgment.
We will now look at Mr, Morrij^' view, and shall give it
in bin own words :f / \ *
"A two-fold destiny iiwaite the devil— the one, political, and
< the other, persoiud . . . the dramutic representutiou of the per-
-7 -^ sonal policy and scheme of Satan is that of 'a great red dragon '
(Rev. xii. 1-3). In the doom of his policy, his person and the
persons of his host are involved. But it ia the personal policy of
Satan that the * great red dragon' moretjspecially represents.
And it is the great red dragon that is caugl^t, and chained, and
cast into the abyss, and is imprisoned there a thousand year'-,
and is then letlodse, and is afterwards cast ii^to the lake of fiii-.
■ The policy of Satan as we have just remarked, involves his person ;
t and so the tfoow of his policy involves his personal doom. But
it is the political doom of the devil> or the devil Q& poUtically con-
sidered, that Is intended, and is dramatiAilly dcsdribed when it j.s
/ "^said, 'And the devil that deceived them {the n'^ions) was cast
into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beas^ and the false
prophet are, and they shall be tormented day and night forever
and ever.' The passive verb in the original, Arti»vwiV/iec«o></aj, is
a plural verb, and so requires to be read, ' and they shall be tor-
mented,' or, as divested of the dramatic dresw,' ' and they shall be
PUT TO THE PBOOF unto the ages of the ages.' That trinity of,
evil, called the dragon and the beast and the false prophet, shalH..
be YojjreMer involved in the same final doom." .\
In a note he adds, ^
" The dramatic force and design of this plural verb, basanis-
theesontdi, is not— thtfy shall be tortured^ as some men conn}, tox-
ture. As we have noticed before : That the the verb basanizo,
and the noun basanismos, are derived from basanos, the name
,«, ^ of a stone found in Lydia, ia Asia Minor, by which gold was -tried
fN^ — a tOuch-stme. From the hteral meaning of basnnoa came the
metaphorical use of 7w.sa« /smos— tliat whieh tests or puts to the
proof. In the mind of n Unman in(iuisitor— both ancient arid
modem — both secular and ecclesiastical— this word apd its verbs
X r^ , ♦ pebt and Grace, p. 178. t What is Man, p. 120, etc. -,
. ■• \
^^■'
THE APOOALYITIC VISIONS.
820
QflA its verbs
caiie to mean tarlure, and torturiug to olicit evidence, to extort u
confusion. But oven in tins thcro wu8 uu end proposed to bo
\ "'^Iny '"''"'^ "^ ""' *"'^""'' '"'^^ ^'^ »" *"«^ t« the torture
; itself, llu, torment inflicted .v,w, ;>,v/.x.s«//j, at lemt, a means to
/ nn end. and not for the mere sake of tormenting. . In
i common diseoarse, the word hasmiismos and its verbs came to
-^present the ,deus of ilainful toil and great bodily affection .
aiKl the infliction of torture. But b..sani,mos and its verbs always
iTt.i|n their raulical meaning when u«od in relation to the iuris-
pn,d)^ce and penal administration of (h,d. The feminine symbol
!h .B=%lon the gi-eat.' and the masculine symbols caUed
the bea^ and 'Uic false prophet.' are said to be tormented •
tl.at is. the sj^ste^ns of ecclesiastical md ot secular and moral
an 1 iff o T""' "f^ ^^'"^ '^'''^ ^-^P'^^^*' '^'^ l>« tested
and put to tiie proof. '
nm Ihr Mr. Morris. We h*ve all these words in the J
. Mew Testament. Uadayos three times, Matt. iv. 24; Luke*
xvi. 23 28, always given as "torment;" Ba6ayt6M6? simiJ'
arly "torment" five times, Rev. ix. 5 ; xiv. 11; xviii. t
U, 15; Baaavi^r^,, once, Matt, xvlii. 34, « tormentors ; '^
!!!V;'"\ ''"''^ rendered " tossed," Matt. xiv. 24 ; once « toil.
ing," Mark vi. 48 ; once" vexed," 2 Pet. ii. 8 ; once " pained.-
lof;.10 ' ' ""''^' Rev. ix.^5; xi. 10; xiv.
Th^ ^"""f "'^'"''''•f i"*^^P^«t^ti«« i« a very si^ie-^ite. ^
2^sewo.^, . a uniformly ren4ere4:3Jby some w<,rd^
me of suffering and pain, may be allowed to retain that
«meanmg ^u eoenj case where the penal administration of
^^a^i^t" r r«^^«°' «^^* i«' wherever the, theories -<tf
anmhilationists do not require it otherwise, ^t .there we
mns^ absolutely exclude the idea of torme^l^t^l^ ^
.^ put to the proof" in all such cases, - -^ / * ^ . .
In vain we ask, is there another instancbi^hidilequires
or wouhlal WtJus rendering in the New Tg^tam^^
^Z ^«^%ient authority evidently m tlfc matter, forhe
cemdescends to give no other, nor even to reason abJut it.
iiut he IS somewhat unfortunate nevertheless. Fpr in the
w
n
!!lli|f
■\l
330 PACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE. P^
very text in question the oanon strangely fails. " Divested
of the" dramatic dress," he says, the passage reads : " and
they shall be put to the proof unto the ages of the ages."
" That trinity of evil," is his own comment upon it, "called
the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet, shall be together
Jnvolved in the same final doom.'''' ,
That is, these three, two of them symbols^ are " doomed "
to be put to the proof (without torture) in a lake of fire and
brimstone forever. The enff of the "putting** to proof "is
never to come ! FoMthis putting to the proof, is to " elicit
evi'dence " ! The stride trial is to go on forever, and come
to no result! "'-. i».
But this is not what Mr. Morris means. Possibly vhi.
It is only what he says. They are tested forever. The flfe-
and brimstone, too, arc of course '* dramatic," and it Is only
the deviFs political doom, as j^ersdnallj/ he is to be destroyed I
J^erhaps that ' makes it plainer. If not, it is pretty certain
to bewilder, which is apparently the next best thing.
But Mr. Morris comes at last to the question for whicli
we have been waiting, " who or what are the beast and the
false prophet ? " And he answers : " They are symboll of
governmental and of moral polity and power." "The beast
is a composite symbol of thfeirecular polity and power of the
Roman world in the last stage of its history." " He ascend-
eth out of the abyss, andAe *goc!th into perdition,' — -els apo-
leiauj that is, unto destruction — final and eternal jilestruc-
tion ; but he is first to be put to the proof." »
*• 'The false prophet,' " he goes on, " is in the first instance,
called * another beast,' which is represented as coming up out of
the earth.," He " is the symbol of the moral polity and power
of-^e^Bom9.n world in the last stage of its history. It will be
accredited of Sataii, who will display in it most marvellous jiowers
— ^miraculous powers, in imitaticm of the powers of the Holy
* Ghost.. . . This second beast is first called the * false prophet ' in
Rev. xvi. 13, and he is so called because the moral polity which
is thus described will claim to be the mature result of manly
wisdom. '
" In Dan..vii 11, the destiny of the Roman beast is spoken of
«t
U m
TIIE APOCALYPTIC VISIONS.
J
331
>
thus : 'I beheld tiU the beast was slain, and his body destroyed,
and given to the burning flame.'. . . But here in Rev. xk. 20, an
additional truth is supplied. . . John saw the beast and the false
. prophet cast alive into the lake of fire, and they are represented
as being still there and al'me at the end of the thousand years,
when Satan is let loose out of his prison. And this is intended
to teach . . . that during and throughout the thousand years, it
shaU be left as an open question, as to whether those- same sys-
tems of secular and moral power will ever be able to rise up again
and be re-established upon the earth . . .and so the beast and
false prophet are represented as alive in an open pool,, or lake of
fire burning with brimstone upon the surface of the earth and in
view of all. And when Satan is let loose the great experiment is
tried. ... Instead of an escape and a re-establishment on the
part of the beast and false prophet, by the assistance of the devil,
he himself is cast into the same lake of fire with them, and to
share their doom : and it shall not any longer be an open, ques-
H(m as to whether mor^l evil will reappear and become ram-
pant on the earth, or in any department of the universe of
God." "^
The great question which concerns us here, and on ac-
count of which I have quoted so much from^r. Morris, is,
are the beast and false prophet men, or are they simply
systems or polities as he represents it ? I shall attempt no
mterpretation of the propljecy, save so far as it is needed for
the purpose of definitely settling this; and it nmy be defi-
^ nitely settled, for God's metaphors are not ambiguous, and
scarcely so hard'to read as Mr. Morris' interpretations.
The book of Daniel conclusively settles that the seven
headed, ten-horned " beast », of Revelation is the Roman
empire, as ,Mr. Morris states it, although in k somewhat
different form. In Rev. xvii. 11, however, there is a feature
of the case which seems to have escaped him, for there the
beast is ide?itfjkd vyUh his own eif//uh head. Now " the
seven heads are seven Ai/j^w." The imperial beast of Reve-
lation is thus stated to be the last king, for in his day it
" goes into perdition."
In Daniel, at the commencement of tha (} mt\\9 empireg.
jtisspokenof ■ <^ which Rome Js the last, wo fed a statement very similw^
/
332 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTUrXsTATE.
that in Revelation, in Nebuchadnezzar's dream the head of
the unage is of fine ^old, and typifies the Babylonian jower;
but Daniel applies/lt personally to Nebuchadnezzar himself:
« Thau art this head of gold.' This double identification of
the golden head i^ay help us to understand that as m the days
of Babylon one^ man represented in fact the empire, so it
will be In the time of t;he fulfilment, of Rev. xvii. 11. One
man wilt repr/sent the empire for God ; and of this as to the
III]: last beast a^ intimation at , least > given in tiie book of
Baniel also/ ' - -— ^ _., . . . _^ „ -TT ^^
« I beheld then," says the prophet, "because of the voice
of the gr^t words which the horn spake, f beheld even till
the ftfiWwas slain." The beast is judged for the words of
the horh : beast and horn are one as to responsibility before
God. /Now a " horn " too is a " king " (Rev. xvii. 12) ; and
"herefeven in Daniel is one morally so identified ^with the
bea^ as to draw down the judgment of God upon it.
More than this, when we look at th6 picture in the Old
Testament we find this horn to be an e/ewen«A horn, feeble
in its beginnings, but rising >to superiority over the rest at
/last. In Revelation this eleventh horn, so all important m
^Daniel, does not appear at all; but there is an eighth head
of the beast in Revelation, which on the other hand did not
appea/in Daniel, and which is in its place identified with the
Jyeast Who can resist the conviction that these two (both
" kings ") are really one ?
^ But the great words of the horn bring down judgment
i, upon the beast : and this assures us still more of the horn's
personality. For^^ir-^ polity " is not a responsible agent, for
that we must have a living. being. Nor could ve think of
ten polities, of which an eleventh subdued three, as is said
• of the " horn ; " whereas, if a real king be intended, nothing
is more natuial. Now, a king is the interpretation both of
" horn " and " head," and this ought to be simple enough not
to need ahother iQtferpretation to explain it to us. The
simplest is the best. "
The bea^ is " ^^orshipped " too by all that dwell on earth,
' 1
THE APOCALYPTIC VISIONS.
333
and the number of the beast is the Humber of a man. He
is found, when Christ comes, with the kings of the earth,
(liberal k4ngs, as Isa. xxiv. 21, assures us), heading their oppo-
sition, and recei^s signal, awful judgment as^thebead of it.
. That judgment we shall look at directly ; mit first as to the
"false prophet." Apart fropi all interpretation he is mani-
festly the same as the second beast of the 13th chapter, as
again Mr. Morris truly says. His character and time and
end couple him ui^d^akably also with the " man of sin" in
Thessalonians, anJ^HLo, however much he too may repre-
sent a " polity," BpPraly yet (or should be so) a man/
A " false ^ro/?/t(S<" hardly even can represent- a polity;
save as it represents one who may be identified with it.
His miracles are Elias-like : he makes fire come down from
heaven in the sight of men ^jjie exercises all the power of
the first beast in his presence ; he gives breath to an^v image
of the beast; he causes^^ all to receive the latter's mark.
Why and upon what warrant we should believe that this is
not a personal agent, who can tell us ? And when we find
such an one ^f^ted with the beast, and kings of the earth in
opposition to^fhe Lord and cast alive with the beast into
the lake of fire into which first Satan and afterward all the
wicked are cast, and suffering torment there for ages and
ages, why should we allow the dreams of men, who seem
only to know how to darken daylight itself, turn us from or
make us hesitate in the assured belief, that these two are
mc7?, and nothing but men ?
But Mr. Morris' interpretation of the judgment must de-
tain us a little, wild and incongruous as it surely is. Exam-
ination can only deepen the conviction of the reality of what
we have to do with here, and of its simplicity also, a sim-
plicity worthy of the Divine Author. It is not without
profit ever td^be occupied (if one's heart be in it) with the
': I Does "taken and cast alive into a lake of fire " mean
judgment? Surely one would think so. But no; they are
systems it seems, still alive in men'!^ min^ds, it remaining an
334 ' PACTS A291) THEOKIES AS HOr A TUTURB STATE.
>» ' , ■.-'.■■
* -,■ .■■■*
open qfuestion whether 'they will come up again* in power
upon earth or not. AAer the loosing of Satan and his
'/^ ' failure, and being cist into the lake of fire also, it isnnot ah
t>pen question any mor6, he pSys, l>ut strangely enough they'
• are'still tested on and on for ages and ages in the same lake'
'■.:^, .•;;■; of firel^ ■■ ^\ , ■■ ^ \ ''^''''' - .:- '
"And that lake of fire re^^ieiyes mothers alsd. Men are
/ ' judged, and a)r|;er Judgmdnt cast in, to be tested of course ,
'• ^rther still. 3! - • '
: ** ' The lake of fire is on earth, too. But the eairtli, and the
*V heavens flee away from the^ice of Ilim that si^^eth on the
throne, and still the lake of ^re abides as before.
, ; V '^- I might, ^lerhaps,. conclude'^ with Mr. Morris here j but 'he,
' ■ tbo sees ip th§ crushing of the serpent's head the pei^onal
V annihilatip& of thei devil, and (again t with Mr. Hudson) his
• ' "piersonal destiny, involved »in thfe destruction of "the Roman
' beAst in Dan. vii. 11. As for the first, the ctnnihiMhon of
the serpent as such is allo^yed tQ be conlplete>,vhen SaCtan is
cast into the lake of fire, but his persoficd- annihilation is by
■ V no means implied. As for the last, they must show us how
they argue it before we can ^reat it as other than imagina-
W^ will now listen to Mr. Constable, and it. nfeed not be
for any length of time, for he fairly ^ives the'matter up.
He says:* - " '
. '* The sense we would put upon the passages in Eevelation is,
" that they convey in highly, wrought figures suitable to the char-
I ; acter of the entire book, only the old idea which we have already
gatheredfromlihe rest of Scripture, viz., that the punishment of
aU consigned to' hell will 'be of an eternal nature, and that its
fearful elect— the plunging of its subjects into death and de-
struction — will ever remain visible to the redeepaed and angelic
- ~t ' worlds. . We will not try to establish -this sense by examining the
y force of each w&rd. We deny that language so highly figurative is
•capable of any such dialectical analysis, or thcd svch is the manner
_^ tX which we ordinarily interpret language of the -kind."
. . . _ -— — — ■■■! ..I, m* ■■IW U FP'^
is ♦ Nat. and Dur. of Etern. Punishm., p- 199, . I ,
THE' ApOCAI^PTIC VISIONS.
335
N
[e prefers to go to otter passages to "show the uSe of
aiiliiW latigUage. Of these, he proctuces Uvo : Isa. xxxlv.
9, lO^tad Jucle'a Te%ence tt) Sodom. Isaiah says of Edqm^ ,.
"The fiind thereof shall become b,urning pitch : it shall not ^
he quendh^ night nor day, the smoke thereof shall go up
forever." \ Mr. Constable ^sks : -
" Will thc^advocates of Augustine's hell tell us that if wo went
to IdUinea, Wi» should see" people i^uffering pai\i from some period
subsequent to Baiah'sprcfphecy to the present time ? * , . 3^I^e
present condition of Edom is the explanation of the poetic fi^re :
it^ cities have fallen into riun : the whole land is a d^Sfa't. ' Th^'.
burning pitcln tli\ unquenchable fire, the smoki^ asceadijilg for-
ever, is reduced to imn ,mher hue in l7i<;inii;/H(if/& of pros^" --^
This iflL only " s,ay mg' t<hat the languagejis that of .^etic ex-
aggeration. Wa utterly and aHsqlutely dfepy it. j Th^pr^sent •
condition of EdQih isi not whaj, Isaia|.h pfophesies «!*. Se' ^..
• speakfP qf a yet futuftsVinje, as ver:.2f-8 distinctly sho^^afid ;
then this terrible judgfiaeW will be fuj^lled*. If Scripture/
language were so deceptVe, ^viio could, ttust it? But «
Isaiah says HQthing, aboVt ".endless life In pain"— not Mei:
word, it is Mr.'CohstableNwho has foisted the.thbught^ upon '
him. ^ Nor is the- Old 'Test^m^nt," foreyor " the "nges of
.the ages'" of the New. .
Next as to j^ulfe. 7, wh^m it, is said, that '' Sodom 'and
Gbtn6trah, and the cities "abpuMhem in like ra'anner, giving ,
themselves over to fornication, and gding after strange flesh!^
are set forth tck an example, suffVijig the vengeance of eter-
nal* fire," — ^Mr. Constable says this cannot refer td any
° sufferiYig in hades, for their conditioii ther6 is never Minted
to in Scripture, and is therefore n)^ " example " ; thaii^eW '
is a fiituf e thing for all, and Jud A speaks of somethings
" which had long been a plain and pdJpable ivaming to th0
ungodly of th|8 earth." He condludek therefore it can only .
refer to ^^ their overthrow in the dam of Zot, and their/
abiding condition ever since.^'' " They and t]i6ir woWl' were .
and this rninfid, lifeless, hrtp^iess" condition has
■ir---
\
:^^/..
bufflt up
-^Ifemdined to the present time. 1^\\q whole transacticJn con^ .
• 4
--i1
!»■•/
!i| .
■ .*'■■-■
HI 9
^36 JAOTS AND THEORIES AS TO A PDTUnfi Sf Af fi. ^
veys the id^*K)f consci<#ti8 pain for a time, followed by ruin
and death forever. This is, according to Scripture, to
^ suffer the veiigeance of eternal firef^' .
This is, rather, the way in which men venture to interpret
the word of God, until it becomes the b^e-word Snd
scorn of infidelity. The cities are burnt up and not to be
found, and the land lies desofate, and this is the vengeance
of eternal fire ! Words may mean anything in this way ;
they are made not to express sense, but to hide it. But
it is not very hard to see that Jude in speaking of these
"citi6s" speaks of the people in them. The peop/^ had
• sinned, and upon the people the judgment fell, the "fire and
brimstone" from heaven being t^type or pattern of that
"eternal fire "in which they suffer still. The temporary
fire by which they perished from the earth was not the eter-
„nal one, nor is it stated to be such. But the wrath of God»^
manifested upon them is a sample or specimen {SetyMo) of
what could not be temporary, that wrath against sin which
. is the " eternal fire." Mr. Constable confounds the people
with the mere material cities, and thinks of a present con-
dition of palpable judgment, of which not a word is said.
The fii-e which destroyed them was " eternal fire," if frou
look, not at the material fire which was at once its instru-
ment and symbol, but at the divine wrath so manifested.
There is then no diflSculty in the matter.
Nor need we discuss therefore the principle which Mr.
Constable obtains from this passage, "that the judgments
of God lipon individuals or nations, in destroymg them here
for sin, is the pattern, and example of that destruction which
He will inflict on them hereafter for sin;" although he.
J»resses t<^^the same end also our Lord's words in regard to
the Galileans, " Unless ye repent ye shall all likeioise perish,"
and eveii Paul's statement that the things that happenc^d to
Israel in the wilderness " happened to them for ensamples,"
r^ads «' types." We have been ourselve^
wh e r e ^be margin
largeljf reading such types, and it is not to be supposed that
we ar^ afraid of the latter principle., But when we are told
T
^
WlE APOCALYPTIC VISI0K8.
887
that " thft slaying of the Galileans by Pilate essentially re-
Bcmbles the death of the wicked in liell," we piay be allowed
to ask for some further proof than his -saying so can afford
us. \ ■ * ' '■ '- '^ ■
Thus neither Jude nor, Isaiah are in the least sympathy
with Mr. Constable in his endeavor to give a sense to bcrip-
ture which he " will hot try to establish by examining the force
of each word." It^ h a very real, however little, ingenuous
aconfession, that >; the words, if siftedjlare against him. He
does, however, try to do soiuewhat even here, an^l with ref-
erence to /^a<sa»'/C<».^' to torment," he points out| that " it is
as applicable to things Avithout life as to living things," be-
cause it is applied orico' (metaphorically) a^we havse seeH)
to the tossing of Ji boat f Ho he thinks the devil; might be
'* tossed " in a lake of fire and brimstone forever ! - If that
will not do, Schleu^ier, it seems, has said that it is iised,not
only for actual pain, but " for death produced by ^uch pain,#
an(Jiiii'tbis sense (he thinks) it is peculiarly applicable to
futiire punishment." No doubt ; so the devil is to be killed
by torment day and night forever and ever !
We may leave lVJ[r. Constable then, to look at 'sonie fVesh
arguments with Mr. Minion. It is strange how fresh the*:
arguments are,, and how little one write^ accepts those of '^"
another; each seems satisfied only with his own. But vt^^^
must be as brief as. the case w\ll allow. ;, /f^
■ I- ♦ .
>H'.
V ■
1
^-.;-'^-
■t •;•■:
' r'
838 FACIS A^P IHJCOlUJtiS AS 10 ▲ BVTVm SIAl£.
\.
#
CHAPTER XXXIV.
I
mi
/-.
THE APOCALYPTIC VISIONS. — 2. -
' " If we are to learn aiiything with regard to what will
happen to the persons here represented,^^ says Mr. Mintqn,*
i^ we must first inquire what would happen to that lohich
represents t/iem, as the consequence of being cast into a l.ake
of fire. Now it so happens that in every one of the five
or six cases here 8{)ecified, the result would be utter de-
str^icJbTon'. They are all living things, and not one of them
could possibly exist in a lake of fire. A wild beast ; a false
prophet; 'the devil,' evidently under the form of the
•dragon,' seen first 'in ch. xii., and again in xxii; 2; ' death
and hell ' (hadea)Y as evidently under the form already seen
in ch., vi. 8,' of a ridpr or riders on horseback ;: and ' whoso-
ever' of the deacl, small and great, that stood' before God,
' was not found written in the book of lite.' If these things
be intendpd to predict th^ final doom pf wicked men and
|©d spirits, then their doom is set fotth under images
■[Xpoint: to nothing less than extinction -of being."
^•^ows" ho^ iitterly at fault as to these figures is
culation Mr. Miiiton irecommends. How long would
a wild beast live in k lake of fire ? Cfertainly, if - we ibtlow
our thoughts, an exceedingly short space of time. How
long if wej, take Scripture ? A thonsand years as first seen,
and then the ag^s ofages.y Similarly as 'to to the false pro-
.phet. So as to the devil from the time he is cast in.
How worse than vain to speculate 1 how entirely Scripture
contradicts Mr. Minton's suggestions. * S*
But this Mr. Minton is candid enough to own, and he
says:
* Way Everlasting, p. 58, etc.
•;.
THIS APOCAXYPTIG, VISIOlfS,
339
■'*»^
" I at once admit my inability to explain tlm in any way jtl^t
is quite satisfactory to m^ own mind. But I do not admit tiuot
the view which it seeins td oppose must therefore be radically
.wrong (!) . . .A wild beast could no more live in such a' condi-
tion for a day than for p.n age-" What then ? "This inclines
me to think that the ages' of ages indicate, not th^ period of
suffeidng to the ocndemned, but the eternal destruction that
comeb upon them. . . .What then, you will ask agaip, do I un-
derstand by ' torment ' ? I understand by it — destruction (!) '
And to all objections that torment and destruction are two^flfer-i
efit' things, I reply that ^the Spirit of God Himself has mos^
pointedly applied the word torment tq^desti^uction in one of those «
very passages. Bead the account in chap, xviii, of Babylon's de- .^,
struction. ' The inhabitants peHsh 'in One d^y ' by 'death and
mourning and faming '; and thAi the city.jtself is 'u^erly burned
with fire.' Now in the long description of the burning which fol- '
lows, there is not a \vord of any living persons or things b(6ing
left in the city, to suflfer torture from the fire that consumes it.
The city is, of course', destroyed for* the sin of its inhabitants ;
but their destruction is (^stinguished-in^ ver. 8 from its destruc^
tion. Yet they who gaze upon that burning mass ' stand far oflF
for the fear of her tormentj What caai the word mean there but
destruction?" ' " , | .
Thus must words be perverted by m^'s will, USSSt tor-
ment mean what torment never meant, and the sanation of.
the Spirit of God be claimed for an unnatural and impossible
use of language, such as never could be imputed to any-
thing beside Scripture. And wha1> is the ground for this
notable &,bsurdity? Babylon's inhabitants perish **in one"
day," says Mr. Minton, by " death and mounting and famine,"
but the city i,s distinguished from these is burned with fire,
DO living inhabitant being in it; and ver. 8 distingaishes the
destifuction of the inhabitants from that of the oity ! It is
ver. 8 he is citing for all this : '6f course he must, have read
It J but this is what it says: — ^_" Therefore shall her pktguea
COME in one day, death .and mourning and ^unine ; and she '
55hall be utterly burned with fire; for strong is the Lord
l^od that judgeth her 1 *' W here is it said, Mr. Mint;,pn, that
the mhabitants all peri^fy in one day ? Nowhere : h^r
.,%
■# ■
* I »
\)';':.
m^~
^TJS-^^J-^-'
#■■
' ^Wm
340 FACTS AlfD TU£OBI£S AS TO A FUTUJOIf STAlE. \.
plac^ues cowte in one dfty, not are over 1. Where Is the city
* *-' •',0 %M^r-
distinguished from the inhabitants, so ai to imply that these
do not suffer in the burning "of the former ? Again, no-
where ! it is bold perversion of the language : find all to give
to the word torment in the subsequent verse an impossible
meaning, which would scarcely have been attempted to be
fastened itpon any other book than Scripture, as I have
already said. ' >
We can well believe that his interpretation is not satis-
factory to Mr. Minton. It is the only encouraging thing
about it, that it is not.
But yet he has not done with Babylon. If she perishes
so as not to be " found any more at all " — " what then," he
asks, "is th^ ' meaning of her smoke rising up forever and
ever? What, but that her guilt and her destruction will
never be forgotten ; that she will be preeminently an object
of everlasting contempt ? Sucli destruction IheXieva to be
the ' torment ' of all impenitent sinners, and such an eternal
memory of sin and its destruction to be the smoke of that
torment ascending up forever and ever."*
So that we must read, instead of " torment," " destruction
day and nir/ht for the ages of ages " ! •
I do not believe that Babylon's smoke ascending up for-
* Mr. Roberts, who in his " Man Mortal " does nothing but repeat
Mr. Minton's arguments, and to whon) no separate reply is needed
therefore, quotes, however, " her smoke rose up forever and ever," to
remark: " If, the sense here were the popular notion of absolutely end
less tuturity, how absurd to desftribe it in the pasi tense — ' rose up ' —
tLS a, thing havinff happened f How can a thing have happened ' for-
ever ' in the English sense ? " Aye, or in the Greek either"? Mr. R.
has forgotten his Greek here, although he quotes it in tTie very next
words. The Greek h ava^aivEty" ffoeth up."
The only additional thing to be noticed as to him is, that he makes
■ the casting " alive " of the systems into the lake of fire t6 intimate that
they will not die of themselves, but be destroyed by the Lord at His
Do the " kings of tlie earth "" die, of ihemselves, because
And how is it the systems are still " alivo " after a thousand
years, if they are destroyed (in his sense) by the I^rd at His coming 1
commg :
they die !
. (7|
destruction
elves, because
er a thousand
.THJ|
.VPOCAEYPTIC VlStONsJ.
341
ever anl ever means that Ijhe memory of it will be forever.*
The memory of all that has ever been will endure forever
and this iis more than the assertion of such a common-place
thought. The key to the expression is that identification of
the city and people which Mr. Minton so vainly contends
against. The expression is, of course, figurative, but iden-
tical with that in ch. xiv. 11, yet to be looked at. Babylon
suffers forever, of course in those to whom her guilt really
bgifiPga
But Mr. Minton goes on : —
" But it is urged that the ivild beast and false prophet, who
were cast into the lake of fire before the millennium, are spoken
of at its close as if still there. This is, however, a mistake, the word
' are ' not being in the original. When a word has to be supplied,
it should be supplied from what has preceded, and not made to
assert an independent fact. ' The devil that diKieived them was
cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the
false prophet '—what ? Surely ' were cast.* To supply 'are ' is
just to beg the question," and assert a fact which is not stated in
the record. The words which follow, ' and (they ^the verb being
plural) shall be tormented day and night forever and ever,'
merely contain a declaration that the destruction of the beast and
the fdse prophet and the dragon woiUd be final and inemediable ;
none of them would ever appear again. The two former are in-
cluded in this subsequent declaration, because nothing of the
kind had been sai I when they were first cast Jnto the lake of
fire." ' " : ,:;. ■ \'. -^^.J. ■..,■,
That is, agifln, we must transform torment into destruc-
tion, and say " they shall be destroyed day and night for
ever and ever"! And even 8(«ve must believe that "they
shall be destroyed" means tnli two of theih haoe been
already, and only the third " shall be"! These are some-
what large demands upon our faith — the sceptical would say
"credulity "; but where man's will is at work there is still
credulity enough for this and more. Yet Mr. Minton finds
it himself not quite satisfactory, it would seem. ^ He (»annot
I
blame us if we sympathize with him
* In a former work I did accept this, but oti more mature cousidei
ation must wilhdraw that accpptance
^•v
Jt,
ili-rfs**^-
342 FACIS And TUEOaiES A8T0 A FUTURE STATE. 4
But -^e 'hU still a resource, if his explanation of these
texts fails id he " wholly satisfactory," as he admits it may,
he can Mtill/quoation ours ! If ho can makfcTiothing els? out
of them, l/c will not accept what they plainly say : —
"^' Now./waiviug tho (luestion which a UniverHJilist would raise,
'as to the ages of agea " — If tho doubt is not Mr. Mintou'a own,
why do(/s he uffi'ct to raise it ?— "yout argument mimifestly de-
pends /iipon tho assumption that t^e 'torment' spoken of in
those Visions reprt-sonts torment in the future realities which are
thereiii predicted. But. how can you prove that ? You can pro-
duce/a string of texts to show tho precise moanipg of hrtsanos
(torment) ; and so can I produce a string of texts * to show
the precise meaning of therinn (a "wild boast). Does the beast in
the/ vision represent a beast in the reality? Then why should
toiTinent in the vision represent torment in tho reality ? "
before we answer thit,, let us hear Mr. Minton's summing
up of conclusions (if/aiuHt this :—
" 1. The word ' torment ' is applied to the burning of the
lity Babylon, when its inhabitants had already perished."
^his has been disproved. , -
"2. Its smoke is said to rise up forever and ever, after
lit has been so completely destroyed that it j^nuot be
found." This is also a mere confusion arifrlng OHj^of the
first mistake. .
" 3. While the beast and the false prophet are cast into
the lake of fire, all their ^adherents arc ' slain with the
sword ' ; which, on your principle of interj)retation, would
show, that some of the wicked will be punished with eternal
torment, others with death."
Quite true, as to the time of the Lord's coming; but the
latter are raised among "the rest of the dead," and then cast
into the lake of fire also. Kow, if the beast and the false
prophet are "phases of evil," as Mr. M. suggests, and not
persons, thei/ should be cast into the lake of fire into which
Hi Satan and all the wicked afterwards are cast, is a difficulty
upon his side he can never explain. 7/' their adherents had
been at the same time cast in, it mifjht have been contended
that they shared the fate of their adbereats, or if all bad
}i
! «
■ 9/'
THE APOCALYPTIC VISIONS,
m
■-..*'
ninjr of the
B
been slain this might have been said. But that " phases
of ^vii " should be cast into a place of. jtorraent is inexpli-
cable in the way the verHcs stand. i,^^!''^^^*^
His fourth objection applies only ^</{*]^^^|l' 1<^> so must
bo reserved.- '^r " ■■"•., wli'-bl^^J ,'-
His iiflh is the old mistake as to dqfi|||p[m^hades being
i^astin.- • .\..;:' ^.'i ,^, -;.,.
His sixth is, that torment is not mentioned with regard to
"Thenaead in ver. 15. But the lake of fire is not (as he as-
Berts) " the very embodiment of destruction," in his sense of
it, as we have seen, and death being destroyed at the begin-
ning of the aufcs makes it impossible thereafter tha^ meii
should die. He asks : —
"7. But does the lake of fire itself go on bm-niug forever ? Is
it • everlasting' or 'unquenchable ' in that sense ? What are the
very next words ? ' And 1 saw a new heaven and a new earth ;
for the first heaven and the fipt earth were passed away.' What
then has become of the lake of fire which St. John saw ot^
first earth ? Why, of course, it has passed away with the l|||p['
of which it formed part. Is there any lake of fire on the new
earth?" ,. ■ ■• .. ,; ; " ' ■ ■ ; ■■-.■..■-■.•/■ v^^ ■■ .
I think it useful to quote exact words, or people Inight
really believe there was some strange perversion on my part,
or misconception at least of an adversary's arguments. 'Mr.
Minton proceeds with a full page more of reasonings upon
this foundation, in which it is, of course, quite useless to
follow him, for the foundation itself is lacking. T^here doe»'
the passage speak of the Igike of fire being on earth at all ?
He would seem to be reading from another Bible than thAt
which is in all our hands. Why, the devil is only cast
into this lake of fire at the close of the millennium, there to*
be tormented day and night for the ages of ages. What-
ever that means, a; long lapse of time is surely indicated.
But in the very next words we read of the great white throne
set up, and the earth and the heavens fleeing aw^y. Are the
ages of a^es all expired in. the meantime, and betbre the
final judgment ?
But again, the throne is set, the earth and the heavens flee
#
l-#*.
344 Pacts and theories as to a puTmiE state.
^ • ■ '
away ; but the dead suftimoned from their graves are east into
the lake of fire, which, of course, has ceased to exist with
that eartli which has fled away !
We will now answer Mr. Minton's question as to why
"torment" in the vision should represent torment in the .
reality. And we answer : —
1. Because it is impossible to say what it does represent
figuratively. No one has given us,— no one (it seems) can
give us, any meaning in the least degree satisfactory.
- 2. Because tlw language throughout the twentieth chapter
beciomes more and more literal continually. The " dc^vil,"
when cast in, is distinguished by the title given him in the
interpretation of the previous vision, not by " the dragon,"
as in the vision itself.* The interpretation in verse 6 of the
"first resurrection " shows us the exceeding simplicity of
the vision it interprets. Souls (persons) slain are seen to live
again, and that signifies literal resurrection. The "thou-
sand years," the reign as kings and priests, are the same in
the vision and the interpretation alike. . And as the solemn
subject of judgment is approached, the-plainest words seem
stu<iied by which to set it forth. IIoio simple and decisive'
they are we can realize the better," after their survival of thie
treatment which we have seen thShi endure. ,
3. Because literal death in the lake of fire we have, seen
to be impossible, and fire which does not annihilate ra-ust ,
apparently torment.
' 4. Because the devils in the gospel speak of torment as (^
their future doom, and here, therefore, the word is guar-
anteed as literal.
We ask Mr. Minton's attention seriously to these reasons
as well as to the examination qf his own views which has
been given. He cannot complain of misrepresentation or
oi 'partial representj^tion, nop do we think we have dealt
♦ The " beast " is iudeed still that, but I see not how else he could .
be spoken of without revealing the mystery which is left to the " mind
which hath understanding." The second " beast " has become " the ■
false prophet.
TUB APOCALYPTig VISIONS.
345
with them more severely than ho would himself desire if
God give him another mind upon this subject every way so
important to souls. \^
There is but one more argument^ adduced by Blaiii, an^
repeated by Goodwyu,* that "day and night arc character-
istic elements of this dispensation," but in that case, for the
purpose of his argument, "this dispensation "' must last " for
the ages of the ages." That "night" is not found in the
New Jerusalem (xxii. 5) or the new earth is nothing to the
purpose self-evidenfly. I grant the language may be
figurative, but its obvious use is to convey the thought of
what is continuous or ceaseless, which in addition to t^e
phrase " forever and ever " shows even by itself that annihila-
tion cannot be meant. What would be the force of " anni-
hilation day aftid night forever and ever " V
The arguments on the side of " conditional immortality "
close then here. But we have still to glance at those of the
restorationist school. - .^
Dr. Farrar is "quite content that texts should decide "
this question. That would give us hope that in telling us
'* what hell is not," he would have shown us at least what
this connected prophecy of Revelation on the very subject,
does not mean. But although he has spent pages upon^e
rabbis, I cannot find ten lines upon this main text througHRt
his book. Indeed the only thing at all to the purpose that
I can find is one note of two liaes quoted from Dr. Chaun-
cey, that "If all things without exception be subjected to
Christ, then death, the sec<)Mr? death, as well as the first
death, will be finally swallowed up in vi<Jtory."t This be-
longs properly to another branch of our subject, but a word
or two is amply sufficient in answer. For the "second
death " is always subject* to Christ, and never opposed,
never needs to be subjected. Are the prisons to which a
king commits his prisoners not subject to the king who
* Death not Life, Truth and Tradition, p. 32.
t Eternal Hope, Excursus 6, p. 222.
/
I
' mgjjjll^,0t^-
.'<
k^
M
l]t<i]
I'ir
it
-I-.-
*•"
346 FACTS AND THEOllIES AS TO A FUTUltJir S*t ATE.
commits them there ? Dr. Farrar'$ reasoning is scarcely
equal to his powers in other respects, if he believes this.
« Mr. Jn^- Qxenham ii;| his "letter "to Mr. Gladstone,
again speiw pages upon two lines of Keble, afid not a line
upon the Scripture so ;^11 important in this matter.
We must depend then upon Mr. Jukes mainly to repre-
sent the restofationist view h^re, apart of course from the
general reasoning upon the expressions for eternity which
we have already examined. And we shall allow him as
usual to speak for himself* II^Aiays: — * _^ ^
: " I cajmot even attempt here to trace the stages or processes "
of the future judgment of those who are raised up to condelq^d-
tiou ... but wlift has here been gathered from the word of God
as to tlie course and method of His salvation, throws &^^K^^^'
upop that ' resurrection of judgment 'which our Lord speal^^S^
Hotsr the method of God's salvation should throw great
light upon the process oi ^naX judffmentj it is very hafd to
say. Mr. Jukes of course assumes that that judgment is
itself a procC'ss of s5ilvation». In that case of.course it would
throw light. But on the contrary, Scripture contrasts these
as two incompatible things. lie that believes in Christ
''has everlasting life, ami shall not come into judgment,"
while " he that . believeth not the Son shall not see life."
"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saned, and he
'that believeth not shall be co)ulerimedy " To them an evi-
dent token oi perdition, but to you of salvation." " There
is one Lawgiver who is able toisave and to destroy.''^ " An'l
f if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly
and the sinner appear ? "t This is the uniform tenor of .
Scripture, in, a great variety of expressions which assure us ,
that the Judgment, of the wicked is the very opposite of
being a method of salvation : it is a method of fdestruction.
But we will let Mr. Jukes proceed.
^" Awful as it is, who cau doubt the end^ud purpose of this
* Restitution of All 9Sihings,pp. 88-95.
t John V. 24: iii. 36; Mark xvi. 16
Phil, i. 28; Jamea iv. 12.
I Pet. iv. IP,
« J'
■>r
THE Al»OCALTfPTIC VISIOKS^*
347
rjjose
of
this
I'ames
iv.
12.
,•;'
1
judgment ? for * God, the judge of all/ 'changes not,' alid • Jesus ^^.,
Clirist ' is still ' tho same yesterday, to-day, and for the ages. ' "
Which jissures us of His unrepelfl^ini; performance of all
that Hp has threatened, as of all that ^|Ie has promised.
" And the very context of the passage which describes the cast-
ing of the wicked into the lake of fire, seems to sliow that this
resurrection and the second death are both parts of thd%amo re-
deeming jilan, whiclk necessarily in^lvcs judgment on those who
^ill not judge themselves, and have not accepted the loving judg- -
ments and sufferings which in thisTife prepare tha^riit-born Jfor
-the first resurrection. So we read,^-' And He that sat upon tho
throne said. Behold, I ruako all thing^inew . . .' He that over-
cometh shall inherit all things; and I triU. be His God; and he
shall be my son. But the fearful and unbelieving, and the abom-
inable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and
idolators, and all liars, shajl haye their p^vi in the lake which ^
bunieth with firrf^ and brimstone ; which b\ tha second death. '
What does He say here but that 'all things shall be made new,'
though in the way to this the fearful and unbelieving mupt pass
.the lake of fire ? "- . . ,.
He says the very' o]pposite. For instea^l of *1 passing "
the lake of fire, He says they " have t/icir part'' m it, as the
saints have theirs in the first resurrectiojj!. And these (or •
among these) are they who«have their " part " taken"\!>ut of
the book of life (xxii. 19) of whom Mr. JukSs teaches they
, have their part then? really Mill. s*v *?^ . ^
Morever it is only as to the condition of the blessed that ;
God says, "Behold, I mak6 all things new," as the context 1
proves. '' He that overoometh, I wjpil be his God, and he ~ •
shall be my son; hut^^ — but what? He that overcometh
not shall be also in the end my son? ' No, surely, " but the
fearful and unbelieving, etc., shall have (heir part in tlie lake
offire." Mr. Jukes' explanation is a destruction of the sense,
a sense which is aa plain as can be. But ag^in he says : —
"The 'second death ' thefef ore, -so far from bemg, as some,*
think, the hopeless shutting up of man forever in the curse of
disobedience, will, if I err not, be God's way to -free those \\^6 *
in uu.othet- Avay than by such a death can be delivered out of the
^...
lii
i!!' ''
|K - .
348 FACTS AXD ^HEOBlteS AS TO At OttTRE STaTE.
, dark world whose life they live in. ... To get out of -this T^orld"
there is but one way," dealh ; not the first, for that is passed, but
the secoud death, Eveu if we have not light to see this, ouglit
uot the present to teach us something of 'God's future ways ; foi^ \
is Ho uot thft same yesterday, tq-day, and forever ? "'
, So it is " Ihrever'' now, instead of « to the ajes " / but
'* now i^ the acgepted tinip, heholA,- now is the day of lalva-
tloti." Is the day of judgment and of wrath stifl the samt; ?
If tiod is (as of course He must be) essentially always the
same, does that marke grace and wrath the saine ? or judg-
ment and salvation ? Does it not rather aissure us that He*
Avho has threatened will make good ? And that the word
will fully be sustained, '^ he that believeth not the Son
shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him " ?
Is it no perversion of the truth of His unchangeableness, to
say that His %rath abideth not, and all shall linallv "see
life"? Hegoeson:— * "^
" We know that in inflicting present death, His pregent pur-
pose IS to destroy him that has the power of death, that is the
• devil. 'ig^' - '
We know nothing of the kind; it is O/iris^s death, not
ours, which does this. Has Mr. Jukes read the next words
in the text he quotes ? .
" How can wo conclude from this, that in inflicting the second
death, the unchanging God will act on a principle entirely difier-
(Mit from that which now actuates Him ? "
That is, again, why should a day of salvation and a day
of judgment differ in character ? But as to death itself the '
principle is not different; for as the first death is the judg-
*nent upon the natural world, so the second death is upon
the world beyond the grave for those who endure it. And '
as the first is final as to this present scene, the second will
1)0 as to that. • ,
" And why should it be thought a thing incredible that God
should raise the dead, who for their sin suflfer the penalty of the
second death? Does tlii^ death exceed the power of Christ to
overcome it?
Or shall the greater foe still triumph, while the
THE AtOCALYl'TIC WtOlfS. ' MQ\
-•. ■ ■ ■•' ■ ■*■; ■ • ■ -r ' ' ' ' ,.'♦ . .
lessVthe flfet denjfti^ is surely overcome ? Who .has taught ^us
thus to limit th<'ni<'iining of the words, ' Death is swallowed up in
victory'?"
I answer to the last <iue8tion, God Himself; if 1 Cor. x v.
be inspired of Him, For the apostfe there tells lis that it is
fulfilled at the resurrection of the body^and that is no ques-
tion of the seeond death at all. Nor is the second death
Christ's foQ/asth^ first deatb is. For the first death does
; (while it lasts) prevent the fulfilment of the eternal purppse
fully, Whether with saint or sinAer. The second death does
not, and is 'not an enemy, as I have before replied to Dr.
Chauncey. v^ to what is "credible," all is that God
reveals. This He has'not(revealed, but theVery opposite.
" Is God's ' ^ill to save all men ' limited to fourscore years,-or
cliauged by that event whidi we call death, but which we are
distinctly told is His appointed means for o'tn^'deliverance ?"
We are not told this as -to physical death. Are tfieTaints
who do not die, but are changed at the Lord's coming, not
delivered? God would indeed have all -men to be savdd,
but this is not purpose or counsel, which, is always another
word,* but (hsire. "Ho^ often ,%^ld I," says our Lord
as to JeVUsalem, '^ mid yeimuld not.^' And "nmffia the
accepted time " applies only to living men^ But all this will
come up again.clsewhere, and the i^est of :gE?^ Jukes' argu-
ments will then be consideired more fittingly. They are
based upon the text before ug^«^ ' ' ' y '
Thus then We have examined every objection which lias
been raised to that simple reading of this important Scrip-
ture with which we first begajj. We have surely seen that
the metaplfors are not ambiguous, but written in. the speech
of Him w^io cannot lie, nor call .by the name of " revelation "
an exaggerated, or at^lcast " mysterious and highly-Wrought "
account, which, when reduced to the " sober hue" of truth,'
becomes the total opposite of what is on the face oi it.,
* /3ovXou<Xt; fiovXtj : as Matt. xi. 27 ; Luke.xxii. 42 ; Acts ii. 23 ;
iv . 28; xxvii. 42; Eph. j) 11 ; Ilpb. vi. 17, elc. Bat we shall have to
recur to this again.
./^-
« "' p '^
,.!t
Si
M»''f
,360 ^ . JAtaTS AIS^jp TflIiOR|Ea AS TO § .FUTUlffe
Tha^k .liijai Hi$ J^ord itiever faUs Mmstif
witness^
first sta
has hi
lor ca
IItv
U%
UlJtO
to bb brow-bba
foi^ |fte s^^lest h<!)ri6#l|aarte .
^I'^'yj^^d^prBQpo^, to . re've:
ii^^
it
'."f;- TJviits ,■*■>»■:■; >
v^:;. *
y;NS.— 3. i
.t;r':v(: »vi'
■A.H
! in
K-l
^^ ''.'//. ^Ml? ■"■:-;■■' <:; ;!-i ■■i*'
3E|ij<^ki^miliaii& (trf oiirliio^t passage will not det^^iVjM
F^'^^^'l^S*' 9^ tl*9 ^^umen^ \pt^ Vegard to it is .neccssarilvT"'
pfja^^^^^lHar' nature to^i^iat :h^S( bcont already adyanccilik.
oh' citfa^l^iM': [It is, howe|'«r, :||ijk>i)!ai:ato.;and indepchderit^^
testirti0,ny^tfce dGst*«y ofithb mck6<| *an,d as such wd n^iist
not pasialiJ^jy. It reads tht^ ;-—"•, ^^ " . ^ ' ' i V
'i^yaditl|^- tliii?<l angel followed tli^, ^^^j^S ^% ^ \^^^ "'^oiel,;
^;^n:i^il| worship the' beast anAhii^'iinfig^, and receive his maifk
liisfoi^ahead or|4n his hand, the same shall drink of '|ihe Mni^j^,.*
of 'me ^TVjiH^bf 'God; which is poured out"wit^out mixture ift!ti ji' i
the '^up^bflWis inc^ignation ; and^he shall be tormented mth fire
and brfpastone in- the presence of the holy angels, and j^n the
preseri?^f 'the Lanib ; and'the smoke of their,torm*ent ascendeth
4; ' j,'up forever and^ever (for ages of ages) ; and^tlrey have norestdi^
{ ; ^' nor flight, ^Ijo worship .the beast and, lit* iiriage, "and whosoe^
i J receivetli, tlie mark of his name " (Kev. xiv. 9-11);
• -4^ One AVOuM'tliink that ^^«K>^ii^ as it Is solerai
Mr. Morris; r' putting to tli(pR)of" instead of " toj
could scarcely much. darken it. He has noticed the jjl
' Kowbver, and o||ect8 to its teaching the 'commonly re^
y ', doctrine on tnese grounds : — r
iy,':^:.- !• It is thelpenalty of a specific crime, and therelore
not be the 4pbm of those who have not committed that
crime. Therefore, if it teach endlbss woe for some, that
,d!innot bo the r common penalty due to sinnbrs.
But Mr. Moh-is i". n-irniii a** fiti]' ; for licll-firo may
THE APOCALYPTIO VISIONS.
351
** QomiA^l|penaity of sinners, and yet men be solemnly warned,
l^^l^^^wihat once let them commit the sin in question and
^eli would be thei^y portion. What is intended very
y is that tor such persons there would be no escape
(jection is th6refore vain.
2. 3Ir. Morris s^ya, that, whatever may be the " dramatic
forc^ " of what is said, " it is eifidetU that it transpires on
earth, and before, the coming of the Lord."
But he gives no evidence for this at all, unless "it is evi-
dent "be considered such. I should think myself that " the
presence Oi the holy angels and of the Lamb," would rather
ma,ke the opposite evident.
3. He appeals to the " smoke of Babylon rising up for-
.ever" (ch. xix. 3), as showing that such words do not imply
tihe necessary existence of the sufferers, as Babylon had been
'^utterly , burned with fire." But this we have looked at in
our reply to Mr. Minton on the previous text.
The comments of the rest of annihilationist writers are no
better than thi». > Mr. Dora^y's main argument is that
. " the advocates of any tenet-^no matter what — must be hard
driven, jC they are glad to take their stand among the hiero-
glyphs that attract us to the isle of Patmos." If -he had
be^n one of those "foolish Galatians" whom the apostle
. reljukes Vith the stat|MMi|j^J^a£ 1p^^ had two sons,"
'^tcl, he would, of qpMfei^lSreSb'^glj^a argument
against 'th(fkpo^. ^et ho Will^ori^scend tb^ notice the
" hieroglyphs ;"^d the s^C(tid aitgument M protdofcel Is,
'Sthat " their tbrmefit is in v^rMl representi^d as syn^rpfidul
witlf th§;pworshi|) : ' they who loorshij} tfee beast ^)i^e no
'j;est.'" The Tscholarship of which is i|&t' pl*ofo«ii4 :' as I
suppose ni Ttpo6Huyovyrf<; slihply to mean ^' theji^orshipoers;"
without any distinction d£ whether. |he worship were" m '"
present or the past,l|||^ffl|^ver'if '^ have nare^^gw
the worship and the ^SwHE bo synchronous, ,th(^ " aAai
be tormented " must shoijj^ii reverse ^s to the torment.
' Bui Mr. Pobney
' the slints as
ay (ioi|0u
farther fr
rora the omission
|^^alj^pg\dth t^" angels and the
■^'
'■M
352
Facts and theobies as to a future state*
« ,j ,
Lamb " " that the vengeance denounced is inflicted here on
earth, jjnd in the time state," which must last, therefore, as
the tprment lasts, for the ages of ages ! And again; " that
• in subsequent chapters we have the fulfilmenj; of these very
threatenings exhibited; which fulfilment indisputably tstkcs
place here and now." Certainly the fulfilment is found in
ch. XX., and we have been looking at it already, but he who
can believe that the torment of individuals here and no\t
can be "for ages of ages " must be very anxious to believe •
it. We need scarcely follow him there.
Nevertheless, Mr. Hudson also agrees that the passage
" refers properly to the >scenes of time, and not to- the final
judgment ; " his first argument being that there is " no allu-
sion to the resurrection or to the opening of the books "I ...
" And the very expression ' who worship tlje beast and his
.imago, sefem« (!) to refer to the earthly conduct and condition
of idolatrous people. The passage proves an earthly im-
mortality, if it proves any." I need not waste timo upon
these arguments. : , • ;;
Mr. Constable*8 remarks do not call for much attention
either. " Elliot," he tells us, " has no hesitation in referring
Rev. xiv. 10, 11, together with the kindre'd passage in r
xix. 8, to a temporal judgment, viz., the swallowing up by
__yolcanic fire of the territory of Rome in Italy." Ak
to which our readers are, we think, in a position to judge for
themselves. But Mr. Constable does not himself insist upon
this; he will take the passages in their usual application,
but only insist on their being images of "death and destruc-
tion," for Ayhich we have had his arguments under the previ-
ous texts.
Mr. Minton too unites this with the passages in Rev. xx.,
there being only one argument exclusively relating to it, a«d
that is its inconsistency (understood in the orthodox way)
with 2 Thess. i. 9. "The torment is said to take place *in the
presence of the Lamb.' But in 2 Thess. i. 9, those who are
found in opp^ition to Christ at His coming, are * punished
with ^^^^^^^K destruction;^/'o/« (away from) the presencfl
It
'. ^ . - I ■ ■■ . ■
TSE APOCALYPTIC visions! "*
X
353
I' 'f
of the Lord.' They aro * gatherea out of Ilia kingdom * and
cast into outer darkness, away from the .manifested ^esenoe
of Christ during the millennial age."
But the "from" in Thess^lonians does not mean ^* away
from." We have already examined the passage, which Mr.
Hudson rightly compares with Acts vti. 19 to prove this.
If it did, it by no means follows that the torment Is always
in the presence of the Lamb or of the holy angels, but that
the judgment will be executed imder their eye. They will^
be witnesses, but it does not say ctenial witnesses,
Gen. Goodwyn is also one of those who believe that the-
ages of ages expire before even tlio millennium, tlkt they
areift fact commensurate with the pouring out of the vials
inth| ICth chapter! -"'Che wrath of God," he says, "the
cause df their torment, is nacer spo/cen of in connection with
the final j 11(1 f mo it of the inlcked, nor has it any reference to
hell and its fur.''' It seems he has never read the aposVe
Paul's words about " indignation and wkatii upon every
soul of man that doeth evil . .'. in the day wben God shall
judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ " (Rdjti. ii. 8, 16).
"It is, on the contrary,'* hc.|dds, " identified here with the
seven vials that will be pouroct out ' hjmh the earthy previous
to the advent of the Lord in glory (2 Tliess. i. !)) which are
called ' the vials of the wrath of God.'" , IIow id'jntified he
does not further say, and h is liard to understand; for
"previous to the ad venWof Ma.' Lord" seefns as iQuch
opposed to " in the prlwH of th-j Lamb," as do "the* ages
of ages "^^ the \;cry shoftperiod comparatively^bf the pour- :
mgout oF^he vials., , The series of mistakes founded uj)pn
these fundamental ones, we scarcely need examine: ., /
Finally Mr. Robert^ his « Man Mortal," obj^igtg to the
orthodox view, in averj^sirailar way ;i-- t'« .^ .
' " 1. [The orthodox] * wrsithof God-' in n wnith alwa^
in hell from gciieratiou to gcuoriition, whfroaa tlip
Apocalypse i|^ wrath that Scomea' iit a particntf
M
affairs on earth, when the d
On tb^ contrary,, the
e raised."
ment of h
^^^•»
■■^■:
^r-
k
^
,•^1
»»»
'%■
t 4 •
7
354 FACTS AND •niEORlES AS TO A FUTiyiE^^Jfi.
Bense,— of Gehenna, has not yet come' lor iny o^e ; ana its
coming at a particular junoture Js not in dppositlon to its
abiding when€i£Hoes come. . ••♦
".2. [The ^drHRidox] sufferers of hell-fire uro immortal souls,
while the apdfc^yptic drin^epi of the wine of the wruth of God
uro * men,' \^^ * forehd|ds ' aud * hauils.' " ,
This is jitlerly false, as Mr. Roberts must know, for we
all believd.that Goct^^viU '' destroy both bodi/ and soul in
hell," and in point o£ filet it is only those^ in the body that
, go into it. ' ' ' ^
"3. [The orthodox], hell-fire is endured in hell, in banishment ?
from the p^jl^ee of Clmst and the angels, while the apocalyptic
torment iu fire and brimsjll^e is inflicted in the presence of the
holy angels, and in the prcs^co of the Lamb. "
This is the old confusion beW<^'Tfli(^ir being witnesses
and eternal wituGsscH, U'hich we^^vc bo-fbre remanced upon.
"4. .[The orthodox] hell ffl^vayj^tu earifc, in souife distant
trdlispatihl region without smid standing ground, whereas the
.scencij^f Rev. xiv. is enaetdtl inihg presence of the Lamb, *after*
the Lamb haj!$eome to Mount ^^^ etc. .i^ - "v^ "^If" ' «-
'j*?^ The passage in Rev. xij^, says not otie wcu*^4bout thaif**
locality ^" hell at all, but merely thre^ena^pl^worshippers
of^e beasit that they shall endure it^flfe ismrver^said tbbe '
on earth..: -•.. . ^.. ■ . '.■■. ^'. --.mFrnk-- ■---■«^-"
This cloies , lie arguments as t(^ the^ passages, the
strengtiPK* which is only t be more brought out by all such
efforts.4to evade thek- force. The simplest interpretation
still, approves itself the only consistent one, after repeated
exaniinations and criticism by those who lack neithfer will
nor mental capacity, but who fail here utterly and hopelessly,
beca^kg in conflict with the word of One who cannot lie nor
<^ange, nor mock with needless mystery the souls of the ,.
simplest among Aose who " read or' hear the wgrds of the -
book of this pfo^iecy," and Avhom He pronounces " blessed,"-
if they " keep the things which arc Written therein." It is —
learned men who have unwittingly devised entamrlements
for tho feet of these simple ones, until they have learned to
'I* , ■ ' ■ ■■
ositlon to its
tancrlements
'#
"EVEntASTlJTa PUN'IsnMFNT" IS MATT. XXV. 355
Stand in doubt of that which they own to be God's word,
hccauM of the interpretations which have been put upon it!
If the Sop of I\ran eoininnr i„ the douds of licaven and all
mOw^y angels with Ilini may mean ^ taking of a Jewish
city, no wonder tliat they need a leaiHd man to tell them
80. And^^this is the Scripture mode of speech, no wonder
if It shouh?>be thought " highly wrought and mysterious "—
mfl^ited and exaggerated rather : and if this be its cOrrnnfm
morle, who would seek out (as expecting to make aught of
them) fi|^" hieroglyphs of Patmos " ?
It wjll»a a mattef of tlie greatest thankfulness to me, if
.art^fr<5mthe subiect of special interest to us now) any
slfoU learn J|the long discussion which we have gone
through, hiiri-uo^nd trjist worthy Js the word of God-
how little it " refl«|the ignorance of a dark age " ; how
Ignorant rather is IRe-ltarning which would belittle it
"Heaven ancUarth shall pass away "-and the voice is that
of the Lord an^ Maimer of heaven and earth—' ' but my words
shall not pass av\by.''
AVe must now return to look at a text designedly left to
-the present, although its fitter place might seem to be lone
before, masmuch as it is the judgment of the nations at the
coming of the Lord.
#.
CHAPTER XXXVI.
" EVEIlLAf$1*iN-ft PUXISnirKk:T " WSfATt. J35:iy^ ■ V^^ ^
It is not needfulj^ our present pui^oso to establish the
- particular oj^Mcaf; on of what has been strangely called bv
&omcthe."parable"of the sheep and the gc^ts. It is ii^
deed no-para^e, but a very simple statement of the separa-
tion of the living uj^ri the earth when the Lord comes to it
and sets np His tlirone there, which separation is comjmred
to a shepherd separating fs sheep from the goats. It is
therefore a part of _that pre^millonniJ?! judgment of the quick
'«•
'■h^
356 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A B-UTUBE STATfi.
- already spoken of, ind which precedes by more than a
thouwiiid years the jud«,'nient of the dea<l before the great
white thmne. VViih this it lias been identified in the popu-
lar view. Hiinpjy because the Lord's eoniini^ havhig been
considered to be at the end of the world,* distinction be-
tween the two was not possible. j
But the result has been a disastrous one. For the judg-
ment in the one case being evi<lently a <liscrirainative one
it was, of course, considered that the risen saints were to be
picked out from sinners by the trial of their works; and
then the natural suggestion followed, that all miist wait till
the day of judgment, to know what was to be their everlast-
ing cottdition. I do not need again to enter into this, but I
shall briefly state the distinction which the passages them-
selves show as obtaining between them.
- 1. The judgment in Matthew is evidently (and stated to
be) when the Lord comes, a coming connected with various
features of the previous part of the prophecy, M'hich make
indisputable its character. That in Rev. xx. 11-15 takes
place when, instead of His coming to earth the earth and
the heavens flee away.
2. In Matthew there is no resurrection, and the judgment
is of the living "nations," not of the dead;; while the con-
trary is true of that in Kevelation.
3. In Matthew 'they are judged according to their
behavior to some whom the King styles His "brethren":
in Revelation judged in general "accordihg to their works."
These are distim^tioiis which are simpje enougli and broad
enough between the two scenes to prevent their being con-
founded. There is, however, a^>oint of resemblance, and it
is on this account that I have left the passag:o in. Matthew t<)
the present.time, tliat, instead of being slam by the sword lis
those are who follow the beast, they on the left hand receive
a judicial sentence, a nd are a <ljudg(Ml to th e lake of fire
as-
■/
are those in the Apocalyptic vision^but, as it would seem
* The expression in Matt. xiii. and xxiv,!^ before noticed, is not^s,
but is " llie coniplotion " (or 'c<>n--ununati<>i) ') " of tlie a^e -*
^«;'
»>
" BVEULASTlko PUNISHMENT »' IN MATT. XX 7. 857
before tho millennium/as the beast and the false prophet are.
I do not say i.ositively that tliey go directly into it, but so
it would seem. It is certain that they are appointed to " ever-
lasting, punishment" in " everlasting tire, prepared for the
devil and his angels."
Men have come in with their explanations again here, and
to these we must turn. They have to do chiefly, as our
argument has, witli the expressions " everlasting punishment
and " everlasting fire."
With regard to - everlasting punishment," the objections
to the ordinary sense are various, some based upon the word
for everlasting, some upon that for punishment, some upon
considerations apart from the meaning of either word, while
some combine several .of these objections together! Wo
must first, in the natural order, look at the word "punish-
raent," for which several other renderings are suggested—
"cutting oftv' "restraint," but especially "correction," tho
word, as It is stated by Mr. Jukes for example, being " always
used for a corrective discipline, which is for the improvement
of him who suffers it."* '
The word for "punishment" here is H6\a6i<i iholasis) an<f
18 given by Liddell and Scott as moan;^" a pruning " • hence"
a checking, punishing, chastisenia/^rlction, punisbment."
The verb WaCcu, from which it^sWx^^d/means^Btrictly-
to curtail, dopk, prune, but usually to kbep within bounds,
hold in check, bridle, check, then to chastise, correot/ pun-
ish. The words derived from this show a sinular meaning,
riius we find ^a>Aatf/^.t, "chastisement, punishment"-
Hokec6Tv loy, "a plftce of chastisement, prison," or 2, "an in'
strmnent^of correction or torture »• KoXacJr^.. «a phastiser,
punisher^^' A^a.^o, is the word used for J.^.«M, Acts iv!
-i, finding nothing how they might i>MnM them," and
again 2 Pet. ii. 9, " to reserve the iiiyust to the day of judg-
ment ioh^panisheii:^ KoXadi, isunly found in the p^sage
before us, and in 1 John iv. 18 : « fear hath ^ome>/^.»' ^-
All is against the rendering of "cutting off," which is
* liestitmion, 1). 129. ~ "
^m' :
■w~
'*.
358 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTUlRE STATE.
'■adopted by Ellis Jind Read,* Blain,t Storrs,t Hastings,^
Morris, and even on' the orthodox side hy Landis.|| Blairi
adopts Ellis and Read's rende^ini?, " And th.cse will go to
the cutt ing oil' that takes pla^e at tht* age ," ! Morris says that
jt refers to the " cutting off" of false Christians' from' the
^ock bf Christ, and from every pretence to the kingdom.'*!!
fAnd even as to 1 John iV, 18, he says that its being repre-
sented by ",torraent" "is not justifiable; for. the Aj^bi^d
rel&tes to the children of God, who are not yet ! made per
feet ' in an experimental knowledge of the love of Qpd. They
are not tormeuted ; but they are cut off;;.from much exp^si-
' mental bles.^edn^ss, which properly pertains to them." .But
this is poor and foolish reasoning. The^ words are '■\f}ar—
i. e.,;irlread of God— hath torment," and so it has whfthei>^in
saint or siTiner. "Cutting off" (as. he would have it here
also) it never is, being never simply that, as the dictionaries
show, and as even Mr. Hudson, who has no prejudice cer-
tainly against the word, admits. He says, "This (meaning
of * excision *— cutting off) seems to be supported by the
cognate xoXo/Soeo, and by the origiMl sense of 'pruning.'
But in prun^g the tree is not ' cut off '—only the braiiches.
And though, by the laws of language, the word inlf/ht easily
have acquired this sense, we find no proof that- it //r<.v'- done
so."** • This argument is thus fairly given up.
.The renderings by " restraint," Mr. Hudson says, "is 'fa- '
vored by the use of the present tense in 2 Pet. ii. 9
{HoXaloMei^ou?^ comp. ver. 4 ; Jude G ; and. perhaps Acts -
iv. 21), and by ^ remark of Schleusner. It is favored by the
tenor e^varipus pa^^es, which represents the Avicked'as the
troublers 0f the rifhteous, to be effectually^ restrained %
God^s final judgtqents.ft But," he adds,4'thi8 idea is ndk,i
* Bible versus Tradition. _ t I^eaili not Life, p. 79
• 1 Six Sermons, p. 59. . , .,. ^ Pauline Theology, p. 59,;
II Iramoiitality-ofthe Soul, p. 480. <If WhaVis ManT pp. WO,
**Dot)tand Orjace, pp. 189,J90. * , ' *
''^ft Up gives the following texts : Psa. xxxvii.; Ixxiii.; xcii.; Isa. Ixti
24 ; Dan. xii. 2, Z ; Matt. xiii. 40t43, ; 2 Thess. i. (^0 ; 2 Pet. ii. 4-12 •'
^^^
r,t-
iV
.*
> "BVliBtASIIWO I'UMlSilMllNi" is MATT. XXV. 350
"^^ prominent in "Matt. J^iv,, and such a' rendering would ^j
hardly tenable," - , y
The word certainly would notler^c th6 cause of anpihila*
tiomsra, nor even of restorationism, if the ^" restraint " is to-
be « everlasting." This meaning, however, connects with
that which restorationists. would give, according to the pas-
sage Which Mr. Hudson quotes from Eustathiu.^, "7voVltk(J/g
IS properly a certain kin#. of punishment; that is, a certain
chastimng and restraining- of the disposition, i,ii not vimlic
iris qn the ground that the word CNprcsses, not vindictive'
"but corrective suffering, that Mr. Jukes ^nd Dr. Farrar take
• their. ?tand. The latter affirms that " KoAatJ/s ig ^ ^vord-
^ wljidr in its «(>^i proper meailhigr ' luis Reference to the'co^ '
i'ixjtioivaiia bettering of, him that endures it.' ^** Mr..Juke8
a^s, tliat '"those^wlio hold th^ cc^mmon vi(jw arc. obliged
t».*?^s this," and supports this by:an appteal to Arch-'
bish^renchV " Synonyms of ij.e i^cNV Testament," who
distingUislirng between the two words w<;A*fer$ an(l»ri;fa,p/«.
^ays, "In Tmoo,i,:a, according to its x^lassical use, the vindife-
. tive character bf the puhisliment isthe ptbmincnt thought;
It IS the Latin ' ultio ' • punishnrcnt as satisfying tlie inflictefs
sense of outraged jiistice, as de|phdinghik Own honor and "
that of the violated law . .;. in H6Xam^^'<yh the other hand^ '
• is more the notioif o\' punishment a» it has reference; to the
s correction *id l>et%ing of himlthat endures it.^ to
wffich he refcrs to Thilo, Plato, and Clement of Alexandria,
and adds, « And this is Aristotle Vdisrinctidft.'''^
It is triie that Ihe Archbishop i^esistk the restor'atiohist
application of this. He says : "It would 'Tbe.a ver> seripus ,
eriwhowevor to attenipt to refer this 'distinction in its'en-'
■ *"'*^fe# '^''»'"*I*^ as employed i,i thtf Now Testaments" ^
;, .Wv Juke*^'' ttofhnu'nt upon this is,^M,|i,it is,4t would be a '
jj ?P^^"s Mw to givenhe word its prefer sei^e." '^Why
.; :shoHld ir be a scripts error, "asks Dr. Farrar, *'t6 refrain
'•'^!li!!^fi!^lj^^ * ^^^^% «erise which it does not possess? "
- * Eternal Hope, p: '.JOO. ~T~^^^ '■
iff -. ' * *
« HI
:^/"
K
~ -^ii
A^
nl
'#■.'
'--*!*
"^m
w „
3C0" FACTS AND TIIEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
- Archbishop Trench has,' however, produced witnesses for
this latter assertion,* which those who tak« him thus to task
.~J>refer to disregard. Indeed it cannot be shown that what
Dr. Farrar considers "theso/c proper meaning" of the word
is ever the meaning of it, eitKci" in the Septuagint or the
Apocryphal writings, in which we have certainly better
authority for the meaning of word.s in tlic Now Testameirt
than can possibly be foiind in Plato or Aristotle.
It occurs six times in the Septuagint of Ezckiel : twenty-
one times in the Apocryphal lAoks. " So iniipiity shall not
be your ?7/A/i " (p]zek. xyiii. 30). is translated ♦' your 7>/w*/.s7i-
. ineiity In a passage in lEsilras, we find' thc; disobedient
enjoined to be ^>«/iiMef? whether by death or other InJIlcUim^
*' penalty of mdney, or^ imprisonment '' : where for "rhfiiv-
, tion '' the word is actually the very word said tto be opposed
BO entirely in mining to HoAcxdfi, — "punished by n/nayjia " !
and where death, the alternative of fine and itpprisonment,
is certainly not a "corrective dit^cipljne." In the book of.
Wisdom the word is applied to the punislmient of the Egyp-
tians, and in the 2 "Hfecc. also to death.f
t)T. Farrar can scarcely .be acquitted then, either of super-
ficial acquaintance with the subjec-C upon \vhich he speaks,
or of wilfully shutting his eyes to the facts before him, some
of which are cited in Dr. Trencli^'s hook. Even in the Xew
* " In proof tliat HoAftdt? liafl acquiiod hi ITdleiiistic Groi^k tliiS
severe sense, and was used simply ^s pitiiislmiont di- tonnont, with no'
necessary urtderthought of the betterinai throu^Ii it of him who endured
it, we have only lo refer to such passages as tlie following: Josephus,
.4}U. XV. 2. 2; Vhno,-De A[/ricyl.O; Mart. Polyrdr,,'!; « Mace. iv.
38 ; Wisd. of Sol. xix. 4 " (Syli. of Now Test. <)\-\\.). ' ,.
t Prof. Bartlett, in his Life and Death Eternal, has a Umg note on the.
" meaning of «oA«<Jr?," in which lie brings forward a number of other
instances, citing among the rest Plntarph. the fspuriotis) second epistle
of Clement, and the Marfyrinm Kolvcarpi. - The list of ]>assajj|^n|()m the
Septuagint and Apocryyiha is as follows : K/.ek. \\\. 'A, 1, 7 [ w'Ttfr 80 ;
xliii. 12; xliv. 12 ; 1 Esdras viii. 24; Wisd. iii. 4; xl.T>. 0, 14, 17 ; xii^
15",27;.xiv. 10; xvi. 1,2, 9, '24; xviii. 1|1. 22; xix.4j 1 Mace. vii. 7;
2 Mace, iv, 38; <vi. 14; SMacc.i. 3; v!.8. ' ; ^
/•v" ' ' ■ ' '^ " ■""■'■
^ \
Q
(jr
■- f
■.■i
\
"BVEIILASTING PUNISHMENT" IN M4.TT. XXV:
861
TeBt^eiit, where out of four passage^ one is that itt dispute,
the evKlenco is certainly agaiirst him. "Fear hath koW^,"
can hahlly roter to "correctivi, <lisciplinc » ; 'and the "pun-
ishment" of. the wjcked in the day of ju jg,nent wiiich Peter
speaks ot, we have, as we jbelieve, more right, to claim
than he. *
. The^ord means then i)racticaljy in th0 Hellenistic Gfeek
|f the New Testament, "^mnishment » simply, arid the mode
61 punishment it does not expr^^ss. Fine, imprisonment,
deijth may 06me under the- term • in the epistletf John (as
wel as in other ijalssagosovtsi<le of Scripture) it can scarcely
imply othoi^than sulforhig in some form. Here it is " e.ver.-
lasting fire, pf'cpared for the devil and his angels," and that-
we^ave seen , is torment : '; they, shall be tpmentied day ah*
night loreyeratjd ever." ' • . - , '^
But arguments pursue us:.&till ; for to yield here i^ould be
^ to give up all. These turn mainly upop the teri^for « ever-
...lasting," and they are of so very similar nattfr% that^^we*
think we 8\m omit nothing if we allow Mr. Minto^ be V
their expositor. ' . ■ ,,W0^
le objects'Uat « evferlasting punishm^t "-x; ^ J . /'
^ an exi)ressiou taken out oi a nio^ ^(m^iifable, andwhicl/
,8c:v*urs nowhoro else m the whole Bible:, Hlji iftoral # th^para-
. We. IS plum enough. But in that asp,ct\ hls.no be&ng What- - ^
ever on the question. It is only in its prophetical aspect that we
This is4e cry habitually raised. But why should pro- '
phetical questions be a difficulty, >vhen in point of fact people
ofraIlknidsK>f prophetical belief see none, and agrae|ek4-
^ ly m^ the.r iut(^rpretation ? As to being a " parable," one
verse and a half introduces and dismisses ^1 that is in it of
his chai^te. There is a "simply comparison of thesepara-J-
t.o„ the Lora makes in that day;b^V.rfeen the rig^eous and :
the wicked:£o a shepherd dividing his sheep /rom the goats ^ .
Uiien_mim^iately the righteous ar? called « sheep,'t;and
^^>i^:\ r ;*Way Evadastiiig,"p. 41^ Ptc.~~-~^l!S''"^~ '■
p thei
« I
•^
>^?c
H^
■■*
^^36ii FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
the wicked "goals"; after which, instead of tlirt figure being
kept up, it'i|>immediately dismissed, and this language never
retuf n^d t0 ; and the details are quite inconsistent with the
figure b^iipg kept up.
Mr. I^nton goes on : — * '
'^Whether the cwmt it refers to will take place at the begin-
uing, or at the end, of the millennium ; whether the sheep and
the goats represent « nations ' or individuals, and in either ctwse
n'hat nations or individuals,— whether Jew or Gentile, Christian
or heathen, true and false professors in the church ; and lastly,
who are Christ's ' brethren,' apparently distinguished both from
the sheep and the "goats ; all these questions are hotly disputed.''
No doubt; but, as I have said, it has little to do with the
matter. The parabolic nature of the i)assage has been niost
unwarrantably pressed, and as a consequence a veil of mys
tery has been thrown oyer what is yery simpleUn cliaracter.
What may fairly be questioned, as for instance who the
" brethren " of the King may be, need raise no question touch-
ing our present subject. The everlasting punishment into
which the wicked are sent away is deined as plainly as can
be to be " everlasting fire, prepared for the deViland his
angels." It may be doubtful who are those punished, a|id
when they are ; the pui^fohment itself is not doubtful.* '
"And 'yet it is out of such a ijai-able as this, that a term is'
chosen to be unquestionably the msiin pillar of so stui>endous ati
edifice as the theory of endless misery, and to be the name by
which it is univorsally known."
The name may well express the doctrine, and thus U^^
W
* I <lo not mean (hat to myself these questions of who or when h,re '
doubt fill. I have no question Ih^they are the " natioi.is " eyangeiizerl
by tlie " everlasting gospel " (Rev.\xiv. 6, 7) during tile interval thaJb. .
elapsfrs between the taking away of the saints to hf^aven, aiirt tlieff ar. '
pearing^ft glory with the Lord. The interval is of swen years at least ^
the last week t>f ^Daniel's seventy, and the time of preparation of the
-earth for its blessing, as the preseijt period is that of the gathering for
heaven. Tlw,b brethren ' are, I belieVe, the publishers^ofthis gosjx^,,
and Jews. Bul all thi.s it woirld take many page:s to'.-es|ablish fro^
Scripture^ and is quite unnecessarv lo the arwument ' '\ '' '■' '\\
- m
M:M
L.
m
STATE.
if figure being
iiguage never
tent with the
) at the begin -
;he sheep unci
in eitlier c:we
tile, Christian
I ; anil lastly,
ed both from
fclj'disputod."
► do with the
is been niost
veil of rays-
in cliaracter.
ice who the
estion touch-
ishment into
lainly as ca,n
evil and his
inished, apd
ibtful.*' ', .:^
lat a term is
kui>endous an
the name by
fl thus have
o or when are "
" <n'aiigeli7.pd
ititorv.il that,
aiicl tlieff a}»,-
yoars at least , -
iratio!) of' tlio
gatlierin;? for
»f til is gosj)flJ(,,
j^bJkli i'rom
;•" EVBIti.AST W X'uilSnMEJf T " ISf MATT. XXV.
V .
36a
come into commo/use for it, without offence to those \\:ho
• claina that they hold eternal punishment as much as we do.
If the term is itself so offensive, it surely must be because felt
to bo in opposition really to their views. Why uro-e the
^ "difficulties" of Ue passage, if not so :^ But beca^use it
gives a name to the doctrine, it is not, therefore, necessary
to the doctrine, wlvich has been already abundantly provTd
apa^t from this., ' . - ^ " '
. . Mr. Milton next comes to the argument as to "Everlast-
ing," which, although in fact already met, we shall allow
him to state in his own way :—i
7— -j'There i^^rt onde the first cracrm your infallible pro^
. Everlastmg"'--he adduces "the evedastinglxills," aj Aaron's "
"everlu^ting " priesthood-" ' everlasting ' does not necessariiu
mean 'endless.' Why are you so sure that it does so in the pas-
sage before us ? Your answer is ready : because the same word
though rendered differently in our translation, is in the same
verse applicd-to the hfe of the righteous, which w^ know to be
endless. This IS without doubt^the Sebastopol of your position.
Ihous£^ds of persons who are whoHy unable to follow ^mythin-
,.hke an argument, con feel the full force of tUs fact. When they
once know that the word is the same in each .clause bf the sen-
- tcnce, they are, perfectly confident that it must bear the same
meaning in each, i ,
" But why ai;e you so sure that it meaws endless in either case ? . '
.That eternal life meafls endless Ufe eLv.where cannot prove it
We know that the ^xpK^ion is ^ed in at least two different- .'
senses namely, as a present -possession, and as an object of hope .
, . . . ^Vhy may there^not be some third aspect in' which * eternal
life <m Represented, differing from, however closeiyconhetoted ^
. with, the o«ier two ? " -^^\.\'
Mr. Mintofi surely oonfbiUtias thi%s h^Fe^ A i^incr
may besefin in many aspects, and yfet after^All Ije b^t tk
mme Oi^xf "Eternal' life i' is al#^s " eternj^ li# ". in
whatever aspe<5t ^een, as ^ hou^ is n«t a ^^^, whethei^ s^en "^
from the n<>rtl.orirom the south. Tk« th-rejs no #ai-i^t ^ :;
for hir suggestion ^'v., '/.: ::\:J^^': ■":!'.: ■'''^' V '
" Now hft^iit b^<1oi^^s ifecessary to m^pit^Miu mp precise :
\y
^.-r.
/ ■ ■'
'■\-f.
f
1
•» .-
364
FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
'3' ■:
U-
(J^
And ha
usag^. It"
ing of the word aionios, rendered * eternal ' dr ' everlasting. '
here is no difSculty either in its etymology or its
simply the adjective of tlie word (tion, an age .<^
.eans, therefore, belonging to, gk lusting Uironghbliv/'
eriodi Wliat that i>eriod is, in tiiiy spocitietl iustiinei',
known fronpi the nature of th<^ case, from the context,**
tert\l evide^ice. " , .|
.^■^
/.
3 m;;,
^■!-^'
Here ^j^^JMinton" imiores the later use oi qion for ca-
nity, which, Ave have seen^ some of the stqutest advocator of
liQiited periods have to* admit, and makesj the matter simple
by denying' all thit does -not eorisist j with his' theory/
^ionios is Clever in the New Testament, when used in a
time sense, less than 'everlasting." It ihay be limited by
tlie nature of what it qualiftes, as *' everlasting "' itself is ;
hat does not make the meaning more doubtful in the*
one csMse than in the-pi-her;; • •
« ' ' Sbmetkne^it is left qi iite ihdefiuite^s in '' the everlnsting liills. '
IStanetypes it 'is uninistp.icably precise, as in * bverjusting consola-
tion and good hppe ; ' wliere the assuj-alice is, that the consolation
plj^osided will U(pver'fail us, but Avill last throughout the whole
period of our earfhly life, that .is, as long as wtii-cquire it. '
Which last would show that instead of b^ng " unmistak-
ably precise " accordinj^ to Mr. Mintpn, its. meaning has in
this pase to be determiaeii by coljaten'^l evidehce, and is not
precise at all. " The ti-uth is, howeX'e|^ it is precise, and
instead of beiiigbounf cd by a UfeJtimei?tlio consoling thing,
the cohsalationj lasts fc rever in th^j'striictest sense. If the
fiiture state ' did" nof f dfil 4t^;'"it"' woul d b€ truly ' bounded
Jby*a lifetime, but that i«rould m^ke it only the hypocrite's:'
-liope that perishes, J Lnd. so i» ,tbe. next Gxamjjle he pro-
X ".So" ftlso St. Paul, s£ js, s* I will eat no flesh ipliile ■ifieji;or0
.s^aniS^/^ litellally' '.to "tlp^^ 'age,' ekejiljer^, translated^ 'forever. '
" . !T^^ is the ,^eriod-of his Own life,, '^nd, if the. saying
s> was to be-i:enidered idiqftnti?tenl^p, ft slj'^ifild havn heen- trfit) slated,
:,'Xil»'lo»g:as'iri|ve:"^^^' ''■'''"' ^' " " ' " ' '
.° fl[ should tliink if F'aul.atii no'^gj^i^for^^^^t^^^^ period of'
"'hl^^'Tife, he w6ttl4 Mt' the argu-
'i-
" " "■ r "■■'"■■«i
■'"■#
,-•'<',-:
'm/
4 ■: r- ■ ^ i
'.''',■■•' . ■
«,.
"EVEKLASTINO PUNISUMENT" lH MATT. XXV.
3C5
ment is but a plausibld deception. If the apostle were going
to eat meat in eternity, it would have force. Perhaps Mr.
, Miaton thinks he is, but lie should show us why he thinks so.
* , «* Tao eiuostiou tUercforo stiiuds tims : Is there any aion, ex-
qept An endliffs one, to which tho t'tcrnal life in Matt. xxv. 46,
can refer ?, Ami if so, is there any reason to believe that it ioes re-
- ter/tosueh o(«m/ there ? Turn to Luke xx. 35, ' They which shaU be
"accounted .worthy to obtain that world {mon) and the resurrection
froni the dettdij^VYfH^and I believe tliat the age there spofen of
is the milienmul ii|fe ',; . then why might not the obtaining of
the blessedne4 C(kmi'eU-d \viUi that age, by resurrection in the
^ case of tlio de^jd, «rljy change in the case' of the living, bg called^
'fflonial life,',i\hich we r-endijr 'eternal Jife,' deriving our word
'eternal ' frorni the Latin (rtas, or age ?■ And \vould there not be
• a peculiar pr6]|)riety in this, if, at th^e same time that those who
are counted wf^rtliy enter . ijjto the life of tlxat age, thte members
of that visible i^harchy then living on4he earth,, who are -counted
unworthy, incur destrnc Hon from the pr^gence of the Lord, aod
are" gathered in Ijundles to be burnt;?" >
Let Mr; 'Miriton prodiiw a passiage in which ''aionial"
means '' millennial ''plainly, and he will be entitled to be
listened 46. This he cannot do, and if he" could he; would,
ve may be mr^. Even then, how cai^r^ " seonial life '
mean sometimos 'Wwwl«Htlng,'' sometimes *^ millenniar'
life? Again, what is the .mcjaaiiig of " millennial'? life?
It cannot be life simply entered into at the millennium, but
life 'belortijinff to it. 'ifmsihe believer's life belong to the
^ millennium ? I/t nOHntsr, ir/irtfevcr. It is not the " life of
that age " hito which boli.vers enter; xvhatever speciaF i-eiffu
they may have during (hat .time, ^heir life belongs to eter-
nity in the strictest sense. ' * '
-i agree with Mr. Minton thai the judgment here spoken
of precedes the millenniiun, ah«l thftt it is a judgment of in-
dividujtls.' To me these are both as clear as need be, and
.therefore! noe([ hot bring forward his .proofs for theift.
..The argument h'e foimtk on this- if; none the lrs<; worthless.
. But he conjosuow to fhe (puv^ioh" in a&'vMjr to the post-
millcnnialist, Avho hfi thiiiks-will- npi be" ^,5ved ])y his pro-
"^^
^
:'(.
'If:
il
I
-, I
t
#.
GO J? ACTS AND THEOEIES AS TO A PUTUBE STATE.
phetic expositions. He will allow " eternal " to mean end-
less, for the sake of argument.
* ■ ■ ■ ' '
*' And suppose it does, how much nearer would the passage bo
to proving the doctrine of endless luiiicry ? yot fcjjnrtide."
But why then so much pains to prove that it means " mil-
lennial " ? Why, the prote.st ULjainst a term for the doctrine
taken from so "difficult a parable "? Is Mr. Minton fight-
ing for the sake of lighting, to show us his power as a com-
batant, or for the truth 'f Why contest points which as
far as the doctrine in question is concerned, have " not a
panicle "^ of importance 'i — :-~~- jj_„ l ^^ ^ .^_
"In order to make it prove that, they would have to prove
that the word "eternal " cannot be appUed to anything which is
accomplished onee tor all, but the effects of which are eternal ;
that for anything 'to be eternal, it must be in eternal process of
accomplishment. This is your assumption througihout. Otl^ers
have asserted it more confideiitly. But what then are Ve to make
of 'eternal judgment'? .Will God be etemaUy judging the
wicked, as well as eternally punishing them ? Will not the judg-
ment take place once for all ? In what sense can it be called eter-
nal, except that its effects are eternal — that is, if the Avord be
used in its most extended meaning— iu other words, that it will
be final and irreversible ? And what are we to make of the * eter-
nal redemption,' wliieh Christ is spoken of i^ ' harittg (Brought out
for us ' ? It is distinctly declared to have been accomplished
once for all : it will not ba a continual process lasting, through
eteriiity. It is called eternal, because its effects will be eternal;
And why shoidd not punishment be called eternal on the same
principle ? If eternal judgment is not eternal judging, nor eter-
nal redemption eternal redeeming, why should eteriial punish-
ment be eternal punishing " ?
Nowthe words are, " these shall' go away into everlasting
punishment," and this is explamed to be " everlasting fire,
prepared for the devil and his angels." It is -singular how
the force of these expressions is felt, almost admitted^
and then denied. First, the complaint is, that a phrase ir
taken out of a most difficult parable ; then everlasting is not
everlasting but millennial ; then if it is everlasting it is per-
^^
" EVERLA.STIXO PtfxiSHMEXT" IX MATT. XXV. ,367
fectly corrett annihilation doctrine : the efcct of thq pun-
ishment is eternal, and punishment is not " punishi^i^/."
Now even as to the last it is really the litei^al force of the
word,* which, moreover, always implies suffering in some
form. Fine, imprisonment, death are that, and the passage
in the first epistle of John, already quoted, cannot be ren-
dered otherwise than by some wordnear akin to "torment.?
It is not a word that will possibly allow the thought of the
sufferer passing away from under it, while yet it endureso
The punishment cannot continue when there is no Ion f^er a
-person to be punished, Annihilation cannot be etarnal pun-
ishment. This 4* whyMr^Minton is so anxious to have it
" millennial," as we hav-e seen. He is uneasy under the very
idea of its being eternal. Why will we call it' so, qiioting
the words of a very difficult parable V Then he tgj|is round
and says, let it be eternal, it is alt right, and wel^believe
in it alike. It must be seriously doubted if we (^:
But "eternal redemption " is not an eternal process, and
♦' eternal judgment " is not ; why should eternal punishmerit
be ? As, for eternal judgment, of course ' ", sentence "
{kpina) is not always being passed; but the*J)erson is
always under it, or it would not be eternal. Anif similarly
as to redemption, the person is always' enjoying it. If the
punishment then be inflicted suffering (and that is the very
idea of punishment), the person cannot ce^se to llPs,nd the
■ suffering go on. Let Mn Minton find, the passage iftVhich,
K6Xa6tz does not imply suffering of some sort, and then he.
will have some argument ; but then it will be easy to prove
that every beast that dies (and multitud^|^j^n severest
pain) suffers eternal punishment as, cV/^/y as^BE- And he
cainnot deny it. A beasj-'s loss may be, of ^^|lfcas much
less than a man's as a man is "more tha^ a beg^t.*^^ut eter-
nal punishment is as real in the one castas it^he^^fc
It will not do then to talk, as Mr. Minton dS^F the
efect being e||Tiab The ejf^eet and what produces th^ifect,
are very dilRren t things. In '^eternal _redemption " the
:— ■ ;^ * /raA/rfi?Sjint MoXddna. — ■. — —
j^^ -a- 55^ -; sr
! ■ I ''^-l
11
If
1
I' 9-' '
1 ■
J-'F
3Cft FACTS AND TIIEQJIIKS AS TO A PUTUHK STATfi. y
redeuined are not merely, eternally enjoying the Wesseilnest,
into whii'h they are brought as the etteet otre.U'nij)tl<»n, Otif
thii retlemptinn also i/.srf/. An<l thl.s is^ if you like; to Hiiy so,
one of the- etiects ; jmt the retlcniption itself is jiossessed an<l
enjoyed foreyer. It is in vain to plead that the punishment
is e^jdured fon^vcT, wlien there is no longer any I /eing toen^l
dure it.
As to the " everlasting lire," Mr. Minton as usual refers
to Sodom and Gomorrah, but adds nothing fresh to the
argument.
; '' everlasting fire " is, and what
the mere lengthenin<jc unneees-
racted argument to take this uj)
'consider some things connected
with this doctrine in Scripture, and it is time to turn to
these.
We have.tieen \vh
its effect. It woul
sarily of a sufficient
again. We have still
CHAPTER XXXVfl.
"the CJOSI'i;L OF IIOPK."
i''
Our aceountSs with annihilationism are well-nigh closed.
But there remain still some from the opposlt^'e side of
restoratioriism which require to be looked at, and amontr
the advocates of this, spite of his protest, wc must reckon
Dr. Farrar, He is- not indeed an assured Universalist ; but
it is not wronging him to say that he is one in hope. His
bodk is styled '' PZtornal //'y>. ,'>" and his own vieAvs are cvi-
denVy identical with what h(|l calls, "the gospel of hoj^^i":
^here by " hope," he does not mean certainty, not a '-hope
which maketh m)t ashamed," .but at leasts liope that'nutr/.
His utterances are /laturally somewhat inconsistent and con-
tradictory in conifcquence. But we will .credit him with
the somewhat incipendent ground he takes, and reserying
thedoctrine of th[? a';ru>(tt/ttVa(^/^ - , the "restitution oV ail
.^.^.„
n
tUIi. Upsi'KL OF UOPK."
' IH, and what
|8 coniiectcMl
10 to turn to
i, wu
own
things," as Htatod in Scripture, for future ca
will now look at his powit ion-, which avc will 8tato
Avoids.
"On «udi a .lucstiou us tliis," ho suys,'^ ''I caru hut little
|or individufd authority, but this mueh at h>ast i.s provod by the
many diff.^ring tlu-ories of wise and holy inen-that God has
given us no clear and decisive revolution on th# final condition
of those AVho have dic.l in sin. It is ruveaU'd to Us tliat « God is
love ' ; and that • ftim to kn.»w is life feternal.' ; anrl that ' it is
, not His will that any should porisli ' ; and that ' as in Adam all
dio, even so in ^Christ shall all bo Imrtde alive ' ; but how long
even after doath, man may continue to resist His will -—how
long he may continue in that ^nritual death, which is alienation
Irom God ;-that is on(. of the s(.eret things which God hath not
revealed. But this much at any rate, that the fate of man is not
-finally and irreversibly sealed at- death, you yourselves, -un wit-
tnigly pei^mps, but none the k^ certainly, admit and decline
and confess, every time you r.>peat in the Apqstles' (!reed, that
Christ descended into hell. For the sole passage which proves
that article of the creed is the j.assage in St. Peter which tells lis
- that ' He Avent and preached to the sphits in prison, which some-
time were disobedient. ' St. Peter in my text tells you in so many
words, that < the gospel was preached to them that were dead '
and It, ns the church in every age has held, the fate of those dead
sinnei-s was not irrevocably fixed by death, then it must be cleai-
and obvious to the meanest understanding that neither of neces-
sity is ours,
"Tliere then is the solo answer whicji I can give to your ques-
tio,n, ' what nbout the lost?' My belief is fixed upon that
living God, who, we are told, is ' the Saviour of all men.' * Mv
answer is with Thomas Erskine of Linlathen. that ' we are lost '
he^e as much as there, and that Christ came to seek and save the
ost ; and my hope is that tlie vast majority at any rate of the
ost may at length ho/ound. If any hardened sinner, shamefully
loxmg Ins sin, aiid despising the long-sufibring of his Saviour,
J^ with that doctrine, it is at his own just and awful peril.
^P^if on the other hand, there be some among you,— as are
there not ?-souls sinful indeed but not hard in sin ;-souls fail-
mg indeed, yc-t even amid their failing, who h)n<.. my]
* Eternal Hope, j). S6, ofc.
pray, and
■U^ ;
■.:..»■■■■'■; ■ /"y^^' ' ■ %i-^^"'' ■.■:■:..-:: . :"• y:-^'y^"-'^/Wm. ^'--/.r^'^^^-j ^^.';'''^''-f.-y''''r :-y ■'!■'■■■' ^ ■-:':/
,:^y ■^,-;;^;; '-■' .: ^,:-:^\ • '■.■■••■ t -&,,_! -■ '■'■'"^ ■ ■■ Vv' :f '''' '"' '^''■'■'•' ,'■'■■ 'W ■ 4/i';' /•■ '■' ■■.'■":. ■-V.i /■■-■/ ■'-■■'«'/.,',.-' V^ ,i$.'' '.
.,■::-■■■■■. '-yjy '.>--■■ '"',-■■■ -'^ ■■'-"'■■"' ■'.'•" '■■7 /-.:'"•■ V. •■'''Y^-'"-^'^-'^ '■■^■■■'■' ''■■ ■ ■■
^■''■'■--- - •.;•■<-'' ;--'^-. -•:---.'----...''^' ■ ■ !__-•■ "-'^'h ■■■ '■■■' ■■■■' ■ .' ' ■ "i ■ . v^ ■.••.-■■■■":•■■. -
■.^: ■;'- „:■ ■■ : . ^ ■ . ■■•^■■■"-"^- . . -^ ■.::---^--n-.- ■■• ' ^ , :.M- ,..''-\y ■/,.-■"■,
■\ -.-si' .'.' . -.<-... . ..." -,-' ■ ■ . • ■■ ■ - ■//■ ■ '■-■'■■■-:■ -■'•--. ■!•' ■'•■-■. ■■ • '-''m--'- .-■
^...v>^. ^,;:--,- -'.^/v ■ • ^^■:-, '■-'•■ -..';-. ^ v.''^,v -:■■■/":: ..;.:/V/.-Vv.? ■•■.:;.?'^^^: • ^■.■■.■■' ■•"'■: :ff^:';,^:-
^*-- -■ ■ *" '- . ■ ' '-'" :'' ' ' -if" * ■'■': .-■■'•,■■'■'/-■,•■;■■■.';■ / ' „■' '■',■.■-/ .'-/•-■ ' - '. : '^ ■ ■ -y- "'■'■!,-■■ ^ <''^ •■'■
.-„*^-:-:r. • *.,-',,. *'. ■-■'...■■,-.■ ./ ■■.'>.- -•■ ■ ./■„,«
e-:.- ■. ^ ■ ■. -- ■•■. ■ ■■■ ■.,-■■.■• ..■: ■-:.-.:■ r-,::-. -■:.--..^_::::-y-yryi.--, ■■■■.-■ \ ■■■• ■ ■•,.,■.,,>■.■.;
^>: ' - ■ ■ -* ■■ ■: , . ■- ; ' ' ■ ." ' ' ■-••». ■. .,.;
s'.::.' ':■:.- --y ■ -■■---:'■ . y^::-^--':r-r :- '-W-l.^:---\' ■■-'-- '■-:'y:r-^^-:.
^" -: ■' ..'..■■:" -■ '■ -. ->.'■ vvv •■ '. . •- •. ■,':-:V--. ■■-■:/- ■.-.. . •^.- : •;/■'. -. '■.■■: -. : . ■:.,■■.,
' .■ . '- ' .- ■',■■■ ■..■■■.■ ■•'■•;'" . ;• '■ • •• .■ ■' :.:-■.• . •, ■ . ■.': >■- .
.... ■ -ii- .-- ■ .. '-■'■• ■ ■ ■■ . .■ ■ -. .• ■ - -.:'-■' ■ .;., . '• • ' .. . ■ ■ .■■ ...... ., «..■ ■
■ ;■;■ r- ■'■ --0-: :.■■;;■" . . "' -^-'^■'■-■^\_- : fy ' ■ -. ■ -t , .-. 7 ■ - ,. ■■.-■■:-'- ■■ ■ . • ' •■, , ■ .-..■
;,,*^:'" ';",.' •!■ ■■■, ,J--: , -'■ : .'■■■ » ■■•/■ ■ - . * "■.■')■ '■ '.' ^■' - '- ' ' ' '■ --■* '■.'
fe^^r^. : .:--'::,i::-f-^ ■ .-.-^v""'- .. ■".■. . .-■..-.v ■:- . .. • ,:- , - -' - \ ■ ■...•■.■;■.:.■ .,.■-: '■■-,: ■: ■'
rri'; ^ -^- . ■■ \.:'. ■■ :•■-., ■ .• - ■■ ^ ■.■■;.;^^. •■. -■• .'A > - ■ - ' ..■-.■■ •-■■. v ■■■'■.
-..-^- •^-.' ^v;:,V::r;.rt---fr.: \:, ■;.; ,:;V ^^..■■:.\,:.:.-::--^^" :,
^■^ ■ v"--v- .^■.■■- :"■--■■:■"■ .:s-, .:-.■■; .-• ■ -.^ •■ -■ ^ '■ v '■■---:■ \ -■■■■■-■■ ■': ...?■•
'-■. ■ "■.■■■' - '--!'. ■ ' '--r-'v' - .■■ " ^,. . -^, " . ■ " ■ . ■ . , ' ' .,..--.'■ - ." ■ > ■ . ■ ,
; -,-.■;, .- . ■ '3- -■." . ' J ,*••■.
::.:.■■■■ \m^^::-- / ,;^y:-.- : :. ^ ■ - ■ // ' ■: " .-y-. ^ ■■....■>. ^- ; ,: . ■■
■ .: ns-C-ri^-i'---'.-- . .■■-.' f''t."'-i - ■'"••- . V " ■ .• ;....■ ■.',.. . .
.•■■. . ■■..■■ -'-^^c-} ---^ - ■' . '-b" - ■ ■•■■ . y-».- - ' ■■ .--. ■- » . - . ' . ■ . ■ . . . ■ . t
'■• : ■ ■ ■■ ■ .-■■: ■ "V--- --■■•■•■-; -^' '■'.■.■ ......■.•.■■..
■:'./\^ ■-.. ■ ■-■- -- .--"-:•• ..e-, -:.-.-v;- - '.,,- •. -.■ ;. • , ■ .:. ■..■ -,,,... ,
, .. . . :■: ■■---■ -'.. -n. -. :.. -■■..■■■.. , ■.■.....
• ■ ■•■■- ■■--.. V. v.^v ■ . ■ ■ ■
.... :.;.. .- „....-. - ,. »:;-S-- ■ ■■. -'-r- - ■ ■ . ■-,--•
..* ^ . ■ ..-■'^ .... . . . -, .....,-"; '. ■ .-■ ^ ..--.....-
. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ' '■■-■■-.' ' y: '■ -i'- "■■■■-'. -..-■• ' ».''■-• ' ■ ■■■.''. ; .
.■.".' . . ■■■ - .■", . '""..
^^.
^^^^^
W-' - -,. ■ ■ '■" ■■ ■'■ ■■ • ' '. ' ■■■■'"- •■ .. ■"' ■ ■ - •■'•:-:■■.:. -'■ : '
^^^^^^--
■ -.' . --■■ ■-■ ■. . ■ ■ .,-■ ■- ■■ -■- . .
^^^^H^^
■ .'■' - - ■■■ . ■ . :/ . .-?-. , ':.-■ -' '■
. .■ - -.-■. ■ ..■ .". ,' ■ .■ V . .. ' .
^^^^^^^^
-• . ■■ ■ ;■■- -.■■.•■■ ■.. - -:'>fiy - - ' , ■■..'■ . -- .:'■.. .:. ,
^^^^^^^'
^^^^^^11^^
^''':^-'y--)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^': ''':':-■
u ■■■■A.--
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ '-
yi ■ • . -
n - ■ " .,; ■ . '
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ' ■ '
^^^^^^^
■ --yr': '^ ^''' ■•■-- ^ -■'■':■ "^:^:-';:'.^ \' ^: •"■■.■'-' ^^■•■:-; ■■:\: - -^X-.v'
^^^^^^^^^^^r
.■■ ..-,,■ /,;■:/.■■'" ...■■ ::>'■['■ ..;.: ..-.-■.•; ■ ' : - ■ ■■ -'-'■•,:.■■.■
^^ '
., .■ ■ ^- '"■-^- "■■"■ -f '^- ■"■,"■''-=■ ■■ :-."'.,.■,■.; ^' " ■■■■■■■■.■■■.■■. . - P^
t ■ _ ■■ ■ ■ .i-' ;.■■".:"■•■■ -..-■,'■- '■-.■■
■- •■ " ■-. ■ ■ ■'■,'.■ . >--: - - y' :-'^'.:. . . ■■ ■....■'.'■.•■'• • ■ •'■. ■ •■""\ .■ ■ " ■ .• -■ "' .;'■■
' '. ■'.,.'■ • . ■ . ■ - ■ ■ ; , ■ ■ „. - '-.■•■
.'.■■■ .'■".■ ■■ ' "• .•»■.' ■■."'■.■■■■'" .■■.'■-■'"''■.■
■■.■■■'■ ■ ' ' -'-■ ■' '' • . : ■ ■■■■'■,'. ■ ■■ '■'.--■■ ■■;.■-. . ■■.'■:-■■.■ ■' ■.. ■,. ■ '■■ . -.^/v-.-
. A- . ■.- ■ .. .. ■ .. ■'■ ■. - • ■■ : ; ■ ■■ ■ ■. .. . •■ ■ ■■ y ■
i\ ■ ..•^- ■ . ■ ■ :- ■.. ■ : .. , '^ ■ ■..■ ■■•■■: ^ ■■ ■■■
y \ 1 .■ - '■ •. .:■■ ■ ■■^- ■ ' •: ■ "'■ . •
■ . ..■.■■' ■.'...» '■■ '■-■■.'■, ■■ ■" '■ ' ■. r . >. ■ ; • ■..■■■'.- .■■■ ; ^
-•'■ .'. ';"'.. ■■.\- ■■'."".■ ■■:'■.-- ■ 't i. - ' ■ .'. . ' '. ' -. . .■■■■ ■■ ' ■■■'' " ■■ ' ■ ■'..'■ ' ■ ■, .■
... ■■■..' ■'.'-■.. ..■■.' f . ■ " . *■■..'". ' ■ ' .".",.
.■. ■ •\ " '^z ■ ■ ■ • ■ . ■ ■'■":■ y ■■' '^ ' y -.-'■' \ y ■- : ■ ' ■ ; . .' :'■'"-, J \ ,
'...■■- r ^^. • . . . "..;...■ ....-,■,■■. . . .' '»■- . . . ' . - ■ • .■■■.- ■.. . V ,....;,■ .■■!■.
■■;. •■■-■ .•■^.. - . ■ -' - y. . ■ r, ■■■.-: - ■■.■.-.-■ : - ■: ■' > .■ ■■- ■-
-■^■.- . ' ■ . ■ - - ■ ' . • ' . . : ' : ■ y y ^r - '. .' -
■ - ' . » 1 V - y ■ , - . " ■ . • ■ r ■ ■ - ,. .-'■■'■■■■
.■•■'■■■■ :■ ■-. ■..' ' :■ ■ .'y --":■"-'. -, ■ ■ :-' . :■''■ /■ ... ■■ ■/^■■/:--
' . ■»
'^-' -- ■■■:.. A- .■. '■■ ■....- :■.. ■ ■.. ■■ ■■..-■ . ■ . .- ■ . . . . ... : .: y ;..■..-
v^. /-.._... ■ .-'■;■■■■ .■■:■. - ■ ■■ ■■'. y.- ^ : ■■ -'.K---.-- ■■ y, _y-y- ■ ,'• . :: ■:
- -' y ■■':■'' ■ ■'.,_'.('.'': ■ ." ■ '"■,'.-'■■ ^■' " ■■■ ■.-■■:■'-' ■ ,' .. ■■■';!■
X).^-: :'^--'- ' ." ■■ ■■■•■ '•;■ '' • -^ .'. ■■ . .■■ .. .••■: ■ ■ "}-.--■ V -: " ': ■■ ''■.-.''.■ .' . . '■ y
■", ■ • - . . ' ■ . . . ■> . .■ ' ,,■."■ ■ .■'..■•". .•..■■■.■''•"■
■ '■"''■■"" ' ' "'■' ■ ■ • ■ -." -^ " :'■■ ' . ■■'.' . . ■ ■ ''■'.'.■'■: '' ■"' ■ ■ ■ . : • ■ ■-.,■""■-■■-■ i■^,;'-■^v■. ■■■.■■■■■ ■■"■'■:;■*
•■ " . 1 .. ■ '■ ..■."■■.- ■■-.-• . k t
• ■.■.'■■■ ■ ,'■ .;■..■■ - . '■ y: .. ■ ■ ' r.''' - ': ■ " ■ -. ; "."•,-.. ■■.-■ .• ■ ■. ' ..■■..■■■.. v. ■.-.■ ... :
..;■;. ;.■ ■• ./ ■•■ ■ ■ :■ ■' y "■'. .. .■ ' yy^- ' - ■ ■ .; . ■ - ^ v -. ■.- ^ ■ \ ■.,■ .. ■..■ . ■ - ^
O ^ '"'^ ^
d
AsMclMton for Infttrmatton and liiui«« M«iiM«m«ii«
1100 Wayne Avenue. Suite 1100
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910
301/587-8202
'<
^
/.
o
y.
<5>
V^
'■i «
,* ir.
Centimeter
Hllllllllllllllllllllll
m
Inches
2 3- 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11, 12 13 14 15 mm
llMllllllllllllllMlllllllllllllllllirillllllllMllMlLlllMllllllllMllllllllrilllllllllllllllllllllllllltlll
1
' ifi 'i' 'i 'i'' l ' W ' i ''i' fi ''i ' i' i' l' ' i'i' ' i' n ''i '' i ' 'i'^^
1.0
1.1
3 4
itt
bi
12.8
132
136
L25 Jlll.4
m
*fl
%
vc
(Pp
MPNUFfiCTURED TO RIIM STRNDRRDS
BY APPLIED IMAGE, INC.
•>>^
<«!»
/.
&
-/
■'V
f'
T1
>)>>
\
,^
^
370
FACTS AND TUEOUIKS AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
^
love, and agonize, and strive to creep ever nearer to the light ; —
then I say, have faith in God. There is lu)])o for yon ;-^hopc',
even if death overtake you before fft'e final victory is won ;—
hope for the i^oor in spirit, for theirs in the kingdom of hoavon :
hope for th^ mourners, for they.Bhull be com fortcd— though you
too may have to be i^urified in^at Gehenna of reouiah fire V)eyon»l
ihe grave."
" We are wretched ; therefore — ^not surely in this shoii; world
only, but forever — God will pity us. Punish us ? Yes, punish
us, because He pities. But ' God judges that He may teach, Ho
never teaches that He may judge.' Hi.'i jeonian fire is the firo
of love ; it is to purify, ngt to torture ; it is to melt, and not to
burn.."*. - ' ■ ■ . ■■i>,- ■ — ■ . ■■.■;-...-■-■
This ifl^Dr. Farrar's "hope." And if it were confined to
himself, one might afFord to pass it by, but it is a hope that
suits men well, and that they are drinking in, — a hope that
is not the true hope for those "poor in spirit" whom he
addresses, and for whom God- has far sweeter Comfort ;■ but
a hope that just those triflers with a Saviour's nlercy of
whom he speaks will take to hang theinselves over that
awful abyss of hell, till they prove it, not the fire of love, but
the awful and eternal fire of wrath, which answers to the un-
dying worm within.
First then, as to these " poor in spirit " — souls lon^ng,
praying, agonizing, striving ever to creep nearer to the
light — is God's answer to your longing this, that after all
the fire of Gehenna may be ne'eded to purify you ? No, it
is the new^ of a better purification: "the blood of Jesfls
Christ His Son cleans^th from all sin." What saved a
dying thief at the last hour, can save still without the need
of " ajonian fire." Dr. Farrar's " gospel of hope " mis-states
the whole case* as to man's condition, but worse it sliofhts
Christ's l>lessed work, and substitutes penal fire for atone-
ment, — wrath for grace.
Is man willing to have God's salvation, and God lacking
in will or in power to save him ? Never, surely. f " Who-
* Eternal Hope, p. 97.
t I tako tins opjiortnnity of noticing briefly Mrs Cox's arrrnnient in
,4:fcH
**THE GOSPBL ^JP HOPE."
arjiiinipnt in
N371
soever shall call upon the name of -the Lord shall be saved."
' Is salvation a doubtful, laborious process, arrived at by Ion"
effort, by prayers, by strivings, which may have to be eked
this connection, wliich is the starting-point of Iiisbook. He asks, if Tyro
and Siclon would liave repented in view of Christ's mighty works, why
were lliey not permitted to witness them ? " Can we blame them', will
God condemn them, and condemn tiiem to an eternal death, or an eternal
misery, because tliey did not see what they could not see 2 " "It
seems hard and unjust, that a man's salvation, a man's life, should hang
'on the age into which he is boTn." "And yet who dare say of any
class of men, in any age, that nothing but their own will prevented their
salvation 1 . . . No ; to say, •'Dou!)tless God gave these poor men all
that was necessary to life and virtue . . is simply to offer Him that in-
sincere flattery, to sliow Him that respect of persons, which even Job
could see Ho Himself would be the first to rebuke."" Thus Mr. Cox
can "see no way out of the difficulty, so long as we assume what the
Bible does not teach, that there is .no probation beyond the grave."
He has no doubt that the men of Sodom and Tyre have heard Christ's
words loiig ere this, and that the words, " it shall be more tolerable for
ihem in the day of judgment imply this " ! (SaJvator xMimdi, ch. i.).
f. Now we are among the people of " brain so narrow " as J^rbelieve
the Lord's words imply the very opposite of this. They cer||Wy show
thax^ issue of 'the day of judgment depends upon . tJie present
respons^iven by man to God, and not upon a supposed future one ;
for if it depended upon^the future, it coukUnot be decided note that it
would b« " more tolerable " ; especially as nobody has a fair chancV;
now ! But then, if man's wilMs not the obstacle, what are we to think '
of our Lord's, " how often would I. and ye would not," or " ye wUl not
ccme unto me," etc.
Doubtless Tyre and Sidon will not be condemned for not seeing what
they could not see : no one believes they will. But they are responsi-
ble for the light they Hkd, and there is a " more tolerable " judgment,—
" few stripes " instead of " many."
Again,^' Nineveh repented at the preaching of Jonas,' 'an illustration
of what the Xord means in this very connection. Was that " repentance
unto life " 1 The city remained in consequence, was not- overthrown ;
Capernaum, not repenting, was. The comparison shows that the Lord
does not affirm that Tyre and Sidon could have been so brought to God
and saved, but that aUeast they would have been affected and humbled,
like Nineveh, by a virion which the cities of Israel, were callous
and indifferent to. With this sensfe there is no " difficulty " to get out
ofby anunwarrantablp and nnM>nptural supposition.
,^^-
V
s.'^aHa^An. -. i .^-% "'sxes' ^ ■'.
372 FACTS AND TnEORIKS AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
*;
r /
out after doath by some supplementary process ? Nay, but
being " justified by faith., we have peace with God throuLjh
our Lord Jesus Christ," "justified through the faith of
Christ, and not by the works of the law." Is hell-fire God's
process of salvation for those who look to Ilim, or God's
wrath upon ihose who reject His salvation ? It is the latter,
and DOt the former. I)id Christ tell the " poor in spirit"
that theirs was the lake of fire or " the kingdom of heaven " ?
Did He tell the mourners they should be " comforted" or
tormented ';:' . /<
Dr. Farrar's gospel is really iHfidelity as to fundamental
truth — as to- Christ and grace. It makes Jheir hearts sad
whom .God has not made sad, While those only could find
encouragement in it who' are as ignorant of grace as he is, or
else those wh^ want comfort to go on in sin as Ipng as they
can. The apostle asks, •" how shall^iye escapdlBj^e neglect
so ,great salvation ?" Dr. Farrar ansVvers, tlflf^ay escape,
even out of hell itself, and most will, perhap5|all. The Lord
bids, " Fear Ilim who is able to destroy both body and soul
in hell." Of course He is (ibh., butj^le never will, s^s Dr.
Farrar. It is not an exceptional thing that the question
of God's love and the denial of His truth should go together.
"Vy^e have not forgotten the texts, however. One article
of the apostle's oreed, it s^ems, rests upon a most " isolated
text," " the sole passage " irt Scripture for it. According to
his own words elsewhere, we might suppose he would not
care to lay stress upon this. But we should be mistaken.
He thinks this isolated text sufficient to bear the entire
weight almost of the whole doctrine that the fate of men
is not fixed by death, but that they may be saved afte^ it.
\ We could not upoii our own principles, however, object
t<) the production of even one passage if really clear. But
Dr. Farrar takes no pains to show that it is so. While
speaking as he does about texts torn from their context, he
himself presents us with the middle of a sentence from
Scripture with both ends cut off; and while believing, on
anol^er subject, that the " differing theories of wise and holy
j:
/=
^siis^i'l^-^sx^
■■■^
"THE GOSPEL OF HOPE."
373
men'' prove as to it that « God has given no clear and de-/
cisive revelation," quotes this &s if entire unanimity prevailed
about it, as what " the church in every age has held," when
he means "some m the church," more or less as it may be.
Perhaps we must not expect over-much consistency ; but if
the Canon of Westminster apprehended aright the greatness
of the issue he is raising, and if- he believed in Scripture as
what alone could settle it, he would not be content to deal
in this light and flippant way with the authorities he adduces"
One cannot but feel that after all Scripture is very little that
foi* him, and that his main reliance is elsewhere. For haply 11
his own text went against him he would protest against
" this ignorant tyranny of isolated texts," as he has done
already.^nd vaunt thedlbre his " Christian liberty " to adopt
his own independent thought^.
But we, who claim no such liberty, nor desire it, are
bound therefore, nevertheless^ to accept his appeal to Scrip-
ture as if it were a loyal one. Let us first read the passage /
then, as it stands Jn our v^ersion, which is sufficiently cor/
rect: — J
"For Christ also hath o^ce suffered for sins, the Just for tWe
unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the
flesh, but quickened by the Spirit, by which also [He went aifd
preached to the spirits in prison, which* sometime were clisol)e-
dient] wlwn once the long-mffering of God waited in the days \f
Noah wliile the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight
souls, were saved by water" (1 Pet. iii. 18-20).
I have brack6ted the part that. Canon Farrar quotes, and
emphasized the immediate context which he omits. It ought
to speak for itself as to the suitability of the passage forliis
purpose.
First, it was by the Spirit that Christ went and preached—
not personally, as the words separated from their context
might be thought to mean. It has been sought to make
* Edw. White, who takes a similar view of this passage witlx Dr.
Farrar, reads " tlmtgh they once had heen disobedient "-^but this is
interpretation, not translation (Life in Christ, p. ,320).
■.:.\---
r
i ,
;
374 FACTS A^D TUEOmES AS TQ A FUTUIIE STATE. t;^
" the Spirit " signify Christ's human spirit ; with this neces-
sary effect, that if lie were "quickened in' His human
spirit,"* that human spirit nrust liave itself died, in order to
be quickened. On this account it has been attempted tu
substitute! "quick," or "alive," or "j»re.served alive," for
" quickenm '' ; meanings -.Avhit4i the word cannot possibly
bear. ";>rude alive by the Spirit "f can only refer to resur-
rection, and\thus it is not Christ as a disembodied spirit that
is spoken of at all. ' ^, ,
But people urge that "'lie went and preached" shows a
personal going. It has been answered that in the same way
He ^^catne and preached peace," in Eph. ii. 17, must be
(what confessedly it is not) Vl personal coming. " By the
Spirit He Went " excludes the thought entirely.
Then further ys to the " spirits in prison.-^' ' They are in
prison now (that is the force of it) as having been once dis-
obedient in the da^s of Xoah. But <lisobedient to what ?
Why, to the Spirit's preaching. It was of these that of oM '
God had said, " My Spirit shall not always strive with man.''
Plainly it was in that time of old that Christ had preached
to Ihera, and what should make it certain, without any nice
■questions of translation, is that the limit of God's striving
'with these antediluvians is: ^plainly set : — "#.]VIy Spirit shall
not always strive Avith man, for that he also is flesh : but hl^
days shall he an h.undnd. and t\i:enty years''' It is strange
that some should think that a limit put to human life, which-,
was then, and for generations afterwards, far longer. It is
the limit of the Spirit's striving ^vith that generation, at the
end of which the flood came. With them the end of the
Spirit's striving and of their life came together. And it is
just these whom Dr. Farrar and others will have it that
Christ specially singled out to preach to more than two thou-
sand years afterward, in direct contradiction of the divine
assertion that His Spirit would not strive.
* The words afe quoted thus in " Yesterday, To-day, and Forever."
t Strictly Iv jtvevMocTi, ' in (the power of) the Spirit.' The rw should
be omitt e d. '—
"the oorpel op hope/*
375
rod's striviiK'
Tho text is an unfortuiiaU} one for Dr. Fartar. It is un-
fortunate that ^o very examples to which he appeals of
probation protracted heyond the «,'ruve, sh<»ul<l be the very
examples given ns by the word of (iod itself of the precise
opposite ! And we may take his reasoning to reverse his
conclusions, and say that, " if the fate of these 4ead sinners
iroif irrevocably fixed by <Jeath, then it must be clear and
obvious that "we have no good reason to suppose that ours
is not as much as thei>. Xay^ it is scarcely reasonable to
imagine that thpy are an exception to, instead of an illustra-
tipn of)^ the universal rule.
Canon Fan :ir has a similar text,., however, in the next
chapter of the first epistle of Peter. Let us take it, too, in
whole and not hi part, and see if it will lead us to any Other
conclusion.
, *'Vor/orf/H'ii ra tt.se Iwaa the gospel preached also to thfam
that are dead] /Ji<// they mhjlit he juthjei areordiyttj to ^^}i
hi the Jfesh, but live according to God in the Spirit"
(1 Pet. iv. G).
Here Dr. F. has substituted " that irere dead " for *' that
(tre dead" without comment, evidently that we may infer
that the people ^/vz-c dead when preached to. But the pas-
sage reads literally ^' to the dead"; and we must g;ither
the rest from the context which he omits. And her^ it is
not hard to see that his mference is as wrong as his transla-
tion is. "
The apostle has been speaking of the altered conduct of
those converted from heathenism, and of how the Gentiles
around mis-judged them. " Wherehi they think it strange
that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot, speaking
evil of you; who shall give account to Him that is ready to
judge the quick and the dead." Thus shniers were judging in
their fleshly way the spiritual life that approved itself to God
as such. Christians were judged afti^the manner of men in
a fleshly way, but lived according to God in a spiritual one.
And for this — to separate them from the ranks of these mis-
judging ones , themselves the objects of God's righteous
'A
i,:
870 FA( tri A\D TIIKOUIES AS TO A PUTtrUE^jOTATE.
jUdi^'iiioiit.— ha.l the gospel boeii proachcd to thorn. So lar
all isplHiii; hiiL why " to the dead "•;* Surely hecauMo tho
apostle would hriujr in Uk; very thought Dr. Farrar rejeelH,
that death lived the coinUtio'u in which it found men. Tliesc
rigliteous ones had got tlic good of that preached gospel
which had niaile them anticipate the coming doom of sinners,
and accept the judgment of men in the flesh, rather than
(rod\s final and etertidTJone. But could tliey possibly be
'• dead " before they were preached to ? Not certainly if
the end was to be their being judged according to men in
t he flesh lor their changed lives ! The context is conclusively
Ji'ir.'linst the restorationist interpretation.*
The other texts cited will come uy more fittingly else-
wliere. Meanwhile we must look at one or two Scriptures
more in this connection, which, altltough glanced at by Dr.
Farrar, are more strqngly put by Mr. Jukes.
He thus speaks of —
"the passiige respecting the sin [' htnHphemy,' ii slfRfed boj
ugiiiust the IL)!y Ghost, which our Lord deeltires ' shall not be
forgiven, neither in tliisVoild, not in that which is, to come.'t
Fi>r this it is concluded that the punishment for this sin must be
nefor-ending. Bat does the text say so ? The whole passage is
lis follows :— • Wherefore I say unto you, all manner of sin and
■'biiisplu'uiy sliiill be forgiven unto men, but the blasphemy
against the Spirit shall not bo forgiven unto men. And whoso-
ever speuketh a word against the Son of Man it shall be forgiven
him ; but Avhosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall
not be foi-giveu him, fibither in this age, nor the coming one.'
* Edw. Wliit." (Life in Christ, p. 321) says: "They had the go^)^A
preaclied to tlicni in liades.iii order that tliey might be judged hv
Josus Christ, and judged like men in the lle.sh, by the same rule as
others who have had tlie gospel on earth, that is, by the gospel nu'ssago
itself; so that ihey should not necessarily perish under the law, hut
• may live (enter into life) according to God in the Spirit.' " He does
not see that they who receive the gospel are not "judged," and if they
were, could not escape condemnation. For men are judged not " by
the gospel," which is a dfeani of his own, but "according to their
Works." '.
tMatt. xii. 32.
"THE OOSl'KL OF HOPE."
377
ing to men in
These words, so fur from proving tlio gofieniUy received doe-
triuo, that sin not forgiven hero can never bo forgiven, distinctly
assort — first, that ail manner of sin and bliiHphemy shall be for-
rriven unto men, — Hocondly, that some sins, those namely against
tlu! Son of Man, can bo forgiven, apparently in this ago, —and
tliiidly, that other sins, against the Holy (lliost, (-aniiot bo for-
given either here or in the coming jige ; which last words surely
imply that some sins not here forgiven may bo forgiven in the
coming age, the sin or blasphemy against th(3 Holy Crliost not
being of that number. This is wliat the text asserts ; and it ex-
plains why God has so Jong withheld the g(!neraf out-^pouriugof
His promised Spirit ; for man cannot reject or speak against the
Spirit, until the Spirit comes to act uptm him. God has two
wnys of teaching men ; first, by His word, the hitter or human
form of truth, that is, the Son of Man, in which case; a man may
n joct God's call without knowing that ho is really doing h0 ; the <
etluir, in and by the Spirit, which convinces! tne heart, >^ieh
tliereforo cannot be opposed without leaving men eouscW&Jy
guilty of rejecting God. To reject this Ipt cuts man oft" ll#m
the light and life of the coming world. This sin therefore is not
forgiven ; neither in this age, nor in^the coming one. But the .
text ssiys nothing of those 'ages to come,' elsewhere re\;ealed to
us ; much less, dcjes it assert that the punishment of sin not here
forgiven is never-ending. "* "^
Dr. Farrar does not go quite so far ; he says : — f
"If alc^y he rightly rendered, as, in nearly every pjissage
where it occurs, it nuii/ be rightly rendered, by 'age,' out Lord
only says that there is one particular sin — and what sin this
is no one has ever known^ — which is so heinous as not to be par-
donable either in this (the Jewish) or the coming (the Christian)
dispensation. Nothing therefore is of necessity implied resjji'ct-
ing the world beyond the grave. But if it be, how of erwhelming
is the argument with which I am supplied ! Even/ sin and hln^-
phemy shtll he forgiven, our Lord says, — without further limita-
tion, and with no shadow of a hint that He refers to this life
only — a gloss which indee<l His words directly excludes ; every
sill and blasphemy shall bo forgiven hero or hereafti'r, except
one ! * If one sin pnly is excluded from forgiveness in that coming
* Restitution, pp. 120, 121. f Eternal Hope, Pref., pp. xl, xlii
i
l-AC'IS AMD tULuUlLS A.S To A I'lTUUi: tiTATt:.
■ I
V
I'f
t i
ago, uther .siuM cannot stuuJ «u the sunu! luvcl, jiud tin; dimucss <
btliiml tho VL'il is lit m) with ut least u gloam t»f hope* "
JVIr. Oxonhani has still another viou- :* —
" Now on this verso I observe, first, that oiu- Lord sjiys uotliiii.».
about hell ; anil secouilly, thftt what lie thjes say bears on t.'xuiu-
iuation no reseniblamu) to an assertion of the popular doctrine of "
indh\ss niisi-ry. , Our Lord d»H'lares that the're is a sin a'Minst the
Holy (rhost for which there is no atpf6iS either here or hereafter.
lie uses the Words mpfn,? ,iii,l lupMiut, (he root-jueaning of wiiieh
is 'sending away,' 'irett^uf,' rid <if.' H,. .ledaivs of this sin tlmt
it can nf^ver be got rid of ; i. e., something of the hin, its charac-
ter, its consoiinrnces, will last on adways- this is what Ho really-
says ; and is it beyond the reach even of our ])resent tuidcrstandin^'
to conceive' that the jMnal ci>nse<|uences of wi4fid sin against the
Holy ^Spirit, vi/., e. g., loss «)f capacity to know and to love tliu
truth, and Him wlio is truth, may well be irremediable eitlur
h(>re or hereafter V How great such a penalty would be, or in
what manner it would be fi-lt or received, we have no means of
knowing ; but we feel at oncis that this penalty is something
wholly diirei-eiit from whaf is commonly meant by eternal piui-
ishment ; it is eompatilthi with existence in heavcm."
The three views Ijoinuj so dissimilar, it will l)e no i^roat
marvel if S('rii>tu re be aijaiu dissimilar from them all. We
shall take them in retro«.ri'ade order, Mr. Oxenham first.
His view is that " 6-oy/<</A///;/ of the sin, its cliaracter, it.s
conse<iucnceSj" ho does not know exActly what, will last on
forever. But surely that is loose and unsatisfactory enoui^'h.
\ltpttjiii Q\u\ (x'C^oi'^ are the lOidy words for "remit" ami
'' remission," the latter also-the only word for '' forgiveness.'
The jjhrases used are, "it shall not be forgiven him," and
-*'hath never forgiveness, hut is in danger of (or sulyect to)
vXarn^X J tt.< I lime nt " (Mark iii. 29). Tliat defines it plainly
enough. *' Ilath-never ' sending away ' " would ])c insuffer-
al>le, not inendy in -sound but in sense; and if one subjeet
to eternal jud^nfent can be in heaven, heaven can scarcely
be what Scripture represents it. It AVould be no Uettcr fof
Mr . Qxenliam If we i^aad with Canon Farrar and others,
* Letter III. (a). '
ui: sTATt;.
'V«iB GOSPEL .OF IIOI'K."
379
instcail of eternal judj^iaent, " eternal sin." I cannot accept
:!io n-.-uling, Imt it is imn^itl^rial to the present (piestion.
Dr. Kanur's own reasonini^ turns upon tlu* rendering of
"till."* worM " iuu\ " tlie world to <mihu\ ' Wlietlier we read
it " aj^e "' <»r not, the " worhl to lonie " is not in Scripture
heaven or hell or hades. It is undoubtedly what the Jews
understoo<l well and looked lor, the world under Messiah,
which Christians luihapplly loss know under that title than
as the niillenniuui. It is even called (in Heb, Li. ;'») the
'' liiihitahle (earth) to come,*' the word used for "'the world"
untlcr Cajsar's rule, wlwch he decreed should he taxed
(Luke ii. 1). If not (as Dr. F. tliinks it may he) the Chris-
tian dispensation, it is yet a dispensation atfeotint; nien in
the hody, not "spirits in prison " nor the resurreetion of
judi^nient.
Con.seipiently when it is said, whosoever shall blaspheme,
it shall not be forgiven him "ithi-'r in this world or that
which is to come, it does nO^pTel' to forgiveness beyond the
gr ftve."1ffl r moan tltc same perton in this world and the world
to come, but that the sin would nofbe remitted to any oho
who comipitte<l it in either a^e. ' ^
Even Mr.' Jukes falls into the same error, but he is
bolder, and adds various suppositions of his own to it. He
H^ippoHcs that the sin against the" Son of Man Would be for-
given only in this age.*-^JIe rupposes that some sins not
forgiven here may be forgiven in the coming age. And the
ages^eyond being ^tute unnoticed, there may yet be for-
givene^ there. - Hit in trutii tlj'v reason for not jroin"-
beyond the " ago to come " is an opposite one: It h l)ccausc
beyond the millennial age is the ju<lgment and eternity, and •
all is fixe<l fort^ver. We have already examined Mr. Jukes'
theory of these ages of eternity, on which, of course, his
"view of this text is based; and need not, and shall not,
return to it again.
But a, word wo must yet say a^ to another Scripture, where
— the '* great gulf fixed " assures us of the impossibility in tlie
death state at least, of any ]).assing lro?n the flame of torment
1
i'
\ 380 FACTS AS-D TIIKOUIES A3 lO A PCTUFIK STATE.
on thf one si<le to the comfort in Abraham's bosom on the
other. .Mr. Juki'M, «)f courHo, objeias that it is a parabli', l.ui
that \\v h.ive conHidoriMl. \o doubt the fxpri'WHions heir
ar«' flLjiirativc; yH th»'y txprcss vt-ry plainly what they fi-^r
-V^^re. He also tells us that this K^oat gulf li.Yed, " thou-^lt
iThorly impas.sablc for man, i.s not so for ' Him who hath tilo
key of David, who openeth and no man shutteth, an<l shut-
tetJi and no man openeth,' who • hath the keys of death anri
hell'; and who, as* He has Himself broken the bars of death
for men, can yet 'say to the prisoner, Go forth; to them
that are in darkness, Show yourselves.' "*
There is more of the sjime kind, always confounding a
day of grace with a day of wrath and judgment, and assum-
ing that "judgment without mercy ''t shall be mercy still.
The great gulf fixed is not impassable to Christ, he says. -
But Christ is thg very One who has fixed it. He h.is
ordained that none shall pass it, and that settles it for the
<leath state at least that none shall. Aftt'r this, eternal
judgmt^nt allows no escape.
Yet Dr. Farrar will have it that the parable shows us
•' how rapidly in that condition '(\n which the rich man is
I ! ^^'*'» '" hades] a moral renovation has been wrought in a
j ' sinful and selfish soul."| II«y has'not told us how it shows
• ; this, but I suppose by the concern he manifests for his
{ v' ' iMvthren. But the motives for this the parable does not
I ' -'J'^^v', .so that it would be difficult to assign its true moral
f , significance^ The fact remains of a "great gulf fixed" '
I ., ^^ already in the intermediate state between the two cla.s.ses of
r just and uiijust,— a gulf which cannot be traversed upon
l ^''^^'^''' ''••le. "After deatli, the judgment," and the nature
^"'^ duration of that final award we haVe been for some time
' ' considering:.
^^"^ *»1J Scripture assures us of the momentous fact that
the significance of the present life is just tjiis, 4hat here and
' ; ■ ] ' " now is dccid^d^n's eteroal destiny. He is called to repent
[ * RosUluUon, p. 137.^ t James ii. 13.
t Eternal Iln;,.., Prof, xxxi., note.
ii:!'' '■ „■■-".:.■.. ■.■■.■■■■■.- ■ - . . ■ «
.F. STATE.
^ AN Simi.lST-UKS
roUATIOXISM.
381
TO- u AY, lost God -Bwear ' lu' Khali not enter into His rest'*
(Ilcb. iy. 7, 11). An«l who shall say that brief "Sm imleed It
in, the pri'seiit life may not as fully test the in<Ii\i<lual man,''
as iiMletinite ages of prolwition or ett-rnity itself? The judg-
ment after death it nui.st bo allowed is aeeonlintr to deed-i done
in the hnhj and no other. If these did not after all eharaetcr-
\iM the inan, that judgment wouhl be partial, and therefore
false. It is in vain then to ple)id for the extension of a day
of graee beyond the i)resent, wliich bring)* with it no exten-
sion of responsibility KU<rh as the day of judgment would
take notiee of; as vain as to plead that the (lelumna-^dg-
ment of one whose eorpse was ei»st out^amid the worm and
flame of the polluted valley is the type of a remediable, or
a tcqninable retribution.
r^. ^*
CIIAPTEli XXXVIII.
A-VXniIl-IST-Ki:ST0KATlONISM. — Ml!. DUXX's TUEOUY.
It is no wonder that — eoiisidering the moral argument^
that have been i)ut forth to sustain it— annihilationism f^iould
have failed to satisfy the minds of many of its a<lvocates.
It is well to note, in looking briefly at the views how to
come before us, that they arc the product of a mind inllu-
enced by speculatire considerations, anxiously seeking a
way of escape from what in the first instance was believed
to be the teaching of ►Scripture. I mean, it was not Scrip-
ture itself that raised question in the mind, nor led him who
puts them forth away from what passes current as orthodoxy""
as to these points, but certain fe^elings of Iris own which rose
up against it, and under which he sought and at last found,
as he believes, a way of escape. It is precisely in the sam^'
way that infi del i ty reject s Scripture altogether, and wo shall
have to consider it more fully at another- time. I am not by
this pronouncing upon the result at which he has arrived.
382 FACTS A5fD TnEOllIKS A>S TO A FTTTURE STATK.
I am only stating that (truo or false) this is how he got
upon the path which le<l hiin to it. .-
;, Mr. Diunrs theory i.>^ a coiniM)!!!!*] of two apparently verv
dissimilar thnig.^,aiuiiliirationisin and restorationisin. It di-
minishes the former to the least possible degree, reservIn«T it
for some ob.stlnate trtlnsgressors only. In this respect jt re
.semblca the doctrine (or o//<' of the doctrines) of the Talmud
already noticed, which in asimilar Avay cond)ines the theories.
In other respects :Mr. Dunn's system is (juite ditlerent, how-
ever, for those finally saved with him never come into
Gehenna. **
For convenienc^e and brevity we may take Mr. lllain's
representation of the views, of which he has become the
zealous advocate, lie has incorporated in the book* Avith
which he has replficed his former one, a letter by Mr. Dunn
himself, so that we shall have the doctrine also in the words
of its first teacher; The main points moreover are all that
wc have space to 4<?al with.
Mr. Blain first ogives the chief points in Mr. Dunn's
" theory " (as Mr. 13. himself calls it), as follows. We shall
look at them as they are stated : —
"1. Gpd, in all the dispensations previous to the second per-
sopji^co-ftiing of Christ; has been and is .still calling out and prc-
^paring a select pcoplb, called in both Testaments 'the church,'
vtlie 'erect,' 'the bride, the. Lamb's wife,' 'the first-f mits, ' ' fost-^^
born,' *a chosen generation,' and also 'kings and priests,' to in-
dicate that they are to be rulers and teachers in a dispensation
yet to come. It was this elect people that Chi-ist meant, when
Ho said Ho ' prayed not io)e the vorH,' and whpm Ho Called the
'little flock who should possess tho kingdom,' or to whom 'tho
Father would give tho kingdom,' meaning by th e king dom tho
■gorernment m the world to come. . .To be one of Christ's
. bride we must find the 'narrow way,' tho 'strait gate,' which
comparatively few find in these dispensations. Thus, if this
view be sustained, these texts and others like them, are no proof
' of only : a few being finaUy saved.> Others will bo saved as
subjects."
* 11(^)0 fur our Race (BufTiilo, N. V., 2ii.l od.. 1,S7.'!)
!ir>
ANNIU1L1ST-HKST0I14'M0NIS3I. 3^3
The first part of this statement is in the main true, that
those called out before the coming of the Lord are to reign
with Him during the dispensation that follows His coming.
This we have before cpnsidered. It is no " theory " but a
ScrijitureKtatemeht, midfeeiiC^d by many long before Mr
unn. '
It is uot true that this mea^hat there will be salvation
for those who die unsaved now ; nor is '* election " what
.^Ir. Blain states. But that is not our subject here.
i"2. Tlitj Jewish Uiitionwas called out to be the liejidship of
nations (.s/V) or to be what is meant by the elect church, us the
^irophccies show plainly. See Exod. xix. 5 : ' if yo AtiU obey
. , . ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people "•
for all the earth is vainG, and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of'-'
prit'Sts, an holy nation.' But this promise was conditional, and
. as they were not obedient, and finally rejected Christ as a
naUon, they became the broken off branches of Eom xi 17 and '
only the ' election ' named by Paul, or the really righteous among
them, of every age, together with the called of the Gentiles, are
finally to constitute this 'kingdom of 2>riests and kings' (9)-to -
1 ..« the bride of Christ. This is the people meant in Psa. xxii. 30,
.51. .^Mieuh v. 3 tells us how long they {'the rest.' Rom. xi. 71
arc/to be blinded, and that they are to be restored : ' Therefore
wiU ye give them up, until the time that she which travaileth has
brj)ught forth ; then the remnant of his brethren shall return
unto he children of Israel. ' Read from ver. 1-4 and comp. ver.
3 with Rom. XI. 25-27, and we see this given up remnant are to
be ^save(l. The church now travails and will, until the ' fulness
of the Gentiles is brought in,' then the ' broken off remnant ' is
'elect '»^^^*''*^'''^ ^""""^ '"^' '"'" '?^I«r«eV meaning the
Mr. Blain reads Scripture, I am compelled to say, very
carelessly indeed. There is some truth here, but more
error, as will be apparent in a moment. It is not true in
the first place that to Israel as a nation were ever given
«ven conditionally, the promises which are now ours in
Christ, nor that believers now inherit the promises which
were once theirs.- Rom. ix.4 should keep anyone from con-
founding these, as it shows that the " promises " criven tc
I
Wi
m-
384 FACTS AND TUEOUIES AS TO A FUTUllE STATE.
the nation still were theirs (although for a time in abey-
ance) after they had rejected Christ. The passage in Exod.
xix. shows that these promises had to do with an cai'(/dt/,a.H
ours with a Amye;i/y inheritance. It' is quite true- that the
two correspond more or less in their different spheres, the
earthly being the type of the heavenly, as the Jerusalem of
the future corresponds (with some essential differences) to
the New Jerusalem of the Apocalypse.* But the eartiily
and heavenly are easily recognizable and abundantly dis-
tinct. Scripture never confounds them, if interpreters have
done so ; and it is not responsible for their riiistakes.
But the last statements of Mr. Blain are (jqually careless
at the least. Where does Mic. v. speak of the restoration
of the blinded Jews? It does speak of the rejection of
Messiah, and th4t for that the nation would be given up
until the time that she which travailed had brought forth.
(I do not take that last expression as referring to the Chris-
tian church, but nefcd not contest it here : thb result is much
the same.) Then V the remnant of Ills brethren "—the
brethren of the " Judge of Israel" whom tljey had smitten
on the cheek— *'shftll return unto the children of Israel.''
Mr. Blain makes "fJie remnant" the unbelievers — " tlie
brokei|»off remnant " he calls them, while the apostle shows
us the remnant as theV" election of grace " and not broken
off. The remnant of IlU ]>rethren (remembering the Lord's
words to the Jewish iWplc, Matt. xii. 49, .50) are plainly
this bellevinr/ remnant, " Siose who do the Avill of His Father
in heaven " whom alone lie accounts such ; while " the chiK
dren of Israel " shuuld be quite evidently the nation at
large. So that it is the believers who return to the nation
of Israel, not the unbelieverV who return to the believers.
Mr. Blain may have difficklty in understanding the sen-
tenoe road in that way, but the reason is, not that it is really
difficult, but that his views arb exactly opposed td the true
meaning. This is often the apparent obscurity of Scripture,
that it does not fit with our v'\ theories " of what it should
* See ante, " Old Testl
Iment Shadows,
.j^^U^..,
AN\M II 1 Li!*T-!ti:s rouA no N IS M.'
o85
say. Its meaning is very simply thirf: during the present
unbelief of IsraolAbclievers among them are necessarily by
their very faith sepWated from the nation. In Christ there
is " neither Jew nor\ Greek." Btit Aviicn the time shall have
come for God to fulfil His ancient unforgotten promises to
the nation as such, when Israel, in travail withhcr hopesof a
progeny shall have brought forth,* then believers among
them will, of course, iind their place again in connection
with the nation. This^ will not be, as we have seen,! till
"they look upon Himw^hom they have pierced" and mourn
for having pierced Him, When " lie cometh with clouds, and
every eye shall sec Ilim '\ too.
That is, when Christ bas*takon up His people of the
present and the past, and When Ho is preparing blessings
(though through judgmenfc for the earth, then the time of
His giving Israel up will lie over; and with His return to
them, His brethren //r/;w/ork (not the individuals gone to
heaven before it) will becon^e identified with the nation as
of old.
This explains how according to Rom. xi., the *< fulness of
the Gentile's " will be come iri, and so " all Isi'ael " saved :
i. e., not the former unbelievers, but the nation as such at
the time indicated. Mr. Blain (Confounds these in a manner
not very creditable to his intelllijence, and certainly entirely
unauthorized by the text^ he has broduccd. '^* '
"3. When Christ comes per.s,,„u%, which ho thinks win bo
soon,— the church, ihe tried and puVified, Avill bo raised first
'Christ thfe first-fruits ; afterwards theV that are Christ's, at His
coming.' They will be raised immort^ .... will be associated
with Christ in judging the worid : ' thb saints shall judge the
world/ " " . - ^
As to this we have alreaV^y^lookod at Scripture ; nor do T
question its truth. The next poii^ brings out fully the dis-
tinct feature of the system, and its essential error :
"4. At Ch rist's coming.^tfid^after the resurrection of the
* Comp. Isa. IxYi. 7-12, and many other places in the prophets.^
t See ante, cht x., " The rurification anU Blessing of the Earth,"
X
.■■-*■■
h I
380 FACTS AND TUEOUIES AS TO A t'L TUUli STATE.
t
I
elect church (how soon uot told), all who have died impenitent
will be raised, and in due time Christ will be made known to
them by the elect church ; or by Christ appearing to them as
Ho did to Saul ; and the offer of life bo made to all who have
uot 'blasphemed agaiust the Holy Ghost' or 'sinned witfnlhj
after having a knowledge of the truth,' in former dispensations.
In this coming dispensation, and, in due time, light being given
the y««.s.s\vill rei)ent and accept Christ, and so bo saved ; Kut .'
with what he calls the leWn- salvation, — will not reign with
Christ, or be of the bride, 'but be 'Ihe nations ' outside of the
XcAy Jerusalem, as told of in Rev. xxi." 22-26. LikevKintf of hers, .
Ber. a:r. swms dark to ///w— says but little about it ; but decides
there will l)e a dispensation, called thrtt of ' the fulness of times,'
before Christ gives up the kingdom. . . As to the time this dis-
l)ensatiou is to last, he'is indefinite, not being guided by the one
thousand year-j of Rev. xx." ~
It is no AVonder that "not being guided" by God's ex-
press " revelation " upon the'subject, Mr. Dunn should be
in the dark. Had lie been so guided, he would have seen
that the thousand years he can m^ke nothing of, are the •
wbole duration (or nearly so) of that reign of righteousness
which precedes the eternal state, and that the resurrection
does not take place till after this, when the heavens and
. earth flee away.
But the whole idea of a rpsurrection ofthe wicked, which
is not to judgment, is the flat contradiction of Scripture, not
interpretation' at all. The Lord has expressly divided " all
that are in the graves " into these two classes raised to oppo-
site destinies : " they that have done good unto the resurrec-
tion of/{/fe, and they that have done evil unto the resurrection
of judgment:' Mr. Blain tells us " the sorrow, shame, and
self-reproach felt by Saul (of Tarsus) and tlie th^ee thou-
sand at the day of Pentecost " will be "the main, if not the
only, wailing and bitterness which the impenitent risen
dead will experience," and that " only as they will lose the
• crown,' or ' birlh -right ' blessing." A man that can make
oh. that to be the n'surrection of ju.lgmonl, such as it is de-
\ :
■■■" ■ ' -^ ' '/.■'-" ■■''
ANNIIIIUST-RESTORATIOXISM., " 387
scribed in the passages we have at large considered, it seems
really usoiess to argue with. »*" seems
This whole idt-a of i rnonft.,^^** /- .
, . ins cvci. the .emWanco of sustZin. it M, n" """/''"'
TLtt ' ':;; .f r -vo, hi™.,,; ... m/j,,,. ,^^t: :•
uytaung all, .every" a.,d"tl,o whole" as meaning
often the «ia,».v, or great majoritj-. I'ltanmg
" The term ' the Iciiigdom of Goil ' " Jr,. K »i i .,
comes an important ™°-d in this I Iry Vf. ""' ""• " '"'-
"wiH, this ide„;th„«.yi™,/e,,^< „.i::"'",f-"' ^"■'
loa,l,.th nnto W,. • ,;, ,.J,, ^,j,,„^P """•''" -'^ »"o way tl.>t
No doubt it is. Fe«- difliculties could be cxneotod f,o
wh.bearsdiree.,r:;onru:Xe„r::,^r:r ^~ ^»
orte^uZi trurout\":trr7'"'.t"f «'~
.ive.!. m satTsfaer:: ^st^tr b^t ^
creation of man seemed to be a failure
Vmere,ower::nX;h:rSteV^^^^^^
:>trird3^rtres''r' -^---itL^-
"smuch as he snee"ed»Tn" ' » '""*"",'«'"'« conqueror, in-
iixaKeofhisMaZT^ , Preventmg man's restoration to the
-cc. -itrthe°.^eptiol tfT ■ °'"''^- ""' *^ '"'"<' "—»
-c the truth, »u7^;,i:i^rc/;;:^i:— ■;? "- -
1
888
FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A PUTUREl SlATE.
r-
Now tho-ruin of man is not merely the devil's work it is
man's oicn. We have all heard how at a ctirtain ])lacc the
Lord cast out a legion of «levils with a wor.l, an.l how (he
people of the plaee, instead of weleoming the Deliverer,
prayed Him to depart. 80 it is ever wherever a soul is
• finally lost. It will not do to say it is the devil's triumph:
if it were that, ]\[r. Dunn's scheme would be no more satis-
factory than what he gave up, for the question of how many
times God has suffered defeat is a very minor thing coni-
jr pared with the question, Ao<« could lie sufcr defait at all /
If a hundred souls lost were Satan's victorv, in these Go-l
would be a hundred times defeated ! If that be possible, a
million or a billion such might be.
, ^ We do not believe in Satan's triumph in even one smglf
instance. He has been permitted to gain a temporary ad-
vantage, and by it a worse and utter defeat at last. Hell /.
not his " work,'' hut hisjudjment, aud7<e does not " overcome
when he is judged." .
But I agree with Mr. Dunu that the settlement of the
question of the existence of evil by mere physical annihlhi-
tion would be a mere riddance by power of what might be
well thought could not be got rid of in any other way.
But he continues :—
"Further— and this seems equally impossible-^the scheme
represents God ns allowing hunOi-eds of milhons to come into ex-
istence evei-y thirty years, under conditions that all but conqjel
their utter misery and et( rnal ruin after u brief, painful, and appa-
rently unmeaning earthly existence. " '
But neither can this be a true representation of the matter.
We arc as sure as ^Ir. Dunn is, that God would never pun-
ish for eternity what was the fruit more of ignorance and
weakness amid the pressure of circumstances too great to
be resisted by human strength. If that is the true state of
the case, men, or a mass of them, would be more the objects
of pity than of blame. And He who is infinite in pity, and
is slow to judgment, because He delighteth in mercy, could
not overlook the essential diflFerence. God will not damn
'^■.r-
"VV.
en one sinrjlf'
AK NIUILIST-KESTORATIONISM.
389
for ignoranoo, for weakness, for inability to resist when cir-
cumstances were too strong, but for wilfulness and obstinacy
in wickedness al4ne. So Scripture represents it. It repre- C
scnts men perishing, n«.t as destroyed of Satan, or of adverse
Qverpowenng foi^ce of any, kind, but as ^/-destroyed ; and
whatever be the kiystery of this, and no one can pretend a
competence to explain the depths of God's providential
government of the world, we niay safely leavb it to Hihi
Nvho will in the eU vindicate the wisdom and goodness of
Ills ways; and "overcome when He is judged," not by
superior power hni by truth and right.
Bat by these speculations Mr. Dunn was influenced in
h.s i,ursu.t of som^, fresh light that was to clear up the
mystery. He says —
"I felt tlmt I hui not yet reached the" whole truth. . . t
.ould not fee sutisfie I that I had so far rid myself of hereditary
prejudice, uud a .sinful fear of consequences, as to have estabUshed
■mthmg m Imrmony kvith the revealed doctrine that Christ was
^10 Saviour 'of the ^rld.' the Second Adam, and as such the "
Kodeemer of the race ihat had fallen in the fir.st*."
Universalism had already, that is, got hold of him, but tt
lus difficulty was to r^uike Scripture agree with it. He was
already steering his ^ourse towards a definite point, bent
• upon Bndmg what he had decided must be there before he
found it, and already was so far under the delusion of it as
to be confounding the potential and the actual, what the
w.ll of God 18 for every man, witli the result in which man's
contrary will meets Eis: " How often would I.have gath-
ered thy children t^fether, even as a hen gather^th her .
chickens under her %1ng, W y« ^,0.././ ,,^,. Behold, your
house IS left unto.you desolate ! " .
^«M^-^BunnAvontU« for many long years,'' struggling
to have things as he tl ought they ought to be.
rrl l°r 'Tf ^'" "T ^'' ' '^ "-^^"^"^^ the words of the
■Fophets and began, ^r the first time, to listen with purged
ear to the ^chlspermjs "^the emphasis upon the word is
'^■';
fit
■■'.■:
; ' 1-
li' •?
I:
f'liJ
890 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A riTTURE STATE.
"the wJmpci'itujA, so to Hpoak, of • Imly men of ohl wlio spuko us
they woro moved by tljo Holy Ghost, 'uuil who so often iincon-
Hciously jultlressetl thcmHolves to tho.s(» on wlioiu tlio hitter diiys
of the World should come. I f^uud in tlu-m much more than
I had expected which seemed to bear on the tiltimato purposes
of God, in relation not to the Jew only, but also to the Gentil(! ;
much that si>oke of restoration in connection with resurrection.
The first passage I noticed as apparently throwing light upon
repeated declarations that a period shall como when truth ftnd
righteousness will bo universal, was that remarkable portion of
Isaiah (xxv. 7, 8) in which the i)rophet declares that the re-
moval of the 'veil which is spread overall nations' will take
pLico at the time when God shall 'swallow up death in victory,"
and wluni He sliall ' wipe away tears from all faces ' —a passaj^c
which is distinctly applied by the apostle Paiir to the resurrection,
and partially by John to the happiness of the redeemed."
These are what Mr. Dunn calls "whispers," so that I
suppose we are not to expect in them very distinct utter-
ances ol" what lie contends for. It is certain tliey are not
very distinct. For on the face of what Paul says, he is
speakini^ of the resurrection of "those that are Christ's, at
His coming," and of no others. If otherwise, then when lie
speaks of their being raised " in incorruption," " in power."
" in glory " — the wicked too are raised in this way, and of*
course the question is eternally settled for all of them, apnrt
from all question of Christ being offered to them atier-
wards. '
We liave always believed too that the " veil spread X)ver
all nations" had to do only with the nations alive on earth
when Christ came, and had nothing to do with their resur-
rection ; and that " God wiping jiway all tears from their
eyes "might be applied to the happiness of the redeeme<l
without sliowing that the wicked dead are among the re-
deemed. Mr. D. goes on —
" A second, found in the same prophecy, was expressed in
these words : ' In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt
and As.syria, even a blessing in the midst of the land ; whom the
Lord of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed l)e Egypt my poonle,
and Aiwyria, the work of my hands, nnd Israel mine inheritance,'
^:VA
Mi£m
K.
ANNinir.isT-iiEsToiHTioNisa. 391
A Mm/appmrod iu EzokicI, wUcro tho pro,,h„t ,po»ks of Sodom
«m her daugh „r» a« returning • to Ihoir (orme, c»tato, ■ and ^^
to brad I ,v,ll pvo tl,„m ,o thoo for daugl.tcn,, hut ^ot by I fy
coveua, t tzek. xv, M-«l). A/„„rt/, ™» found in J.rcL f
I mil bn..B ag,u„ tho captivity of Moul, in the lattor day ^ » {
further. -I ml l,r.„g again tho captivity of tho clnUten "f
Ammon «uth tho Lord' (Jer. xlvui. 47 ; xlix. 6). Thoro arc
many other kmJred text,, but the,o, referring t. tho iZZ
founda fulhlment or that, they „.„ do ,o under tho pL rii^
K>u„«t,on. B'B""lmga,«stateI,rael«in.ilardeckratio„.,al.„„nd
Take only one by Ho»ca (xiii. U-U) : ■ O We], thou ha„t dt
»t oyed thyself, but ,u me i., thy help. / .„■„ „„,,„,„ ,,„„ ' ™
/,«/,»,«,■ <rt„^„,„,, I, vill redeem them from death"; O dfaZ
I w,U be thy p a^,e,, O grave, I wiU bo thy dctructio,^ ; roping
m,ulc good. To mo U> seemed utterly impossible to attach an*
nfonal meann.g to prediction, Uko these, whether rcX-T
GentUeor to Jew, which did not directly c™.,,,„&, the ™p^
,.t,on that tho persons spoken of were to bo annihih.ted '^o
Insertion made by MatthewHenry and other,, that in such m !
»gesden„„cmtu,ns arc applied <« tho natuml Israel, andpTon^is
o the spmtual Isr,.el, appeared to mc, and stUl appears, nZZ
les.. Hum a complete changing of the prophecy." ^
And to me al.,o. Nevertheles, Mr. Dunn has himself
m,ssed the meaning. The above passa.^-es are evidently tte
whole strong, , of his position, as apart from ordinary restc!
nowTr of ^"^"■y.''"™ ™»'le. had he not been under the
L He ''T"r''"""''^' ""^^ "'■•^^'ly '•^■'''ly owned to
us. ^He conioundH, as do a lu,JL,umber of sjJilled " Ad-
wUh2-'Tr' ""' '■'"'*■"" -BtorationS naUo,^
with mdmoaat resurrection. '
Yet in th.it diligent CYan.ination of tho prophets wh'ich
l>" '■.■..! for s„ lon.g a time been .-arrying o,, he nmst hive
' '"'" '!).»''""■« the resurrection "f dry bones is expressly
t».
liiiif..'
>■ i
r-'
m '
392 FACTS AND TUKUUIKS Aft TO A FUTUUK STATK.
interpreted in this way. " Then ho said unto mo, Son of
man, those bones are the whole house of Israel. Behold,
they say, our bones are dried, and our hope is lost; wo aic
cut off for our parts. Therefore ])roj)lK'Hy, mid say unto
them. Thus saith the Lord God, I>ehold, () my pi'oplc, Hvill
open your graves, and eau.so you to conn- up out of youi
graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. And ye shall
know that I am the Lord, when Thave o|H'ui>d your graves.
O my people, and brought you up out of your graves, auil
shall put .my Spirit in you, and ye shall live; and I shall
place you in your owji land."
If Mr.. Dunn wanted a passage to expre.ss his views, he
could scarcely find one more suitable cwvy way than thiv
One might have imagined it the very o»ie which had iu:
nished him with his idea. Here is ro!<urrection, and conver-
sion after resurrection, quite according to his thought. Yet
he has not ventured to produce this passage in evi(ience,.au.l j
■ it is clearly inapplicable as evidence. It is a figure^ of
national revival simply, such an one as the chosen peopit
are yet to know. People literally dead as iii.lividuals would
not^ be represented as saying^' Our bones are dried," etc.,
while they might well bewaj^ their national deatU .so. Tlii> "
way of speaking is not uncommon in the prophets, and 1
have no doubt that^aji-<*xample of it is ioiuid even in Di^n.
xii. 2, where literal resurrection is more g()nerally believed
to be in question, but where the contradiction to any view
of literal resurrection is absolutely prohibitory to the
thought. It is not a general resurrection (a thing moreover
found nowhere else in Scripture), for it would not in that
case be ''Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth.'
"Nlowever numerous the " many," they cannot be all the dead.
Again, it' is not the first resurrection, for some awake "to
shame and everlasting contempt." Nor ia^ it the resurrec-
tion ofjudgmenVli^r the n;a?on that others awake " to ever-
lasting life." And the rendering some would propose,
"these (who k\fake) to everlasting life; but those (who ^
continue, asleep) are for shame and everlasting contempt,'*
AXXnilLisT-UKSTOUATlOKiaM.
is an iimdinissilile re/iJoplinr t« ,, »
«.l. .1... ,.a...,al'. ,V ,^J,-^."- '""■n'-."-.! i...«,o,.r.Iu„„„
imt.onul revnal ol" Israel thoro will bu 11,^0.'.. I
It will not 1,0 l.lossi.,.. to ^11 hn, '-a ^'''^^ "^ '*"'"*'•
aMcrtoa as U> Israel in the stron.j; t..!; '" """^ ^^^^^
Again ,n Lsa. xwi. i:,-ir,, ,, ,. have a similar figure • "Thou
hast uicieaseJ the nation O I m-.l Ti i • "
nation : Thou .t.t .^lorlfiei T. i '""'' '""''"^^^ ^^«
ail the ends ol the e-iiili T .... i • . . . . "°'**
uiuiccaith. i^<>r«l, nitroubethevhave visif^J
lliee, they jM.urcl out a prayer when Tl.v l ^ ^
•'I'on then.. . . Thy <lea. nh- II I v ^ ''>^/'''f ^^'»'»S was
they shall arise." ^ ' '" * ^^^ ^^'*^ body,
up, and wc shall live i„ Hi, si,,,,, ■, ''"^ "" *'" '<"^ <«
.t, it clashes with ma„y .Scriptur^ And thn """"'
applies to the restcatio. Ld tvitl o^ or" "'""''
w icrc the imaw nC .., .• •■.""" "' "thef nations,
Moaband aZ;;!— ;;™ ■; ""' ""-ve. used'
revive, whether y,; aJZT.ryTtt"^ undoubtedly to
""^"e .news w^ean and w?;,l:^:.Stir.^
I;
:f
in.
PI
I, 1
; J'
nW
J)9i PA(TH ASfL) TyPOHIKS AS TO A FUTinii: HTATE.
^.
will liriii|{ Ibrtii in HiM own tiiiut lUe tribcH of KphralriL
now HO vainly bcin<>; HcarduMt lor. On thu olhor imm
Kdoni :ui«l Huhylon lio unilt>r irrcvcrHilih! doom. In all tli
liioru Ih no ilitlioulty with (xo*!; und even uh tu 8odom,yK-«i
have no proof of the race being ntterly extinguiNhed wIumi
judgment fell upon the guilty city. TIiuh there is no im-
possibility in restoration, without bringing up from the grave
the people dentroyed then. In KU[>poHing the latter, Mr.
Dunn has been listening to the reasonings of his own mind,
and not to (he " whispt rings" of the prophet.s.
lli.s further te.vts are 'M^y those appealed (o by llni-
versaliMts of every elass. I'atH being '• more tolyrablo for
Sonlom in the <lay of judgment " than for Capernaum, he
, found it ditHeult to reeoncile M ith the annihilation of either.
lie quotes the Lord's words, " I, if I be litled up from the
earth, will draw alt uuji unto me, ' which will be <puto true
'^ of that future condition of thy earth, when the "prince of
^^liis world shall" (according to what He fiiyn in immediate
connection with this) "beca.st out'" (John ^^kjHi'^'^)) hut
has no reference to those dvhig in their tiinsi(|Byiht£i^rs to
what Christ also says, whefP'' He bids thei|tiUHHSj|^//^'//-
heaiooih/ FnUier in forgiving their enemies,^^WorTf tinu'
(only, but i'rom the heart, and therefore forever; not for
, j^^^lu oflences only, but ibr oil; not ' seven times ' merely,
twpfcife^tj^tinies seven ' : " wo^ds w hich he misquotes and
'"^'^PBS^^^i^'^*'^"**^'^*^^^^^'^^^"'^ ^^ ^"*'^' * princij)le there
^^iP^HI^^r ^y ^CiKi^^"^^'"^ ' ^^ ^'^ ^^^ any.*^
, B^^^Ktfs also l^ufs words : '' As by one man's dis-
obetlience tJie tiuoiy were made sinners, so by the obedience
ot one shall Mc uia.ty be made righteous," where he accu-
rately enough puts " tlm many" instead of '^ many'.' ; but in-
accurately retains" one " instead of " Ute one." It is plain
that that indeed spoils the argument lie would draw from
this: for if" the many," in that definite way, must mean the
same people in each case, then " the one," by the same rule,
must mean the same particular one, which we know it does
not
• ,^-
5™gra»
IjB TI^tT.
ANNiniLLST-RKaTOKATlONLSM.
' »oMi„arily annlv tl,„ ,,,„ , ''""'<'' '« " «ro«l.an " a. we
into "the in„.,y ,;f , ;!v!' ' "f ."'.•''T'' '"" "*" '"'
viii. Mu.«, „:;;: ::: .r:,;n;;"^^r'«"' "■ «'-y (•»-.."•
Knot "iM r,.|ati.,„ .., man . ™ k" l r;""" •'■''r^''^
"*, nt IS a captive not by any choice of his own " (C.r i.
IS alfts, a willin.r rai.tivc.) • if i Af m n , - ^'""^ **'
-inngi, ,„u l,y .eason of r.i. ^l^',! ' ~; ,' ""»
same i/i /lo/tfi." «'"'.)< ctofl the^
o,nZ.: '^I""""' '" '■•"•" "■"'l'""- lH-arin» •• with;
^■4ck to th. only ,", 1 !f ; ■?. -r "';:' ^" "^""^ ^ «'«"'
tu/T I the masses of mankind ? ' The p,Lc.„
fa. hfi. say,ng, n„,l worthy of all acceptation. Al?6 t^it
Here was 'M. ! , , , ^^'"^^' «"mraand and teach.'
U.ve7ZT ''"'""'"'" '"^™ ">"• ""-l "-at it is rather be-
, a^cu lo DC nqu, m the present time, and '
■«■ — —
/
1 a
«■
tS>
'?-■
\l' ■-
(
V;- 1"" 0''' ' ■ -
u,..
/"/V
,?^-C..^ ,N
f)
I \
I K
■fv
V '
ii;.
396
rA.CTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
not beyond the grave. Indeed if Christ be >/ow " the
Saviour of all men," as in a sense He is, it does not follow
that He will be that finally for such as now reject Him, and
it is often threatened that He will not be. But then Mr.
Dunn's proof is nowhere.
He goes op to connect this with what he presently found
as to the kingdom of God, and here (as We have noticed)
he presents much that is really Scriptural. But even here
he is, as natural, too much engrossed with one aspect of
future blessedness in which every other is merged. I may
not pause to point out where he fails, however. It iif^uitc
true on the other hand that, the saints saved now are "to
'.sit on thrones'; to 'judge others '; to * reign oh the earth';
to be * priests ' as well as ' kings ' ; to rule .some 'Mith a rod
of iron.' " No part of this is new to believers in the Lord's
pre-|nillennial advent. It seems to have been new to^Mr.
Dunn; and so to have encouraged him to believe that hero
he had found what he wanted for the perfecting of his idear
"May it no£ then," this- kingdom, he asks him'selllSl'be the
- appointed .^pncy for bringing about the firial triumph of
the Redeemer by placing the myriads who here live and die
without light, without training, T might almost say without
probation, under perfect govorjiment and infallible teach-
ing ? " He notices then that there are ' nations " represented
as outside the New Jerusalem, '"who are said to be in pro-
cess of healing by the leaves of a mystic tree, growing by
the pure ' river of water of life ' that proceeds ' out of^the
throne of God and of the Lamb;'" and these « nations"
he assumes to include, of course, those of whom his thoughts
are full, the unsaved dead of alleges and generations.
This closes the argument of his letter, in which it is in-
teresting and sad to trace how the prepossession with one
fixed thought led an intelligent man to find in Sf-ripture just
that thought which prepossessed him. It is tot^hlng too,
and a matter of hopefulness, to note how doubtfully l^e has
yet to speak. « That mnch is pot said regarding this possir
ble, or rather probable, field of future usefulness,^' for the
! STATE.
be now " the
oes not follow
eject Him, and
But then Mr.
►resently found
have noticed)
[3ut even here
one aspect of
jrged. I may
■r. It ii?" quiff
now are "to
oh the earth';
«c' ' with a rod
I in the Lord's
a new to^ Mr.
ievethat here
ig of his idear
nselljgl'be the
il triumph of
■e live and die
t say without
fallible teaeh-
" represented
to be in pro-
e, growing by
s ' out of the
?se " nations "
I his thoughts
•ations.
<^hich it is in-
iion with one
^fripturejust
:ou(hing too,
tfully he has
ng this possir
ess,"' for the
[• '^E RKSTITUTIOX OF ALL THINGS." 397
heirs Of thiskiAgdom,hesays, ''need not ekcito our wonder "
The thmgshe speaks of are, at the most, " probable." ^^
,/ the, are no, true ? There is no '' full assurance of flh^»
or "of understanding" hero With \U rt • . .
"Mr. Dunn's tkeor^^ And thrafto, ^^"•°' *«^' ^^ i«
* 1 1. , •'^ "^ alter \-ears and vears nf
study, a hope that ,na,j make ashamed is the «oIe reLT ■
The false pnneiple of this interpretation of sjpt" e ha,
'or::i™t^"^S.1:rvt^rh"^r^^
tHe. out. With Hs''^:d:;irt,fe^irh™^^^^^^^^
^JiW"
CHAPTER XXXIX
"THE BESTITUTION OF ALL THIXGS.'^MR. ^tJITES. ' ;
This Scriptural expression is the titln Air t i \
o • . . propose now to take uri and nnrsno i.,i.u
Scripture th? thread' of its arm,ment """ P"^"'^ .^'th '
already looked at, and of coase™Tnol',„„f"f ^- ^^'^
there i. much needed yet to e:m;^,:Ltr':l:y''''''''- ""'
its "testimony," TW, XHxu^ .'.' ''"'°"'' ^^^■''™ "P™
contradictory Not on'lv U th^ ' ,*'''"'" "" «^'' «%■<'
with its good news for every one- \TZ2 1 ""^^^
direct statements as to the rlX'of tie? J- '.'■''' ""^
»;ght a.e apparently irrcooncllaMer H Tddlr, fi^?"' •
all the texts, or- some of those whieh .1.1 ^ ^* °*
tahment, and owns as to them " Wo J ,^ n "*'""" P"""
stronge r," but h e add s :- ^"'^''^ """''t "°t well b. ^
398
FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
1 1'' i;
"The difflcaltyis that aU this is but one side of Scriptaw
FoMnstance, there are first the wunis of God Himself, repeated
agajn and again by those same apostles whom I have ja t^t^d
that -m Abraham's ,eed all the kindreds „f the earth shTbe
blessed ;• words which St. Peter expounds to molT hit ^c^
shaU be a resftubon of aU things, ' addmg that • God hath spoken
of Uus by tCe mouth of all His holy prophets sinee the wi d
began.'"
Let us look a moment at these texts ere wo pa.,s on, and
ask ourselves how far they conflict oven seemingly with
e emal pun.shment Few wouhl imagine j^rhaps that the
blessmg m Abraham's seed to all kindred., „f the oartl. did
that And by the very fact that all the prophets have
spoken of the " restitution of alL things," it'is plainly no
■what Mr. Jukes would imply. Moreover this " restitution '•
« of (A».,y., not persons, and (according to what we have
seen to be the scope of that Old Testament to which of
course the apostle refers), it is upon earlk,-a„,l nowhere
else. Restitution of all (the) thihgs of which the prophets
have spoken" is the true force of the word,- anTnot a
restitution of the universe, as .Mr. Jukes seems to imagine
''St. Paul further declares," he gocsU to.say, '■ this wondrous
■mysW of God's will, that He hath purp^osed in b£2S
^ordmg to His good plea.,„re, to rehead and reconciled o
ttmself m and by Christ, all things, whether they be thing^^ n
heaven that .s, the spirit world, where the eonflk with IC
yet js.,.or thihgs on earth,' that is, this outward worM, ^^
death now reigns, and where even God's elect are by natut
children of wrath, even as other men." j »rare
But this goes no further than heaven and earth, and does
not say one_word about Allen^ngels or lost men; they will
be outside the scene here spoken of Heavenly thin^ as
well ^earthly are said in Scripture to be "purchi^d,"
J:!52?£!!?^i:::i!^!f^fil>mfi^ been L
'WO, as ,f to get nd of this ^V, „nrt imerpret«l a. if It we re , ) ,. —
STATE.
) of Scripture,
ierent doctrine,
aiself, repeated
vo just quoted,
etirth shall be
can that there
od hath spoken
inco the world
pass on, and ''- -'-^l
sraingly with
laps that the
the eartii did
rophets have
s plainly not
* restitution "
hat we have
to which, of
md nowhere
the prophets
,* and not a
^o imagine.
-lys wondrous
in Himself
!concile unto
be things iu
t with Satan
world, where
re by nature
;h, and does
i; they will
y things as
purchased,"
ing been in
'-o? (Acts Hi.
e sentence in
-e-^. —
"TnEUESTITUTIONOF ALLTlilNOS." 399
^"ll^T^ '' '"''• ^ -"^P--onofthe passages will
shou that they cannot "apply to those to who.u mT]!^
would apply them. In Hob. ix. i>l-.>.i n.. Z , ^
the vesspk i^f thr. . • " ' ^"^ ia»>«"iacle and
lut vesseib ot the sanctuarv SDrinll^.,! ,t,*i *i ii ,
which the apostle internro^ 'f /. 7 ^^'"^ ^^"''^^^ ^"^1
pos«e.,io»to bcredeemea. And i . C.^ 1, ■ o in'T
.,way,M%.v are spoken of, not ,,e™, ';,'''''' "'""'
eUed bein« „.,„e!, .,„.,, I,', .^o';' , ;:^;r""LT''•
to reconcile all M,„,., u„to Himself- l.v ?• i ' ^ "'
*e, .e;tl,in,. „,. ea'nl, o- >l::::l: ^'' '^^^'..-'-^J
a.t,„„ to this_",v„„ ,,„„, „„ reconcilca- T„ ~ ,"
these passages is hell named or by anHos Lr, T". f
'^Fmfiu... "1 r "^ •'"> possibility included.
now groans »,„uT„l„vi,S7i::T""' i"" "'"'*'"''■ '■''-''
into the glories u^^y oi u!^ ^iz"::^^::^?^ '" "'"■"'■°"
But this we have seen to ho f J... i^
• even man; and the dc "vera 1 ","'; "''"'"■■"'■ ''""' ""'
"the redemption ofile bo ■" "t H 't"" ■■" "'" "'"« "^
thousan-d yL betbre^he j iml ':i::^;-''r«-.»
It .s a mere strain of the "all ereatio, " , "'"'"« <""^-
read it with the context. Again- " '"'P»''s,ble if we
"In another place he deol'iro« fl.of r< i
l..gt).e worM'nnto Him.^lf • O'^'^^m Christ reconeU-
True but they refused and rejected if ,n1
■ng the " n,inistry of reconciliat X'!' ^11^:^;'''''-
s.on, in His absence, has been perpetuated ^"^''^ --
tlic devil ;•••_ /^^""""""''"Poworof death, that is,
oftitr;:::'!^,- :s.^«'---—h„ th^ib fear"'-
fi,^fl . 7 f ^"^*»eir lifetime subject to bondir-P '' Tf •
*^e^«rsMeatha.ristI^
-J. J,
W:
IFi/
'&:
400
FACTS AND THKORIKS AS TO A FUTURE STATB.
• ght through he gospel "( o Tim. i. 10). For whom v
l^or those who .lo n<.t receive, the gos,H.| "^ A,„l )JZ '
' j«„*i ' '-'"Airtt , lu.ii US sin hath reioTied iinf/>
sm aboanded, gmee did „,„el, more „b,„„,d • ".^ ' "' ^^"^
^ce and of the git of nghteou»nes8," and by implication
as oerta»ly^ .A.,. ,„/,„ <fo „„, The „istakl crmonly
funding of grace a matter of krcaM, instead of /iei,M
But from tho-nature of the case, if it were a question of the
.umber reached, there could be no .--.-abounding of gra^
fell «"&" "','""' ""-'"'"='"" ""-ShChrist'tran
atall. But ho real matter is one of depth and height and
»ot of breadth, as I have said. 0,.e offeiee brings condem
nation; the free gift isof,„„„^„ftfe„eos to justified ion T
eLs b^fr ''"' ■^"^""'' ''^■'™ righteousness not /^
reign but they ™y« i„ uj;, ^s to number, it is on each
side "the one- and "the many: the first Adam ^d the
many connected with bin,, ,he •• last Adam " and trianv
connected ,vith him, with a difterence only i„ the 18th veS
where the tendency ",«««?, »„,„«„" f, i„ contrast wTh
^^eaotuaUssnem^he 19th.t > contrast with
* Rom. V. li-*^! ~~~~ ^ ■ ■■
"TIIK Ri:STITUTIOX OF ALL Till XOS." 401
Mr. Jukes got'8 on : —
•' To auc.tlu.r chmch lu- .tute. tho'same doctriuo, ilutt ' aH in
. A.Um all dus ovoM s.. in Clirust .sluill all 1.., mad.,, ulivr ' • and
timt ' the end ' ,sl,all not co.ue ' till all are subject 1„ Him,' th.t .^
'God may be ' not all in scmo but ' ;dl in all ; for Ho must ivigu
till He hath p,it all onourios nn.lor His feet ; the last enemy that
slmll be destroyed is death.'"*
This save the fn-st passa^re, we have already had before
us. Throughout the chapter the resurrection spoken of is
the " resurrection of the just, ' and it is only that, or those
t!.at are " in Christ." As all these die in Adam, they all are
^ made alive m Christ : the " all • are defined bv the eonnec-
tiou with the previous verses to be'all " those that .s/.v;>,'and
o whom Christ '' is tiie first-fruits. • They are the ju^ only.
It 1^ defaned by the connection with tlie verses followincr to
be all - those that are Christ "s " : «' Christ the first-thms •
afterward they that are Christ's at His comin^r." Xor does
the apostle say one word about the wicked at^all
Again Christ rei.^ns till He pufs all enemies under His
Wh ?!, -^''"^ ''''"" '^ *''''"*^' '' ^^'^ -"''y ^n^V^^'^'o to this.
When this IS accomplished He gives up the kingdom, and
there are still enemies, though « under His feet." God can
not be all in all then, in the sense Mr. Jukes would assume.
Ihe connection in the, text, moreover, .loes not .rive his
bought at all. For if Christs enemies 'had bec;m: i^ 'end
before He gave up the kingdom, ILs giving if. np .oouU not
make God all in their luarts cunj ,nore thai Ure. But i
« the gurmg up of the kingdom that makes God " all in all "
Evidently then the sense is that He wUl be in recognized
and 2my>icf/ice^^ supremacy everywhere.
But he goes on: —
W,f? ''" T- "8™. 'Bleesed be tho God and Father o£ o„r
Lord Jea,« Ctat, who hath ble»«l „, with all Hj.iritual blesxin",
imnessof times He might gather together in oueaU tilings iu
* 1 Cor. XV. 22-28.
■"I
402
\
FACTS AND THE0B1E8 AS TO A PUTtJRE STATE.
'1
I^J. bo«. which are in heaven and which are on earth, even
— ■ *
This k a text Mr. Jukes has already onde given who
rauslatca" gather together io one » as " rehta,!." 1 "ee;
.amly puts .t* anew connection, by dropping six v^™ ,
H"rn^tVrS"il'™'^'A'^- ^
L^lV^n ?« °™'^ '°"'^""''"'" """""^ that Josus Christ it
both ±a a„"f "^ "' ,*^. ""> ^''"''' ' " '" «° tWs end Chri
ii^^^:a'iw^:^'^"'^'' "■•" =" '^^'" "f f-'" fcoth ^
Cllfst'? """ ''k' "'■""""'y '""'"™'* f-O'' "^'^e- For
Chnst s enemies be.ng put under His feet imphes thM they
own H,m Wd; and that they find Him, o/loolc to Him a^
haviour, 18 only said by^r. Jukes. • '
'■ He further declares tljat ' for thi.5 <mVo l,„ ..,«■ .
W' anlTV^r .r ''^"««^ for all, to be testified inX
Irn.; lf^ '^' "^'^ H ^"'^ ^^"^^'^'i-d ^1 in unbelief tS
. He mi«ht have mercy ubon all.' "| '^""fuei, mat
Mr^jXI?"; 'r"" ""'" '"''' ^^ ''»™ ="«» looked at.
Mr. Jukes unites thep together after his own fashion omit
tmg or supplementing as suits his argument. Th^'inTh .
befor and suffer reproaeh, because we trust in the livin"
God^_etcvrords_,v^showus the connection with God
' * Eph. i. 3-10. . ' . ~ ' — ■ ■
t " Things " is not expressed here in Ufa Greek It r«a^a « r ,
enly,,earthly. and infernal [beinasj " ^ColT^.^T''^^'"''"'
isrrfa-arVror. I «'n»sj. m tol.i. 20 on the contrary it
tPhil. ii. 10.11; Rom. xiv. 9. '^
H Tim/iv. 10: ii. !_/;
Rom.
xi. 32.
-N :- —
,'*• ;
/'THE BJiSTITOIlON OF ALL THINGS."
K^3
" K* f f T' ■ ■ ""'"'"'''"y '"'''">«« "'ho believe, so that
m the facf of per,ee»tio„, etc., he could labor. aJ„ ht
r :;: if "■"^f ™S»- - -on «, prayerl- should bflde
^'L ^ J"'™ '™'"''^ «™ ™r.,«, apart and in
exhort therefore, that, first of all, suppl cation p™;er,
mtercessJ>ns, and giving of thanks be made for all me7 f";
kmgs an, for all that are in authority, ,/,„, „„ „, " t; j°
puaa,uir^aceub/^Pfei„ all go^li,,,, and honesty for hi
o7 tht tr,:r;r thriiTGrd ™T '" t'<"-''«'^«''
.ween Uod »d men,''i: ^ cS rel::HSt: Hit
self a ransom for all to h^ to..f:fl i • j . ^ ™'
,.ho whoi. passai" ^-^^r- rii^M^rs; i™r
,ot nadtetimeye,! Income; whereas the apostle's words
wh.ch arj hterally " .ho gave Himself a XZ {Tm
bis b"a°Th "^ "^^ "'"^'" ''^ - °^-» -nvtj
h.s but k the sentence that follows the very opposite
whereon o I am ordained a preacher." etc. ^^ '
As for the last text quoted, it is an entirely differed on,>
now not helved in yojX.-JZZXtZ:^
that they aU may be objects of mercy t For r!jTl\
""tt" '"\ «"« "P together) air 7unbfiref ttt H
m^t have niercy upon all." The Jews refu „g TL^t
wh.chnook «p Gentiles, lost all claim upon G„5 and be
mercy. But thus God coujd show mercy to them «.hen it
was demonstrated to be merely that. tL mercy I to h'
-1^
ro uocprvpioy naipoiS iSiois.
VT03.,
■cvr.i d^"' — '"^^O- ^^ v,.re,. iu.^ Wa^i
-*.
si
li:;
In-'
1 -11
404 FACTS AND TIIKOKIES AS T.» A FUTLliE STATE.
nation as such. The words have m)t lung to do with uniyer.
sal restoration. » *
It ^^'- •^"'^^^ t"''"'' no^^ from Faul's testimony to John's •-,
tl .t ' th. Fu iH.r s..„t the S.m to he the Saviour of the world ' '•
for God sent not Ih.s Sou into tho vorld to .un.h.mu the world'
but that the world through Him might l)o .savvd. ' "
But why not go on to the ne.vt verse, which assures us
of how alone this could be realized : " he that beiieveth on
Uim IS not condemned ; but he that beiieveth not is con
demned already because he hath not believed on the name of
the only begotten Soil of God/-*
" Further he teaches that tlu- only begotten Son 'is the pro
pitiation not for our sins only, In.t for the siu.s of the whole
wor a ; that He • is the La.n!, of G-.l whieh taketh away the sin
of the worid, and ' was revealed for this very purpose, that He
might destroy the works of the d.vi) ' ; aUd thaVas a result
there shall be no more deatli, nor scrrow. nor pain, because ali
things arc- made new, and the former things arypussed away.' "f
11 ^^''''^ ^''»»'" various and <li,seonnccted texts are brou<rht
together. No one. I/should trust, that believes in Chdst
-doubts His boing the world's Saviour, but what is more than
doubted IS II.s being the actual salvation of those who refuse
Him And if Flis being a 'propitiation forj the whole
world, means that all will l,e saved by it, how is this toV
reconciled with the fact that for some there "remainethno
more sacriHee fi5r sins"? Again Christ's taking aw^iy the
sm of the worn will yet l,e displayed, as Mr. Jukes ricrhtly
foresees,' when in the new earth it and all its consequence'
death, sorrow and pain, are passed awav forever. But Jthat
fis stnetly in the new heavens and earth, wherein dwelleth
righteousness, and :Mr. Jukes cannot make thjlt lan-ua-e
apply to hell. \ '^ '='
^ While as to the devil's works, as f hye befbr^said, they
*Johniii. 17, T^. " ' ""- — -
Rel.\'l3"'' '^ ^"'" ' ''" ''''•'"' ''* ^^" ^^'- '-'-'-^^ «««
t " TI.0 sins of," .,,o„!,l l,o omitfo,!. mv i. ^voll known. '
4. 5 ; and see
"THE RESTITUTION OF ALL TIIINOS."'^ 405
may be undone, and man even loosed, from his bonda-c in
this respect and yet share through his oNvn will the devil's
portion. The lake of fire is not the devil's work; it is his
punishment. ' ^ .
Finally Mr. Jukes adduces :—
, ; ":^)r 'the Father lovcth the Son, and hath 'given aU things
into His hand' : and the Son Himself declares, ' All that ?he
Father giveth me shall come to me. and himthat cometh to mo
Imllmnowxseca.tout. For I came down from heaven, not "o
do mine own wiU but the will of Him that sent me. Ami this
IS the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which He hath
given me I shcmld lose nothing, but should raise it up again at
the last day. And again He says, ' And I, if I be Ufted iip from
the earth, will draw all men unto me.'"*
Here again it should be no difficult matter to see that all
things being given into Christ's hand is a different thing from
people being given to Him as His own. And in that sixth
chapter of John's gospel f,pmi which Mr. Jukes quotes, the
limitation is so clear and precise, and so close to the very
place he quotes that it seems impossible it should have
escaped him. The next ,erse to his last.but one rims thus •
And this is the will of Him that sent me, that every one
which seeth the Son,4nd believeth on Him, may .have ever-
lasting life, and I will raise him up at the last dav." Does
that apply to all ? . Will they who do not believe have ever-
lasting life alike ? Is that what these texts point out '^
The last I have before spoken of. and need not return
to It.
Mr. Jukes finds therefore an "appajfnt contradiction " in
these sayings of Scripture which the " appro^^e^^eabhing of
Christendom " still leaves an unsolved mystery. Inieed it
must be confessed his versi.on of it does leave much unsolved
but having given my own, I need not follow it. ^
"The truth whi'ch solves the riddle, lies," he says, "in the
mystery of the will of our ever blessed God as to thq process and
stages of redemption ;—
John iii. 35 ; vj. 37-30 ; xii. 32.
406
I'ACTS AND THEOitlBS A8 «, A FUTURE STATE.
mi I
• " (1.) First, His will l,y some to bloss and save otlmr* • "it
" (-•.) Hi» will therofom to work out the rod«mplio„ «f "^ ,„.,
by ,u,«»..vo ag.» or di»poa™U„„». or, to u«, tSeL^Lt
St Paul uccorchag to .h„ p„rp„«, of .Ue «ge„ • ; a^^!^ ^
life, aciuittai, ,„.:i s„,;,ti„„ L ' I r' . ""r"" ■""' ™y '" ■
destroy l,to that la« th p^wer ofdeathTh:; V""".«'', '!-«' «o
, to duUver them who through t.Llfi.i ' "' ""^ ''<'"'• ""d
subject to I,oud„«e° ' ^ " "' "'™"' '"^"'' "'"' W«"i'>.o
The second and third of thcsp Kiat..m„^»?^' t
wen considered. Wo have ^n tllTe" p^pt: oT^
ages" has not in Scripture the n»aning m/jTZuJ^^
We have seen too, that the death of ,J,f ,„„,„r '^ f„^-
tion IS never the appointed way of il, salvation ..t-
are opposed. As when James'lays • h re tone L
who is able to .,„. and to ,&..„,/•. „ho « ^l s„;pos?Z
these were convertible terms after ,N - . , PPf'" '"^^
apostle speaks of Qhr ist by death d„, ' • , ""'""' "'<'
--♦k ^ -. '*"*»•' "7 aeatn destroyinir hitn that ho^i
the power of death,_it is by His o,ou death He Toes i. and
not by the death of those whom He se,« free '
It is mainly then his first propo.,ition wo have to^o*. ■ j
now : " God's purpose by the first fr,„, <• t consider
let Mr. Jukes state his argument
•In thy seed shall aU thekiLd^^Us Ttrl":?. t^M ^"^^ ^
* •
•ORE STATE.
"TIIE KESTlTimoM OF ALL TIIINOS." 407
It .nay b« „.e „r„ .,li„,!. but ne .„,„•..». „„ „.„„„t ,<^
1. -. r« „. t ,.. ,a..t . ut Christ ,v,.H I„„„ a» Al.rahW« «h.,1
M«.v ■"./»"."«. hU-n, ,|,r.M„l, Ili,„ ,H „,u.|,, were h„r„y
. Meanly It ,l,o«|,1 „oom ,„/ A,„l tl...,, Mn. J„w":,' :
mcnt ,» vo„ . Why ,I„e, he apply ,ho hloasing of all
km, r..,l, „f ,ho earlh only ,„ ,,ta, „.„, „„„,„ „.|,^,J; ^,,,
.he, . Jloroovor, th,. " .S..„,l " h, « h„„, all ki,„lro,lH of ,ho
..artharo ..1,0 hh.».,„.l, is .x,,r„«sly „.ss.>rt,.l by ,he a,„,„tU.
Myal. .... lb) to be Christ j,lo„cs an.l „„t true ofothern "be
sa,th «o^ An.l l„ s..,.,ls, as o.-.n.a„y, bat as ol' one, a. ,1 to
. .y "ee,I, „.h,.h ,» CI,,;..." Arj,n,men,,or,.„„,.se;is easy
^^^«e^uy ,«s«n.e the basis of it at our will. Hut, we are'
• „ " J'fl""-!'"* fa tl-n rcvo„l,,l ,vilh full,.r ,l,.tail i„ th„ l„,v „f
md .sha,l„w h„I,.s f,„,„ a„„t the faec of Mo».«. l)„t i„ t:h it
ho ,„„•„«, ,s u,,v..il„,, f„,.,,.,.r, ,,,,.1 the .nystorv by th,. «,■.,. 1,^
to save olho,. ,s by the Holy (ihost n„ul,. fully uauifost. Chri^
Hoi3fir.sUbo,.„fr„„.„„„v„, fl„t oat of lit,,, for Ho isthooulV
begotten Sou „f o.,,,, bo„otle„of tho FatlaT before all Irf .
• or by Hna were M things er..al,.,l, whioh ,»■.. in heaven ™,i
wineh ,.re .„, earth, visible an.l invisibh., whether they l" h™ *
ny H.n. an,l for H.ra, ,„,<! Ho i. 1„.f„re „11 thif.gs, „„a by ffira
.11 thmgs eousist.' But He is more than this, for He iZ
Hotilt I '"•"","''■•''-■''''•'. «"'"'■' "' •'-'!■. •«">' i"aH .iS.
fl stbom from the ,loa,l, that He is H..a,l of the olmreh, L}
fl.*fn„ts of the ereature. All things are iu,W of God ; but
Sme^n^^^au^^d^th, by man e*n|o also the resurreotion^;
* Mr. Jukes fees nn ibffiT o nc o b c tweea
*
can an '. onlj/ begotten " bo a J!r»( /
t Where is thi.^ taught t
II, St ■' and .. only." How
~\
1M^
lli^
\
■v^
408 FACTS AMI) TIIKOIIIKS A8 TO A FUTURE STATF:.
of til.' .liiwl.' Tliereforo ns by ono flist-born death cfttne into tin*,
worhl, so I>y unothor flrHt-bom hIiuII it bo foroviT ov<'rthro\vii."
* IJut if thin bo the New T«'8tanu'nt doctrine of the tirst-
born, :is ho holds it, Mr. JukoH allows it docs not prove h'ts
case. V^ory rcmarl<ablo it is, after lii8 having told us just
before, that " in Christ the purpose is unveiled forever, and
the mj^tery by tlu^ first -bom to sare others ia by the Holy
-<}host nlado fully manifest," he now tells us that neverthcr
less it is not in the clear revelations of the New Testament
,th«t we are to find the unveiling of this purpose, but we must
</o hai'A- ((> fhe lam to find it! " The la\^of Moses is most
instructive here; for while 11 is true "that the letter W" that
law cannot be explained but by the gospel, it is no lemrue
th(it the gi)spel in its breadth' and depth caimot be set forth
but by the figures of the la^, each jot of which covers some
blessed mystery " !
Wo have usually thought that the letter of the law was
|»lain enough, and that the Ji^nres were what the New Tes-
tament explained. On the contrary, Mr. Jukes asserts the
figures of the Old Testament alone fully set forth the gos-
pel of the New !
lie confesses then that his full gospel cannot be found in
what we style, by way of -eminence, the " gospel " I Let us
still go on with him, however: —
" Wimt then does the law teach us of tlie First-bom from the
dead?. . . Acc6rdiug to the law, the first-born had the right,
though it might be lost,,, of being priest and king, that is, of inter-
ceding for, and niling over their younger brethren ; on him de-
volved the duty of Goel or Redeemer, to redeem a brother who
had waxen poor, and sold himself unto a stranger ; to avenge
liis blood, to raise Up seed to the dead, and to redeem the inher-
itance, if it were at any time lost of alienated. To sttstjdn these
duties God gave him a double portion. Need I point out how
Clirist fulfils these particulars ? how, as first out of the grave,
that 'barren womb that cries. Give, give,' He is the First-born
through whom the ble - ssing re a ches its ? — In this sen s e no Chris-
tian doubts that God's purpose is by the First-born^om the dead
to save and bless the later-born."
"TUB KK8TITUT10N OP ALL TIllKOS."
M)\)
ie no Cliris-
Dm tlio (load
The first-bom under the law were never priests. It \h
well known there was one 8i>ecial family. The noarost of
kin redeemed the inheritance, etc., not necessarily the first -
bom. And Christ's doing this does not yet present Mr.
Jukes' gospel, but ho must dig deeper down to find it.
"But tho trutb goes further still, for thoro nro others lu-Kide
the Lord who iire both * flrst-born ' and • AbruluunV. seed,' who
must therefon) in their measure ' shuro this huuuj houin- Vith
and under Christ, and in whom, us • join t-heiis with Him,' the ^
promise must Iks fulfilled, that in them •nil the kindreds of the ^ :
enrthshftll be blessed.' This gloricms truth, thoUKh of tho,vt>n'
essence of tho gospet, which' announces salyiition to thtj world
through tho promised • seed of Abraham,' is even yet so litth'
seen by many of Abraham's seed, that not a few of the ehiUbiu
of promise speak and act, as if Christ and His body only should
bo saved, instead of rejoicing that they are also tho appointud
means of saving others. Even of tho elect, few sec that they ari.'
elect to the birthright, not to be blessed only, but to \n) a Ijlossinj,' ; ■'"
as first-bom with Christ to share the glory of kingship and priest-
hood with Him, not only to rule and intercede for tlieir younger
and later-bom brethren, but to avenge their blood, to raise »ip "
seed to the dead, and in and through Christ, their Life and Head,
to redeem their lost inheritance."
This then is how the Old Testament figures set forth the
gospel of the New! But the blessing of all nations is
through the "one seed," Christ, alojtc, as wo have seen.
In what " measure " then can others share in it y And what
has being "joint-heirs with Christ,'! to do with ^^^iavhuj
others " ? What does avenging the blood of those who have
died for their sins and in them mean ? and how arc these
the "later-bom"? That the risea soiftits are priests and
kings with Him who is Priest ftnd-lting-Ms of course true,
anH rule and intercession for others are implied iji these
terms. But over whom and for Avhom are these offices?"
" Their younger and later-born brethren," says ]\Ir. Jukes.
Then these, should be, and will bo, doubtless, millennial '
saints. Theytsan hardly b(i the wicked, withoul, we assume ——
the later birth (new birth, of course) of these. Mr. Jukea »
/ •
A
%*'
^
■- •*.
3*-
410> FACTS AND TIIKOUJLES AS TO A FUTUllK STATE.
at present has at least given us no evidence at all of
this. '
lie now passes on to the " first-fruits," rightly referring
the Passover first-fruits to Christ, the Pentecostal leavened
I! If cakes to the saints: '•* Christ, the First-fruits,' and * we, a
kind of first-fruits ' : Christ 'the First-born,' and we 'the
-^ :- church of the first-bom'; words which carry with them,"
he says, " blessings unspeakable, ' for if the first-fruit be holy,
the lump is also holy,' the offering of the firstrfruits to God
being accepted as the sanctification and consecration of the
^ whole coming harvest." •
Does Mr. Jukes mean, of the " tares " as well as of the
• wheat, or of the wheat alone ? If the latter, it will not bo
* questioned ; but neither will it serve his turn, lie seeks to
apply it thus: —
'* First, the Jew is Abraham's seed, — the people that dwell
alone, and are not reckoned among the nations, and althougli
'all are not Israel, who are of Israel,' Scripture willindeed be
-broken, if Israel is not again grafted in; when, if the casting
away of them has been the riches of the world, the receiving of
. them, as St. Paul says, shall be life from the dead. 'Israel is
my son, my first-born, saith the Lord.' All 4iatious therefore,
shall yet be blessed in them, "
Here again is the constant twist, the many seeds substi-
tuted for the one. And while Israel will be fruitful in the
earth, this is hot the fulfilment of the Pentecostal first-fruits.
The other application more concerns' us now.
"Thp church is also Abraham's seeiti; for, as St. Paul says,
' if ye be Christ's ye are Abraham's seed, aud heirs according to
the promise.' To the church, therefore, belongs the same pro-
mise, as first-fruits with Christ, not to be blessed only, but to be
a blessing, in its own heavenly and spiritual sphere. For if the
• ' Jew on earth shall be a ' kingdom of priests,' what is our hope
but to be also heavenly ' kings aud priests' ? As kings, for i\n\
Lord shall say, 'Be thou over five cities,' to rule and order iii tlie
"^ coming age what rcqiiires order ; not only with Christ to 'judge
the world,' but to bo 'equal unto the angels,' and to 'judge the
"THE RESTITUTION OF ALL TBI
N^S."
411
angels' ;* aspr/>.s/s, for a priest is 'for those out of the way,' to
niiuistfu- to those who are yet out oi the way. . . . Christ
barely ciitvvca on His priestly work till. H«' had passed through
death and judgment ;t so with those; who are Christ's, their death
and resurrection shall only introdueo them to fuller and wider
service to lost ones, over whom the Lord shall set them as His
priests and .kings, until all things are restored and reconciled \into
Him.' .,
Priesthood is not for " lost ones." Christ as a priest, in con-
trast with the Jewish priests, is "separate from sinners."
Even they ministered only withhi the limits of the chosen
people, and our priesthood nmst confonn to this. Here Mr.
Jukes' interpretation ends. The shadows of the law, that
were to preach the perfect gospel unpreaclied by the gospel,
are utterly silent as to the " wider hope." After this long
argument the only result is a "^w^.s-^ /<?»,. and an nnanswercd
question, as far as Mr. Jukes is concerned.
" To whom, I ask, shall the church after death be priest^ ?
Shall it be to that great mass of our fellowmen, who have departed
hence in ignorance ? Shall U be to 'spirits in prison,' supji as
those to whom after His death Christ preached ? Shall wo^ His
saints, made like Him, do the same works, still following Him,
and with Him being priests to God ? Will not their glory be to
rule and feed and enlighten and clothe those who are committed
to them, even as Christ has fed and clothed them ?"....
And THAT is the argument, I have given it really at
superfluous length, but it was well to see the whole, if only
for the satisfaction of seeing how simply impossible it is to
make ScApture contradict Scripture. Mr. jukes calls it
reconciling, of course ; but there was nothing to reconcile.
And a reconciliation which can only be accomplished by
sinklmj Great Babylo7i into the imter of life, a^ he does a
little further oii,t most people will after all^^hink exem-
* Judgment is with Mr. Jukes a mode of salvation, and we afe tO|
save the fallen angels so !
t He did not enter on it at all till then : " for if He were on earth He
should not be a priest " (Heb. viii, 4).
X p. 41. '
1;;
412 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE 6TATE.
pllfies one of his own principles in a rather startling way.
But none Avho know what Scripture is will thank him for a
^alviiUou of It tn-owjht hj ita dcsiriu-tinn. As they do not
holieve in the process, so neither will they aeoept the result.
Mr. Jukes urges in another part of his book th.at— >
" tho precepts which Gocl has given are in their way as strong a
witness as His direct promises. Hear the law respecting bond-
men, and strangers, and > debtors, and widows, and orphans, lin.l
the i>unishmeut of the wicked, Avhich may not exceed forty
stripes, ' lest, if it exceed, then thy brother sluuiW seem vile unto
thee ; ' yea, even tlie law respecting asses fallen into a pit : hear
' the prophets exhorting to 'break evei-y yoke,' to 'let the op-
pressed go fr<..e,' and to 'undo the heavy burdens' : hear the
still elearer witness of the gospel, not to ' let the sun go down
upon our wrath, V to 'forgive not until seven times,' but unto
seventy times seven,' 'not to be overcome of evil, but overcome
(^vil with good ' ; to ' walk in love as Christ has loved us,' and to
' be imitators of God as dear children ' :— see the judgment of
those who neglect the poor, and the naked, and the hungry, and
the stnniger, and the prisoner ; and then say, Shall God do that
which Ho abhors ? ShaU He ommand that bondmen and
debtors be freed, and yet Himself keep those who are in woi-se
bondage and under, a greater debt in endless imprison Ant ^>
Shall He care for widows and orphans, ivnd Himself forgeTthis
widowed nature, whiclUas lost its Head and Lord and those
poor orphan souls, whic\ cannot cry, ' Abba, Father ' ? Shall
He limit punishment to forty stripes, ' lest thy brother seem vile,'
and Himself ii|(Jict far more upon those who though faUen ai^
still Mis children ? Is not Christ the faithful iMraolile, who ful-
fils the law, and shall He break it in any one of these particulars ?
^ Shall Ho say, 'Forgive, till seventy times seven,' and HimseH
not forgive except in this short life ? Shall He command us to
.>vercoine cnul witlvipod, and Himself, the Almighty, beovercome
ot evil i Shall He judge those who leave the captives unvisited,
and Himself leave .captives in a worse prison forever unvisitod ?
Does H^ not again and again appeal tO our own natural fefelin^-s
of mercy, as witnessing 'how much more' we may expect^'a
larg(?r mercy from oicr Father which is in heaven ? If it were
Otherwise, might not the adversary reproach, and say, Thou that
t'-aeluTst and judgest another, teachest thou not thyself ? Not
1
"TUK llESTITUTlO^f OF Al.i- THINGS."
418
— _^
llius will God Ix-justilieJ. But, blessed be His Nanus He hIiuH
in:illbo jiistifunl."*
lu that assurance %vo kIuiU all, I believe', unite. i3ut Mr.
Jukes can Hcarcely thus turn the questions that ho puts into
the aftirmatiouii tlmt he fain would make of them. lie con-
founds things widely ditfercnt. lie forgets or omits what
•is in the highest degree essentiil to the argument. Who
would suppose that according to him the law had any
heavier penalty thaii the " forty stripes " referred to ? Dr.
Farrar can make the execution of a criminal, and the casting
forth of his utiburied corpse amid the llanies an^ worms of
the valley of Hinnom the figin-e of cor»-ective and remedial
punishment. Mr. Jukes .seetiisi to forj^et that the penalty of
death ever existed for ma^factors under the law. For if, it
did exist, he could hardly say that God enjoined for all
offenders either continual forgiveness, or temporary punish-
ment merely* Is death the figure of cither V If not, of
what is it a figure ? Surely, as I have before argued, a
punishment inflicted by man which, as for as he is concerned,
Has no end and (^nnot, be reversed, must be the figure of
that which if divine has not forever end or reversion. I
know Mr. Jukes says that death is the wdy to life, and de-
struction but a process of salvation ; but no criminal exe-
cuted by a government ever believed that these were one
and the same thing to him, or intended as such by those
who sentenced him.
V Again, what would mercy to an ttnrepenting .criminal inr
volve ? Has Mr. Jukes forgotten that of some even in this
life' it is said, " it is impossible to renew them unto repent-
ance" ? Does he not understand tlipt the mercv which with
us as individuals may be right and good, may be the reverse
of both if practised wholesale by a government ? He con-
founds these thing as if ho.' did not understand it. Nay, he
speaks of God's remission of imperative judgment as " letting
the oppressed go fvGc^* \
But I do not think it needful to argue further. We have
_ .. . * P|». <);^ <)i. -^^^
."v
ti
lii';^::.
■ f.
■t
I--
I*'
414 PACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
it confessed by Mr. Jukes himself that " the gospel in its
breadUi an<t depth -cannot be set forth but by the figures
of the law." When these figures are appealed to, we find
not the slenderest evideqce to show that the "later-born
• brethren " to whom God's '* first-bom " sons are to bo kings
and priests are those ih hell. The ages of torment, instead
ofcheing limited and temporary with an eternity of universal
• blessedness beyond, are limited only by the life of God
Himself And lastly, the destruction which he would have
to be a method of salvation, is everywhere in Scripture de-
- fined as its opposite. These are the fundamental principles
of his interpretation, and with these it necessarily falls;
while ih our examination of the Scriptures proof upon proof
^has been given of the contrary view. Mr. Jukes himself.
. confesses that, from his staud-point of universal salvation,
" taken in the letter, text clashes with text, on this sub-
ject."* But that gives up the whole question, except letter
^ancl figure an-e at issue. If they are, who shall decide be-
tween them ? ^ay, how shall the figure be interpreted if
t not by that letter, which it seems is discordant with it ?
,1 ^leave then Mr. Jukes jn the self-contradiction in which
■ he has involved himself Our account with him is virtually
• dosed, although statements of his may. yet 'come up fhf
examination. We must turn to other advocates of universal
restoration. /
* ; • . ♦?. 117. . .
/■ ■/
» ■ '
"TliE KEtimUXlO^ OJ}' ALL TULNOS."
415
CHAPTER XL. ^
"THE RESTIUTION OF ALL THINGS."— CANON FAHUAR.
" Canon Parrar often names the doctrine of " final resti-
tution " (in the uniyersalist sense, of course), and .his last
"excursus" in^the appendix to his book is entitled " The
Voice of Scripture respecting Eternal Hope." There is little,
however, beside a list of texts, which we shall presently con- ■
sider. THie first two pages are taken up with that protest
against isolated toxts, which we have alneady looked at.
Then it is urged, that " if the doctrine of endless torment be -
true, it is incredible that, there should be no trace of it in
the entire Old Testament, except ^y putting on the Hebrew
phrase ' forever 'a sense which it dofes not and cannot bear."
We have gone so fully into the question of the Old Testa-
ment doctrine, that this ^Iso we may pass by here.
His third section i1s devoted to the consideration of the /
Jewish rabbinical, teachings upon the subject. I have added ^
the few texts they appeal to to Dr. F.'s own list. Otherwise i
-their views are of the very smallest value.* Of course,
Josephus and the Pharisees and E'ssenes do not appear in .
the consideration of Je\vi8h doctrine.
His fourth section 19 occupied mainly with advice to
" honest, serious, and, competpjat readers " of his book, as to "
/ u.__,t, ._ —
* As an example we may give the following in Dr. Farrar's own
words: 'Hn a magnificent passage of Of/ioi/t (attributed to R; Akiba)
it is said that God has a key of Gehenna, and that He will preach to al^
the rigl^eou!? ; ,that Zerubbabel shall say the Kaddish, and an Amen!
shall sound forth from Gehenna, and that Qabriel and Michael will open"
the 40,000 gates of Gehenna and set free the dam'ned. . Akiha founds
this on ha. ccxvi. 1, reading sUomcrnyneiiim, ' j^servinrf the Amen,'
" for sho7ner i-munim, ' keepinffjlie trut/i '" / ,
Of cours e ;, accorditig to thi s , Geherlhit must tie " in the- land p{
Judah." and the righteous nation are th? lost in Gehenna ! V •
V^
>
m.
m
I
•■'f I'-
ll 'E 4'-
jl i«:
■I
^
' -416 FACTS AND TUliOlUES AS TO A FUTVltli STATE.
the spirit ami manner in which he Avould have' them weigh
tlie texts he addttces. As it includes a brief review of the
subject, and spine tilings not said elsewlicrc, we shall briefly
glance at this, lie asks : —
"Now will liDiiist, .scrioiib iiud competent readers weigh tlic
plain, litt-r.il"m,;iniii;^ of the texts which follow—the nnmbnr of.
which might o:fsily l.o^trcl>lcd, - and in wishing thorn with an
Ciivn'ciit and piM yrl-fnl dosiro to get vid of trailitional bias and at-
tain to tiutli, will tlioy also do af> follo\>-s ?—
"i. Examine- tlioir own consciciu*'c arid reason as to all that
they know, aad all that tlie Biblo teaches,, respecting the love of '
God and redejnptioa througli Jesus Christ."
Only rcnJmbering thnt^ what they A-no?o of -cither cannot
ti'anscend/Uic teaching of that Bible. The love of God is
only really known where, and so far as, Scripture is known.
And reason and conscience are not other Bibh's — are not
authoritative - standards,^)ut only make us capable of re-
sponsibility, and actually resj^onsible, «to the au'thority.of
God. - • — /
'-' ii. See 7tow ver>/ little, which is in theleast degree decisive,
- 'they can produce on the cjther side ;. and how for every Word of? ,
that very little nu explanation is offered, demonstrably tenable,
and« far more iu accordance with history than that which they
adopt." ,1 ■ •
Which if true setitles the rnatter. For if universalisra be
" dempiistrably tenjjble " itS' oi)posit'\i caynot be, save upon a
principle which dastroys the authority* of Scripture tolto-
. getl»er; * But this may safely be left, alter all that we nave
• had before us.
"iii. Considerthe tremend'ouM weight of evidence which must
be thrown against their private interpretation from' the fact that
neither'the Jewish nor the Cliristian nlmrcli have evoT been al>le
, dogmaticallv to sanction it." - ^ '
Tlie word of God no more needs the church's ** sanction "
. v:'"to make it true, than (4od TJlmsclf the permission of ITis
creature to exist. But Dr. I'arrar tanuot mean to imply
~~ that the church has ever jn'owounccd it a doubtful opinion,
as to all that
that we iiave
' "THE KESTITUTJLON OF ALL TUlNOiS." 4l7
or*that the ov^lrwhelming weight of human testimony has
not been in favor of the^-octrine he rejects. To me that
floes not make it one iota^more authbritative or more trust-
worthy, because all true faith is in God's word, not man's ;
but the facts as to the general ecclesiastical belief are
scarcely decisive, against the view still prevalent.
' " iv. Remember that in the extreme form in which they hold it,
which excludes anything resembling purgatory, it is directly op-
posed to a largo body of primitive teaching, j\nd to the views of.
the entire Roman church. "
How the question of **^ a purgatorial :fire where the souls
of the righteous are purified by punishment," as Dr. Farrar
himself states this doctrine* from the Catechism of the
Council of Trent, can mitigate the terror of eternal punish-
ment for the wnrightoous, it^s hard to say. As for primi-
tive teaching, it is too large jy question to take ftp here,'and
•" honest, serious, and competent readers " will hardly assume *
what has not been proved. But if Dr. Farrar identifies it,
as \^e must suppose, with that "almost necessary belief"
'which he speaks of in his preface,! then it is hard to say how
its exclusion from an ev'nngelical creed, should make that
creed hardej and less merciful. He states it there as " the
wide-spread, ancient, reasonable, and, I had almost said, ne-
cessary, belief yi some condition in w-hkch^ — by what-- means
we know not, whether by th&ptpna sensns or onJ[y the^wswa
damni — -Imperfect souls who die in a state unfit for heaven
may yet have perfected in them until the day of Christ, "that
good work of God which has been in this world begun." ^
That is only what we have before heard Qan'on Farrar inti-
mate that some whom he styles the " poor in spirit "may
have to pass to the kingdom of heaven through the flapies
of Gehenna. . Right or wrong, the evangelical creedi is not
legs merciful surely, when it teaches that the blood of Christ 7
and the Spirit of God can make a dying thief fit for paradise
the same day. It is scarcely less «ierci/"«/, however little
he may esteem it possible, to sub. st itute paradise for t he mild-
l': -■
* Pref.,p^.'^xvii.
f P. xix.
h h
- !.■■
i
^1 :
418 FACTS AND TUEOUIES AS TO A FUTUUE STATE.
est fofm of purgatory. Nor does this touch the question of
the unsaved.
" V. Give due weight to the fact that many who Jiave devoted
years of earnest labor to the inquiry— ripe scholars and good meii»
orthodox fathers, eminent theologians, profound thinjcers, holy
and reverent inquirers— have come to the deliberate conclusion
that there is not a single text in all Scripture which Jiecessitiites
a belief in endless torment. "
But how many who have as patiently and laboriously
come to the opposite conclusion ? The ert'ect of which upon
a really reverent soUl will be to make him see thaj God will
not allow that to be settled by mere human authority, which
must be ascertained in the presence of God alone, and from
His word. Good mer may, alas, suflfer themselves in many
ways to be drawn aside from truth ; but still the word
stands— for "Scripture cannot bo broken "-^^' If any man
will do (willeth to do) His will, he shall KNOW of the
doctrine, whether it be of God." <^
" vi. Bear specially in mind that it rests, almost if not quite
exdusivehf, on the meanings which they attach to two words,
' Gehenna ' and 'iEonian,' of whiih the first, interpreted by the
only possible means of iutcrpretation open to us, cnnnot bear the
sense which they attribute to it ; and the other is over and over
again applied in Scripturti to indefinite but limited time, or to
that which transcends all coii('<ipt ion of time,"
So far from its being merely a question of either word,
there are -a number of passages which would be decisive
without either. Every passage which speaks of final " de-
struction " or '' the second death,-' such statements, as "he
shall not see life," " cannot enter into the kingdom of God " ;
that " no'ic is the accepted time," and " now is the day of
salvation " ; all the passages, the most solemn and full in all
Scripture, of the book of Revelation ; all these, among other
testimonies, refute Dr. Farrar's first assertion.
Then as to Gehenna, if the students of the rabbins are
,hat it means, f ew ro a(lera c ompara-
alone competent to s ay v , \
tively, however "honest and serious," can be pronounced
■1^
"THE RESTITUTION QF ALL THIN OS."
419
"co^fitent." But why should 6i:)ntra(lictory and hyper-
bolical rabbins be more trustworthy than tlie testimony of
•Scripture itself^ Why on il« authority may we not say
that '• Gehenna " is a place,Where •' ,s(ni| and body " are '* de-
stroyed " ; as well as on that of the it'wksh doctors, that
"the judgment of Gehenna is for twelve^ months," or that
" Gehenna is pothing but a (lay in whlcFi "Um impious shall
be burnt," or that " after the last judgmontNfcrehenna exists
no longer "—that, last judgment in wliieh men are adjudged
^to Gehenna! All these statements are given Ijy Dr. t^rrar
himself froni his own chief authority, the Talmud.
Again, as to "tteonian," we have seen tlfat while in other
writings we can trace a growing use of " aion" for eternity,
when used in the sense of duration at all, aeonial is never
less than ''everlasting." And though we may speak of
"everlasting hills" this does not make the proper force of
the word doubtful. ' >
1>. Farrar would have his readers begin their Scripture
search with the matter already almost settled for them out-
side of Scripture.
His next piece of advice is characteristic enouch :—
" vii.' Be shamed into a little humility— a. little doubt as to their
own absolute infalUbillty on all religious subjects —a little sense
of their possible ignorance or iu vincible prejudice— « little absti-
nence from cheap ^ftnafhemas and contemptibh m/Mmwies— a little
avoidance of snoli base weapons of controversy as tEoTissertion-
that those who hold such views as Inhere have advocated are re-
peating the devil's whisper, " Thou slialt not surely die.' " /
To all this I maybe excused from replying; l^ittrnote
what follows ::— '
" By not losing sight of the fact that (1) these/views have been"
held in substance, not only (as I li^e said) by great teachers and
holy saints, but also by W'hole c«^-ches ; and (2) that they arc
involved in practices so universal and so primitive as prayers/or
the dead. The Kaddish, or prayer for the dead, in the jre\^sh
if SO was
liturgies, is probabhr as old as the time of nnr T ^nrrl, nnd j
by Him unf&proved, though it was believed to be efficacious for the
relief of souls in Gehenna."
'.■:-m-
1
"•^v
I?*-
420 FAC-rS AN'l) TIIEOUIRS AS TO A FUTURE STATU.
Dr Farrur does not refuse very dubious texts, as wc see,
tVom U..t other Bible of hist<>ry in wbieh »- J^''*:;;;;^' ^;;;
itiHaiM,naeron.stu-umenttob;iseuiM».r:ui .1. I be next .
text is not less dubious, though fn.ni Scripture. ^
..Euuueut commentator., oounrnviug 2 Tim. i. l«;"^^^j^^- ;
.uul iv 19 have believed that St. Panl'.s prayer for Onesiphorus s
a pr mi for one who was dead; and he does not -reprove ho
;.S^of even so superstitious ^ praetice as bapUsm for the .
dead." . . \\
The first of these is again a largo conelusion from scant
premises. Paul salutes the house of Onesiphorus, no mention
made of Onesiphorus himself. He prays ibr inercy to las
Cuse, and "tlit he may find the mercy of ^^e Lo-^-J^ha
dav " and as Onesiphoyus does not appear m all this, it must
be'^ferred it was a prayer for the dead! In an oppo.t.
. interest, how would Canon Farrar treat such a -on^^^l^re^
Yet the second argument is worse. W here does the
aposlle^peak of the imnaiple of the practice o "baptism
for the dead"? Nowhere. -Re argues, if anything /o. /A.
■.practice Mf. " Else wKat shall they do who are baptized
Cbe dead if the dead rise not at all ? why are they then
baptised for the dead? And why stand we in jeopardy
every hour?. I prqtest. . . I die daily" (1 Cor. xv. 29-31).
If this is not approving the practice,! know not what is.
Fancy the apostle urging in his argument tor resurrection.
<' Else what shall they do who are (so superstitiously !) bap-
tlzcl for the dead." As for the principle, he says nothmg
aboutit. What was the principle? What was the practice
evcn'^ Dr. Farrar ev.idently refers to a suppositious cer;
cmony " never a;lopted except by some obscure sects of
Gnostics, who seem to have founded their custom on this
very passage,';* tlie * practice of siibmitting to baptism^
■ *Oonvbearea,;; llowson; Life and Epistles of St. Pai^. 'in their
Conybeaie am ^ - th e ""ly meaning the Greek seems
..ntP ii'iioii tlie text tli e y .sp e ak of it as — , —
note u,,on u e u^x. -. ^a^.: 1^ explanation is liahle to very great
to admit jet, uiej f-'^ . » . „ ,, „. q. Pn„l should
difficulties." The first difHcul.y they ment.on is ' hat St^ ^^^J^Z
,ef..r to such a , superstition without rebukmg it. The second.
'•m"
♦'THE HESTITUTION OP ALL THINGS.
421
iu>t ri'piovf the p_rim-l/>/c of it» — H principle jwhieh must
have iml»lit'<l ihA need of Imptism to free from the penaltieH
Borae person who had difeclunbaptized. Dr. Farrar owns
it as u '' su|M'rHtitious cuHtojn " ; yet thinkM the apoHtlo does
jot reprove the
lUve im|>lietl thA
of sin, and tlie ppssibility of the living making up the de-
ficiencies of the d^ad ! a thing too gross to be accepted by
the ritualistic Ctfristianity which so soon succeeded the <
apostolicgk
Yet in iRie lig}»t of tlie context the diflioulties of tlio pas-
sage are not insuperaV)le. Why cannot the ordinary rite be
styled— for it is evident there was no special one—*' baptism
in place of the dead,"* simply because those freshly receiving
it were tilUngup thp ranks in what wa!| then indeed " the
noble army of martyrs " — of men '* aj)pointed unto death. "t
The verses following show that in this track the apostle's
thoughts were runnnig. "I protest I die daily. If after
the manner of nicn I have fought witli beasts at Ephesus,
what advantageth it me, if the dead, rise not?" Why
should it be so very strafnge an , expression for him to use,
"baptism in j)lac6 of the dead," under ^Hch circumstances
and in such a connection 'i Especially when the choice is
between this and the apostle's sanction of " so supemitious a
practice" as Dr. Farrar owns the otbe'r to have been — a
l)ra('tice which there is no evidence ever existed ?
The a.ntiquity of the practice of prayers for the dead "we
may concede to Dr. ];^arrar, as of many anothecr error wh^ch
Scripture shows us coming in. already in apostolic days-
Superstition is not tli« more venerable lor its grey hairs.
"viii. Let them woigh- the fuv;t that wlmt Christ did^oncc-
Uiimely, preach to the lost, g^uid opon^or them the prison doors-^
tluscontinuance of ^ifoli a pralnice " in the period which followed, when
a magical eflicacy was more and more ascribed to the material act of:
, baptUin." They conclude that " the passage must, be considered to
adiiiAfl! of no satisfactory explanation."
* vnifi TK)v veH/icjy. 'Tnip is undoubtedly used ip this sense
in 2 Cor. v. 20 and Philem. 13, though it is not*a frequent use in the
New Xestam'jiiit. " _
■tOh. iv.9. :_.:„._1^:-l:J_,1_,:,_^::::1;1:, _.:^_: ._::.;_,..,. /,^_.:: ,.:V_„;:;:..
'■■■.: '.- ; ■ -^ '■■ '■.■■■ '■■' ■■-''.
'. ^' ■
H
V:
11
II,
' % •!:!
'1 ■ .-
)i
ilil:
422 FACTS AND THEORKd A8 TO A FUTURE STATE.
He may do again aud ever. The text on TvhicU I preached
•tLoJblesHcd light on one of the durkeHt emgmaH of Dmno
iusSr^the caHos iu which the tlnul doom -— "f "J^^'^^. ^f,.f
roportion to the lapse which has iucurrod it.' [VVas thut^tho
^^h the CorinthiauH Vj Thi« was tl.u interpretation of the
early fathers." . * *
Which does not save it, nevertheless, from being error.
Lone before this, in view of what was coming in, the
Alltle Paul commended the Ephesian Christians 'Ho God
«L.A. Wo/7//.,.«c."; and we have ^^U^^J^^
need of the injunction attte present day ^-P^'.^,
elusive in this case against the interpretation of the lathers,
however early or many. " . . , x* i • i
Wc may now turn to the p»«age8,th« princ.pal ot wh.cl,
have been already e^camined.t The first a (Sen. ui. 15, tho
p^eaioOon of the^erpent» head being bruised by th_, wo
manrseed which o Jy needs to be referred to again, on
Xun of a qaouttion from Dr. Chauneey" H»- could
~ .0. if sltan triumphed by .-;-S ""'■o- » .^« r.
slaves' In this case could it be sa.d, !» m I«i In.. 1-i, "i
slTsce of the travail of his soul and be satisfied, for 1,,.
shall bear their iniquities '? " „
The Iwer to the first question is, that Satan wdl nev
Jul sin-le slave. His reign in hell is a m,.re dream a„d
fdelL on! To the second, the answer wUl be found very
simplTby quoting the whole passage : " He shall see of .1,,.
StL 'ravaiTof hissouland be -«f ^ ;4^^';; f, [ ^
e,l<je shaU n,// rk/lueota Servant rot..!!/ MA>y, to'
' '"fZ^^-adauced, »hl.h nee* no '-'•"-f- CrUi';':
: John 1.29; '"• J • ^'^ ' ,,•„',„ .,o -n . xi. 32; xiv. 9; 1 Cor. xv
xxii. i
I ;
"TUE UEaTITUTION OF ALL TlilNGH.'
428
Weill, who naturally quotes down to, " an«l will by no means
clear the guilty," which ho omits. ,^
(.'].) Psa. XXX. 5 ho aliHo appeals to : '* His wrath cndureth
but the twinkling of an eye, hut His favor a lifetime"; but
those words are part of an exhortation to the Lord's sfuints
to sing to llini, and are illustrate«l hy the deliverance which
the Psalmist has experienced from his enemies. They apjdy
to the «liscii)lino of the righteous, and not to the punishment
of the wicked. _ .
(t.) Psa. Ixii. M* is one of the texts (with Mic. vil. 18-
20, etc.), upon which Kabbi Aibo founds the remission oi
eternal punishment for all except the worst. Nothing -is
Haid about it, however, in the psalm, but " two things "f are
ascribed to Ood, power and mercy, and these will be shown
in rendering to every man according to his work. All the
Testis speculation. And the passage hi Micah speaks ot
God's mercy in Israel's restoration in the lattqr day.
(5.) Psa. ciii. : " lie will not always be chiding, neither
. keepeth He His anger forever," is one of Dr. Farrar's own
texts, bat the application throughout the psalm is again
quite obvious, as especially the iVth and IHth verses, Avhere
"the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting o?t
thein that fear lUm^ ... to such as keep Ilis covenant, and
to those that remember His commandments to do them."
(C.) Psa. cxxxix. 8 : " If I make my bed in hell, behold,
Thou art there " : — (i >r^i*y strange quotation ou Dr. Farrar's
part, made still more strange by the poetry in his note.l
* V. 13 umst '>e ineaiut- accoidin? to th« Ilwbrew numbering, 12 in
the English. > .
t Delitzscli translates ; " One thing hath Elohini spoken, these two
have I hoard," etc.
4^ " What hell may be I know not : this I know,
'^ I cannot lose the j»resoiioe of th6 Lord : ...
'; One arm— Humility — takes hold upon \
Ilis dear humanity ; the other. Love,
~ Clasps His divinity, so where,! go. ~
He goes ; and better fire-walled hell with Him,
than golden-gated paradise withoiit."
ft
n
*•
424 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTUUE STATE.
Strange-becau^e the word for "hell" is (as of course he
knows) sheol; one of the words he speaks of elsewhere as
deno^g " a place both for the bad and the good," and which
"means an intermediate state of the soul previous to judg-
ment,"* and not, therefore, " hell " in the ordinary sense at
all. Made stranger by the poetry he quotes ; for that would
make it appear that hell was a receptacle for those who clmg
in humility and love to Christ. t . -
rii) Isa. Ivii. 10 : " For I will not contend forever, neither
will%)e always wroth : for the spirit should fail before me,
and t¥e^loul^ which I have made.'^ This has been already
urged by Mr.' Constable in behalf of annihilation, as by
Canon Farrar for restoration. In truth *t has nothing to do
with either, being simply the reason w^y the Lord will not
pursue Israel to extremity, as having purposes of. mercy
toward her. This is what the context positively proves.
(8.) Isa. xlix. 9 : ^'That thou mayest say to the prisoners,
Go forth; to them that are in darkness, Show yourselves."
This is quoted by Mr. Jukes, as well as Dr. Farrar, It is
an address of Jehovah prophetically to Messiah, and applies
expressly to the earth and npt to hell at all: "I will -also
give Thee fo*- a Ught to the Gentiles, that Thou mayest be my ,
wlvation unto the end of the earth, .... to establisli tho
earth to cause to inherit the desolate heritages ; that Thou
mayest say to the prisoners. Go forth," etc. Similar lan-
guage is used in familiar passages, where none would dream
of carrying it further.! Dr. Farrar must assume that it ap-
plies to hell. Will he say why ? ^
(9) Hos. vi. 1: " Come, and let us return to the Lord:
for He hath torn, and He will heal us; He hath smitten,
and He will bind us up." How this, which does speak of
the Lord's mercy to the penitent, bears upon the question
of the judgment of the impenitent, it is again difficult to say.
(10.) Hos. xiv. 4 : "I will heal their backsliding, I will
love them freely ; for mine anger is turned away from him."
He r e also a word of e xplanation would have been accept-
* pref., p. xxxi.
t As, 6. g. .Isa. Ixii. 7, Ixi. 1, Luke iv. 18-2V.
M
V
'•
"the kestitution of aIl things.**
425
able. How does this show that'Crod'a anger will be turned
away from those under " eternal judgment " ?
(11.) Luke ix. 56, I give without cotoment: "For the
Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save
them " ! ^
(12.) Luke^xii. 47, 48 : "He that knew not his'Lord's will
and did commit things worthy of stripes shall he beaten with
few stripes.^' That I surely believe ; but a man must be
born again to go to heaven. *
(13,14.) Phil. ii. 10, 11; Col. i. 19, 20 :— These have been
looked at before. I only mention them here to allow place *
to Mr. ]Minton'8 observations, of course from a different
point of view to Dr; Farrar.
Mr. Minton contends! that " all things," in the latter pas-
sage, means "the whole universe," as being what is spokein
of in ver. .10 as " created by Christ; for precisely th«e same
language is used with regard to both. . . . If Gehenna be a
locality, it is p«r< of the earth as represented to St. John by
the lake of fire. And when we are told that even on our
view * hell has to be excepted ' fiipm the universal reconcilia-
tion, we reply, that when that reconciliation is completed,
hell will have done its work, and passed away with the first
earth on which it was seen. ... In each case the universe
is regarded as a whole. . . There is nothing in existence
which Christ did not originally create, and there shall at
* Mr. "Cox (Salv.^ Mun., p. 186) adduces Rom. xiv. 9-11, to urge that '
" as * no man can contess that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost,'
th« dead who are to bow to Him, as well as. the living, must be open to
the renewing ministry of the Divine Spirit : open to it ! yes, and merci-
fully condemned (0 and exposed to it until every one, even the most
stubborn, be compelled to yield it."(!) Now "no man can say that
(not' confess ') Jesus Christ is Lord but by the Holy Ghost" is a ques-
tion of power, not life. Many will say in that day " Lord, Lord," and be
condemned (Matt. vii. 22). But condemned, says Mr. Cox, to the
renewing ministry of the Holy Ghost. " The heart of fools proclaimeth
foolishness."
tAVay Everlasting, pp. 23, 24, note.
,«»«***'■
426 FACTS AND inEOWES AS Vo*.FUTfKF, STATE. ,
last te nothing in eristence that H. ha« not reconciled to ;
^^ Nowthe passingaway of hell with the fir^ earth is nhnply
a dream of Mr. Mhiton'H, inasmuch as the dead are not cast
into it till after the earth and the heavens are fled away.
And hell and those in it are never mentionec], as to he re-
conciled " at all. They are given as a third class m the pas-
sage in Phiiri>piaBs, where subjection and, not reconciUation
isfpoken of: ''that at the nameof Jesus every knee Bhoud
bow, of heavenly beings, of earthly, -^1 tlTher
Plainly heavenly and earthly do not here mc ud. this otht.
class of ittfernal beings, and, therefore, all thmgsm heaven
and in earth do" not, if Scripture is consistent with .^^
it surely is. This is demonstration that Mr. Mmtons thought
of the expression meaning strictly " the universe is mcor-
But he is not willing to give it up, ncvertheleBS, an.l he
urges that in the passage in Philippians in the or.gmal,-
.. . „r is ' U tl>e name of Jesus.' and that St. Paul i. te.chiug
the Philippians precisely what he taught the Colo»s.am. tliongU
todffie en?lan^e. He dechaes that aU the iutohgont mu-
"r^all uttiTtSy ' bow ■ to . God the Father.' tlu.t is, W-,, ,
gT 'in the name of Jesus.' 'J, M. C appeai-s to thmlc tl a
"under the earth' means GehenuJ. But no oue has been east
into Gehenna yet ; and it appears to St. John as ou the »u f,
oi the earth. If he will once more refer to the original, he ^u 1
: ethat the word is one eommouly used iu Greek lor «. <W.
When speaking of the 'all things,' St. Pa.d divides hem ut,.
te%et. with everything belonging to it, and all the rest of
cr^itW When speaking-not of all 'things,' as enoneously
t^sHtedin Phil. i.. but-of all umiymt creatures, he d.vuhu.
wtrUo" of creation whieh-is subject to death into the l,..n,
lud Z rfW. probably to convey an assurance o .esm-iecta
•C the dead. . . . -Theie will not be left iu the whole uuivei..
"gle knee which does not bow to God the Father in tlie
• ^^' Jesus. It is 'subiection; no doubt ; but it - " «S
... . / ^" pis ' or an cnt oraeti imi-
\
Bubjection of W^ heart, not a ' par a ly si
mouy of power.
l;;, .ii. ,:i_
"THE RESTITUTION OP ALL THINGS.
>»
427
se " IS incor-
Ilyfow here again we must first set aside the extraordinary
view Mr. Minton has as to Gehenna. Where does it appear
to the apostle as on the surface of the earth ? Certainly
not inthe book of Revelation ; rv^ anywhere else so far as
I am aware. Then the dead, he tells us, are not in Gehenna
"yet." Quite triie, if we speak as to the present. Bftt J
suppose it'is not " yet " that every knee bows. If it be the
deJid tha^ are to bow in willing subjection of heart to Go,d
before jiMtoare yet in Gehenna, then it is hardly possible that
they «HK<evcr go there, and universalism, not annihila-
tion, W^rtd be true. But it would scartjely agree with
Scripture to blot out Gehenna altogether. We mijst co
<;lude then, that the "dead" do not bow before Geh
But then cr/i!*??* Gehenna there are no deajd to bow;
even accordii% to Mr. Minton, those that die the second
death will not,. and there are no other dead at all. '
Perhaps he will say, that is not yet what he means. Well,
thert he must mean that of those now dead, every knee shall
in the future *' bow " ; but that, in his sense of bowing, is
umpbrsalism again. Mr. Minton cannot give any meaning
to the words he quotes, consistent with annihilation ; if the
subjection be subjection of heart. For if it be living and
dead before judgment and every knee shall bow before then,
the wicked dead will be converted and saved beflS'e they
are in hell at all ; and if those now dead are to bow after
judgment, they will still be converted before they are anni-
hilated, iand God will annihilate converted souls ; or if
finally it be those dead after the judgment, then as none will
die in any sense then but the wicked, still the same result
follows. Willing subjection of heart in all the living and
the dead is either universalism or mere absurdity. • s
But is it willing subjection of heart that the passage
shows? Certainly every knee bowing doeg not of itself
mean that. Nor does it say, as Mr. Minton piitB it, that
they bow to God the Father at all. The apostle is expressly
s peaking of the exaltation of the n ame of Jesnw, and it is
at that, Xatiie (as the context absolutely requires) that they
/'
Mii'^
> ;
■ ■ i
m
■. f-
P
H*
■^
428 FACTS AND TnioRIEa AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
bow, though it Ibe to God the Father's glory that the Son
is thus Honored. Mr. Minton (with Jukes and others) ren-
ders " in the najne," hut there is no need from, the. Greek at
all, and the context is decisive against it : " lie hufi given
Him a name above every name, that at the name of Jesus
~ every kn'e^ should bow "is the only consistent reading, and
8ubjectiop;.'not Reconciliation, and that to Christ Himself;
tho otily possible sense.* , '/ ' ' %
i'hfen as to those " under the earth " being used for the.
dead, it is allowed that the Gfeek wdrdf often means this;
but Mr. M. >M1- probably illow%at " infernal " is nibre
exactly literal, although he may not agree that this term
'should have its modern meaning. But if beings in hearen,
on e&rth, and under th^ earth are characterized in this way
at the time they bow to Christ, and that bowing iteelf cor-
responds (as 'fclcarly'it must) to all things being pht under .
> His feet, there are then po "dead "to ,be covered by this -'
term, and " infernal " must^ raein lost men and spirits in
Gehenna, and no others. - .
Thus 'also, infernal being a third class to heavenly and
earthly, it does .not come into the passages in Colossians .
and Ephesiansi arid must be omitted from the thought of the
. universe which is found .in them, | Neither annihilation ism *
nor uniyersalistii can make good their view from texts like
these. - \
Let US now rettim to Dr. Farrar.
(15.) 2 dftr.' V. 1^ : « To wit, that God was in Christ, rg-
conciling the world unto Himself, not imputing their tres-
. passes unto them ; at^d h ath committed unto us the wo rd^f
"^ ThatTv reS ovoua^ mnst be ' in the name " is a strange asser-
tion to be made for any \ne who knows the flexibility <\f Greek pve-
pqsitions. It would be jmUssible for a scholar saye under influences
which had destroyed his mfental capacity, to assert it. The text is an
example of ^k. denoting " the occasion/- of which Winer give^ ^^n ex.
ample which is quite i>aralWl U* this ; Acts rii. 29 ; f<pvrEy ^v to, *
Xoya T6vxfo. " then fled Moses ^t this saying." To. which maybe
aclded Luke i. 21, " marvelled, that he tarried," or " of his tarrying.' ^
"^ -^ xaTajfioyioovr
A
" ' '' ■ . ^ ' , " ■'•"' /"'*;- > , .
recoDciliation," Tbrs says nothing of'resMfty' nothing of how :
men treated the Reco^cile^, or- how they treat tne recjon-
ciling w^fd. \.-^ . . /l^. .
(IC) Titvii. 11, 12: ,** Not as in the English version, bluk^ _.
^For the grace of fiod" hath appeared, ^mch is ?:tving to"^
all men (//'<?<»r;7^io5 Ticidti^ dyOfjcoiroii).^' This' again is not ■
result but aspects "Saving to all " is the grace which "has
.appeared, that is its character, but Jt^es not set aside the'
warning of the.same apostle,' ".that ye repeive tiot t]^e grace . '
of God in Vain " ;* nor the fact tTiat^e.go^pelis that alone
Vberein this grace is offered, and that " he tK'at believeth
not ^hall be condemned." Salvation, as w^e have sejenjis not
consistBtit with such " condemhation '^ but the very opposite -
of it. ' V, - ■ .' .':/■' . '.:'" ■ /■' ' ' . "' '■^JT^". ■' ■■
.'(17.) Heb. ii. 8,D: " Tho« jpst pk all" things msubjecti^^^
under -His' feet. For |4 that IJ6 -pilt^aU" in sijbjectipB "
•itoder Hmi, He left' nothing thdt is not jJut undei; Him. Biit
now we see not yeVaU tj||ings ,put under ijitn^ . But ,we
see Jesus, wh<^ was ' made ,^ ^little lower than the, aflgels.
. fo^^ tbe, suffering'yf dea^h, crowned with gloi^an^ honor;
that He by the/grace of God^i(or "rathor /^tupi's ^^au, '/pr ;
' emry' ratioirc^lminfli or for eherythin(f\iieut.y except ^ocV)
.should^t^-ste ^ath." •«. ' ' , ,.
In- nie first place,' no editor of ,whoih I have any know-
ledge authenticates Dr. Farrar's reacling. It jsmenlibned
(as by Alferd) as found iii '* §ome an'cient copies, versions'and '.
fathers/ but no one prefers it or admits a^^estibn as to it.
The ybj^ct of the readipg "is of course to* show that Ch|ist
diedaor angels, which is the very- thing ccmtradicted in'%e
iBtn verse ofthe same chapter, the truev(EPlion"of which is
^^e margin : "For verily He taketh" not hokV of angels ;
fUt of the seed of Abraham he taketh ifiold," i!,e., as result ,
therefore, not even of all nnfii.. Dr. Farrar's reading is ijk- •
gitimke from every point of view. Aa* to, the rest of the
quotation there need lie no dispute.
%■
.M^
/
* 2 Cor. Ti. 1.
^^-
*:'it..
'-^-
.
I
430 I FACtS AJTD THEORIES A8 T6 A FUTURE STATE.
a^8.) R6v. «r. 13 : " And every creature which is in heav-
en, and onHhe earth, and under the earth (vjtoko ro* r^s rhi)y
and sucK a^ are in the sea, and all that is in them, heard I
saying, Blessing and ho^ioj- and glory and power be unto
Him that sitteth upon th6 throne, ai|d to thel^amb forever
and ever." Here those ^' under 4.he earth" are a different
class from those in Philippians, as the expression itself and
the context shows. " On the earth " and " under the earth "
and " in the sea " are evidently so many parts of the world
itself, in which every created thing is now vocal with praise.
Similarly—
(19.) Rev. xxi. 4, 5 is limited to the new earth; while—
(20.) Rev. xxii. 3 does not necessarily extend beyond the
Kew Jerusalem. » ':
This completes Ganon Farrar's list of passages to be con-
sidered, and our review of his book. I appre^nd that' the
" honest, serioBts, and competent reader" to whom he ad-
dresses himself will be the last to believe that he has made
out his case. v
Before summing up the results of our inquiry as to the
two main forms of the denial of eternal punishment, it will
be well yet to consider the ethics of the doctrine, and as a
preliminary to this we must give attention to a. view of eter-
nal punishment itself which has been propounded by one,
who can by no means be classed with any of the writers We
b^ve hitherto been occupied with. ^
\ r
<o .
J-
' LI* . '
-v-\-
MR. BlttKS' VIHW.
431
f . •.
. CHABTER Xtl.
\ Mr/bIRKS' VI kw.
Mr. Birks' view yOf tbje doctrine of eternal punishment
wa&'first puMished/^bout twelve years since, in a work en-
titled, "Tlie yioiovy of Di\;iiie Goodness," antMias . since
been republisheu in ip. revised foriiPin the second edition of
his " DifficultJik of Belief,'.' in which it 'occupies the last '
three c6ap)rer8. . It is to thiJ^ exposition of it I shall, of
coui^e, exclusively rol'er in my present attempt at ari exam-,
inationjwit. ; , v
With the first of the three' chapters in question we have
notlimg to do. It is occupied with a statement^of^ibe-ease-
as /4^"¥* *^^ doctrihes^t»f annihitationlitid^Tf^universal sal-
Wtion, with every line of whi'ch I can most fully an^ heartily
'/concur. His second chapter open? with a view of the com-'"^
mon ethical objections to the orthodox doctrine, to the con-
sideration of which we have ndt y,et arrived. We; are still
occupied with the Scripture doctrine itself, andj|,' is only so
far as Mr. Birks deals .directly w.ith this that '^shall follow
him fti this chapter. Passing over all the rem of his argu-,
jnent, therefore, we will confipe ourselves no\^,jto his propo-
sitipns as to eternal judgment itself. *■ -
And as to the first of these we find ourselves again ill en-
tire agreement with him, that— ^* /•
"1. First, the second death is not the^eign of Satan in ^king-
dom of his own, in which he xeigns over those whom he has
4eceiYefl, and actively torments them forever."
^We agree with him that — - --^'-^^r - 4t^ ^^ ^-•
" there is the widest contrast between the present time of SataU's
permitted activity and reign, and the future season of hfe punish-
mentr, when all his power to tempt and accuse the breUiieu, or to
reign over evil men, will have ceased forever. It js not strange,
-*■— :
A^:;
, \. i
\
432 FACTS AND THE0BIE8 AS TO A FUTUBE STATE.
but natural and certain, that sinners should have less freedom for
active wickedness under the fiery anger of God tlian in the time
of His forbcaraueo and long-Hufferi|%, Nothing can be more ,
monstrous than the notion tliat, undi*r the holy eye and right-
eous hand of the Supremo Judge, they cah and will rebel more-
freely and fiercely than ever before. Such a prison, in which
criminals should be allowed to cultivate tlieir o^yu wicked habits
and practices to the uttermost, would be a foul i-eproach to any
earthly government. Sow great, then, must be the evil of bring-
ing this charge, witlioijit the least grain of Scripture evidence,
nay, in the teeth of its express statements, against the govern-
ment of the Righteous and Eternal King ! "
Mr. Birks' tsecond pfb|iosition is that — <
" 2. Again, the la,st judgment and the second death are one
main part in a wise^ holy, and pex'fect work of the God of love.
". . « The issues of judgment, however solemn, must be such that
the All-wise, "whose understanding is unsearchible, the All-good,
whose tend^r^ mercies are over all his works, c'an not only acqui-
esce in them, but oven rejoice, in them with a deep complacency
of divliie love. . .Now this revealed p<Mfection of the Whole
work of God, when we reflect on it calmly, must throw a steady
light on this.mysterious and solemn subject of the second death.
The first deaCh is God's last and greatest enemy. It may be
.bdme with for a time, bnt its continuance would be a fatal bar-
rier to the dominion and glory Of the Most High. * God is not
the God of the dead but of the living. ' And hence that indignant
sentence — *0 death, I will be thy plagues ; O grave, I wiU be
"thy" destruction. ' But the second death proceeds directly from
the appointment of tiie Supreme Judge who is perfect both in
wisdom and , goodneas. Ho^vever terrible and solemn, it is his
divine remedy for all that is most fearful and appalling in the ac-
tual or possible evil of a fallen and rebellieius universe. . . ^hq
attempt to deepeii its terrors by heaping up all kinds of moral
and spiritual horrors, the unchecked ravings of fiendish malice,
the blasphemous utterances of raging desjjair, and to see in it the
stereotyped continuation of ■ rebellion, hatred and blasj)hemy for-
ever, is to reverse and deny the revealed object and aim of the
work of Chr i st . — 'For th i s purpose was the Son of God man i--
fested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.* Tlio grand
purpose of the jiulgrjaent which ho will execute can never be to
illl. BIHK8' VIEW. ^
433
God mam L-
sterebtype and eternize active reh(illion against God, but to abol-
isli it Un" vvvvvaoh."
Now hero rtt^altji tliere ih nilu-li of truth' that needs to be
reiiicmbcrGd. "Slii Bh'ks' system, liow^evcr, begins to appear
in the exaggeration ()f the contrasfc between the -first and-
the second death.' 'That they are ccmtrasted has been,
already insisted on. .Type and antitype, which is the rela-
tion in which they stand to one another, are always more oi*
less Gonthists. That the first death, Juoreover, would in its
continuance be fatal tojthe 4ulfilment of this divine pug^e,
whether for saint or sinner, is simple and sure enough. As
the infrjp^ement of the creative plaij. it can but fulfil a tei
porary purpose &nd must eventually pass aWay ; and the
second death caunOt be, therefore, the repetition, of'^ it.
The resurrection which introduces the latter is the close of
the former; and deatl^ is the last enemy, in tliis way, to be
destroyed. > • " , \
But if the'last enemy, is it " the greatest " ? l/there any
wai'rant for jqpposing it ?/i moral character atid design to the
final judgment? Surely no^e : in fact the. very opposite.
It is, just as the second is, '• th^^appointi^^yOf the Supreme
Judge who' is perfect both in wisdom and goodness." Nay,
the Lord's parable of the rich nian ^ri hadfes gives us a vie^w
of the first death which (as related to tho lost) .resemble^'so
closely the second, that jnany have confikimded' them. There
is noT the least warrant for giving/to the first deatk t^e
character of »/^ora? evil which Ave shsrtl find Mif^Birks attach-
ing to it still more plainly in the si^uel. '*
Again, does he nOt go too far in deciding that the" secoud
death will work any moral change In those who. are subject •
to it? That it willvnot " steiv/otype and eternize /active re-
bellion against God" is no d<>ubt true. That it.wiU change
"hatred" into "^u'ght else/ must be proved rither than
asserted. The subjectigi/ of " infernal beings " - i^ clearly
taught. Every knee sha/l bow to Christ, and every tongue
confess that he is Lorcl ; that is true, for Scripture affirms
it. " The loorks of tbfe devil " shall be destroyed, but noi*
.< ■.*'
^^\
.•..).'■
434 FACTS AKD THEOHIES A8 TO A ^UTUBE STATE.
his character changed. Were it so, it would naturally seem
that universalism ipuBt be the true view ; for if the hcUitti
of all wore subject, eternal punishment "would be a raon
strosity; for it is not" based upon the infinite guilt already
contracted, but U[p<)n. the- />er«<tf<<inc// of moral cliamctir.
. " He that is unjust, let him be unjust still, and he that is
filthy, let him be filthy still."* Apart from all (juestions of
X3xact demerit, could the God whom Scripture reveals pur
sue with everlasting rigor those who had been brotight int(
heartfelt subjection to His will ? .
Mr, Birks' third proposition is — ' *
"3. The doom of tlioJost, wo are furtlier tnught, will be the ob-
ject of acquiescence and holy conteraplntiou ou the piii-t of all tht-
unfalleu and redeemed. . . . That doom, however solenm, can
— hardly be one of uuminyled horror and darkness, much, less of
unbounding and etornal blasphemy, which is the object of com-
placency and holy adoration to saints and augels, free from all
taint of mere selfi.shuoss, and moulded into the full' and perfect
resemblance of the divine love." -
The question could scarcely, be seriously raised as to
whether the act s of Him whose ways are perfect will be .the
object of complacency to creatures brought into His moral '
likeness. *' Their happiness is not," indeed, " made to de-
pend either on their ignorance or their Ibrgetfulnes's of the
doom of the lost." Nor need we suppose that doom to be
" unuiingled horror ami darkness," if by that is meant a •
doom which would itself be an evil, rather than onCvdesi^ed ,
for the repression of evil. To the very lost themselves, it
is not inconceivable, that that repression in itself should be
a good— the only one, it may be, which remains a possibility
^in their case. V
"4. Fourthly, on the day of- judgment the lioiior due even to
the| wicked as God's creatures, and gifted by Him with high and
noble powers, will, in some way or other, be still recognized by
the righteous Judge."
Mr. Birks applies, here the principle of Gen. ix. 6 and
* Rev. xxii. 11.
MR. BIIIKS' VIEW.
485
en. ix. 6 and
Deut. XXV. 2, 3j^and seems to intimate that Christ as Judge
will respect the divine image in man and the brotherhood
of all hunianity by some "moftsurement" or even "mitiga-
tion " of what might be the exact due. He does not posi-
tively say this, however ; and we must not say it for him.
"They were judged every man according to their works"
is what Scripture says. We can say nothing else.
" 5. Once more, the List judgment is the work of God's mercy as
well as of Hisjudiciid rightt'ousness. Tliis is plainly taught us
in those striking and impressive words of tlie Psiiknist— ' Also
unto thee, O Lord, belongelh mercy; for thou renderest to
every man according to his works.' In the judgment of the right-
eous it is easy to see and feel the truth of this whispered message
of God. . . Can it be true, even of the souls that perish, that
there is mercy in that sentence which dooms them to the lake of '
fire ? The deep thought which Plato dimly apprehended by the
light of nature, seems here to receive a direct sanction from the
Spirit of God. Punishment is set l>ofore us in the light of a
divine medicine for the diseases of the soul. Compared with that\
most awful of curses, that evil should be left to work out fully its '
own terrible issues in the darkness of utter banishment from the
divine presence, even the justice of God, however severe, is medi
cinal to guilty sinners. Their d iom is awful, but a world aban-
doned to the reign of unrestrained and triumphant wickedness
would be still more awful. The abyss, a bottomless pit, bound
less in its breadth and depth and insatiable in its craving, is to
be destroyed and abolished by the power of the Redeemer. The*
revealed scene of judgment is not a sea, an ocean or abyss, but
simply a lake of fire. It is mercy to the wicked to deny them the
fatal power of adding sin to sin. It is mercy to keep them from the
power of tormenting c@h other, by the free indulgence of their
own sinful and hateful passions. It is mercy to force them back,
even though captive and in chains, to the presence of that infi-
nite goodness, from which their own rebelhous hearts would lead
them farther and farther away, till they should Iq^ themselves
deeper and deeper in delusion and darkness foi;fev
I have not quoted all this for the sakVof opposing it
There is much in it suggestive, much thi£' would seem as
atijeast probably true. Whether it be thoVal meaninij of
«JSj,
-w.
r.
A ; ^
' ^ (I ^
*r
"%
' «f
§y
ii.i -
436 FACTS AND TfiEOKlES AS TO A FUTL'HB STATE.
the psalm is another question ; and if we read it in connec-
tion we shall perhaps har<lly agree that the thought of racJrcy
to the wicked shown in jihignient itself is what it speaks
of* Yet the principle need nOt on that account he untru^
and be it mercy to the lost or not, it is assuredly mercy to
the unfallen and redeemed, that evil should be repressed.
But Mr. Birks' texts can hardly therefore prove what be
quotes them for. The radical error in his view is exhibited
iO his next proposition. - — -*^ —
" 6, Again the second death is a sequel of a resurrection, but a
resurrection ',, to shame and everlut^ing contemi>t ' (Dan. xii. 2).
It thus involves in its very nature contrasted elements. For
resurrection is a work of redemption, a triumph over death, and
a fruit of the atoning work of the world's Redeemer. But a re-
surrection tdVsliame and contempt must alsr^^^ bp. a perpetual mani-
festation of .t^ creature's morrtl emptiness, in contrast to tlio
immutable and glorious perfection of Him who is the Only Wisr ,
and the Only Good." »„-"< v
I have already questioned the application of this pjsssage
in Daniel to literal resurrection ; but that concerns us very
• little here,, since evidently the resurrection of judgment
_ would answer the purpose of Mr. Birks' argument equally
well with that in Daniel. But the resurrection of judgment
' cannot be shown to be a work of rederaptr6n of a fruit of
atonement. It is Christ's work doubtless, but not as re-
deeming; nor are the finally lost ever the redeemed. For
the saints and for no others is resurrection " the adoption,
the redemption of the body.*! For no others is- it ''a. tri-
umph over death.'t The purpose of God a.s to man indi-
cated in creation, could not bo intended permanently to be
Bet aside by death, and the preservation of the spirit in death
implies the resurrection of the body from the grave. The
^: resurrection of which Christ was fiist'-fruits is a" resurrec-
tion from wnonf/ the dead." This is a " reVlemption," and
this alone. . .
♦ I have before'given very briefly my own thought,
t Rom, viii. 23. t ^ ^o*"- ^^'- 5^''>'^'
\
»
.1
MR. BIRKS' vCeW.
437
L in connoc-
Thcre are no "contrasted elements " therefore in the re-
surrection of judgment. That it is on the other hand a
" perpetual manifestation,
and a needed one, thcr
suggests at least, that
and make His power R
of wrath fitj,ed to destrnc
creature's moral emptiness,"
c no doubt. The apostle
illing to show His wrath,
wKh regard to "the vessels
and Fie who dolighteth in
mercy must have recognized a governmental ffecessity for
this. And thus we may believe, with Mr. Birk.s, that "their
^ Bolemn doom, though no result of the choice of the Moit
*' ttigh, whose love has displayed itself to the utmost in sol-
J?erdn warnings to deter sinners from the path of ruin, may yet
be the object of His deep and holy acquicpceneo " ; whether
or not we are able to belieyc with him that the reason is
''because in this way alone a ransomed universe can bo up-
hold forever in a blessedness based on perfect humility, and
capable on ttot very account of enlarging and unfolding
itself, without risk of fresh apostasy, (or ^wjft?**^" ,
This closes Mr. Birks' second chapter, rtw^vhat he con-
siders the " direct fand open lessons " of the Bible on this
rmbject. These dirfect teachings have c»^rtainly carried us
no further than this, that the final (loom of the wicked in-
\olves their enforced subjection In Ood.V That it caniiot
consist with active rebellion is Vpiite true -and important,
also. That there is an absolute need for it, looked at fr.oin
the side of mercy as well as • righteousness, is still true
And that in some sense it may be mercy eve%to the lo
themselves we have conceded likewise. So far we can go
no further. What we believe Mr. Birks has not.shown,
cannot show, is that punishment of this kind is in any se
a redemptive or restorative process,— the only proper resu
of which would surely be .w end of the punishment itielf.
•This he does not believe in, although a mitigation of the
punishment he does seem to' suppose. I cannot . seei that
either. Oertainly the// texts
se
ult
Scriptur e gives ov e n a hint of
we have thus far looked at do not.
■ ■ ■- ,"^ ""^ : ~ 7 ' ;/ '^ Rom. ixT 2'2.
^^00^'
I \
|:
^;'V
lilt !
Sit
9.'
/
438 FACTS AND THEORIES A^ TO A FUTURE STATE.
But Mr.'ISirks beliovos that " the l^ew Testament throws
further and perhaps still clearer light on thissolemn truth
of eternal punishment, when we look below the surface, and
strive to combine the indirect with the direct and open
lessons which its sacred messages convey." And here—
"1. Every created being may be viewed in two different
aspects, persional and federal, or what it is of itself, and its char-
acter as part of a greater whole. This Avarp and woof runs
through the whole of Scripture, and occasions a frequent an-
• tithpiis in its stjitemcnts of divine truth. Thus ' in Atlam all die,'
and still ' the soid thtet siiineth, it shall die.' In Christ ' all shall
be made alive,' and still it is to those who by pa'tient continuance
in well doing seek for glory, honor, and immortality, that God
will render eternal life. The' charge to the Galatians, ' Bear ye
one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ,' is followed
at once by an oppbsite statement, as the attendant moral caution,
' For every one shall bear his own burden.' . . The same contrast,
wherever selfishness is not complete, is foundby experience in the
elements which constitute human happiness and misery, joy and
sorrow. In part they are purely «knd simply personal, but in part
they arise from sympathy with the joys or sorrows of others.nor
from the contemplation of truths ^ot personal,- but <*jectiveand
universal " . i. *
"Now all the statements of Scripture with respect to the future
doom in judgment of the righteous and the wicked; have direct
reference to personal conduct and personal -retribution, the
federal aspect, in these passages, do^^ not appear. .^.,,. But this
truth, however solemn, and.however inwrought into the doctrine
of man's personal responsibility, cannot exclude a fi^ther truth,
namely, the federal relation of all mankind to the Creator of the
universe, and to Christ, the Head of every man., the Saviour of
the world, who gave Himself a ransom for all men. , One of these
truths is no less deeply inwrought into the texture of God's word
than the other. It must reveal its reality and it^powe];^n some
way or other, amidst all the solenm and tremendous realities of
the coming judgment. " . *^
Mr. Birksmust surely feel that that assertion is vague
enough at least. The difficulty in dealing with it is pre-
cisely Its vagueness . A n d yet is it after all too defiflite in
X
5IK. BIRKS' VI'EW.
439
s realities of
supplying what^Scripture, as it should seem for some good
reason, entirely ignores. He owns that the federal aspect
docs not appear in the passages whlcli speak (^future judg-
ment. He must own 4hat whereas, for instance, the " bear
ye one another's burdens " (which he calls that), applies to
the present life, the assurance as to the future is strictly
personal: "every one .shall bear his own burden.'' Is it
allowable to say that a certain "truth" must reveal its
reality ^d power in regard to that from which Scinpture
seems to exclude it altogether ? Doubtless^ the Creator of '
the universe w'll not forget even in judgment that men are
the creatures oi Ills Iiund ; and Christ the Ih^ad of all men,
it to whom all judgment is committed because He is the Son
^ gCMan,* will not Ibrget His own humanity. But it is vain
to brirfg this in to modify in any way the pc^itive statements*
of the word. It is not as Saviour of the li'orld, that He
takes His place upon the throne of judgment; nor can the
"ransom for aR" avail anymore for those adjudged to
Gehenna. Mr. Birks does not, I suppose, think that it can;
yet it is hard to say why he brings in thoughts that are in-
congruous to his subject. For the judged, through their
own wilfulness, the ransom has not availed. Had it done
i^o, they had not been judged. Salvation Mjitcondenmation
lire opposed in terms, and to argue as if tnosc condemned
were still in some fractional measure saved, is at least to
suppose that Scripture jias Ueen deficielit in not saying so
and to assume A competency to make up the deficiency.
"2. yecoudly,' the second death is a work of the God of truth,
by which pride and falsehood-are to be abolished out of the moral
universe. . . The fire, prepared for the de^^landhis angels, mnst
l>e the destruction of guilty pride, when it has become in a man-
ner coiisubstantiate with the spirit, and can be overcome in no
geiitler way than by the ever-enduring strokes of tlivint' judg-
ment. ' Them that walk in pi^de he is able to abase.' "
""Only it is .hard to. say how far pride is " abolished " out
of the lieart, when it iieeila such " ever-enduring strokes " to
* Jolin Y. '27.
#'
/
440 PACTS AKD THEORIES AS TO A PTTTURE STATE.
keep it down. For my part I can accept the former state-
ment, wlieu interpreted by the latter.
" 3F Thirdly, tlio second death is u work of the God of love,
wherein Hft displays His holy anger against every sinner whose
heart and life have been marked by utter selfishness, and the en-
tiro absence of genuine love to God and men."
I can have nothing to object to this. .
" 4. Fourthly,.tho resurrection to judgment, Uke the resurrec
tion of life, isW^imrt of the redeeming work of Christ."
This is a former statement, and the main one of the whole.
It is here, however, mor^ fully argued o® and we shall
agam look at it. He-says —
"The two main issues of judgment, howe^»eat their con- ;
trast,have one feature common to both. Th% follow a resur-
•rection. Hence the apostle jinites th^pi in one common, state-
ment, before he marks the contrast between 'them that are
Christ's, ' <,and all others. ' For since by man came death, by man
came also the re^^rrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die,
even so in Christ shall all be made alive.' The first death m
every case haa come through the sin of Adam. The hfe-restoring
resurrection is to come in every case through the po^yer and work
of the second tdatn, the Lord from heaven. The judgment Of
the lost is based on a present work of the Redeemer, in wluch
they share with the saved, and on a victory over death, wrought
by Christ, and depending on the power of His atoning sacrifice
.and resurrection from the dead. Their bodies are restored from
%e earlier dominidli of the grave, and the dominion of death, so
far, is wholly abolished " ^
f - But Mr. Birks makes no sufficient distinction between the
resurrection of judgnvent and the resurrection of life, of the
. latter t)f wliicb the Chapter from which^ he quotes through- .
out speaks. Had lie begun his q^tation a little earlier he
would have sQ.en that the apostle, instead of beginning with
a general statement of resurrection which would imj^dde
both jjplasses of the dead, /rs^ of all speaks ".ofth^ that
'♦ sleep »^ in Jesus, of whom (and of whom^^^) He is
dead
"first-fruits." — *' But now is Christ rl.scn from tho
become the first-fruits of them that sleep." Tliese sleepers
iS
g.r
-••A
«8,''.
MIL BIUKH' view.
441
are not all the dead. They are those fo? whom <^atb has been -
annulled, and changesljnto a refreshment and rest only from
cares and conflicts of this life in artticipation of the endless
mornin-. Of ?Ae/r resurrection is Christ the first-frUits, for
they 'alone are raised in " the ir(>^ge of the heavenly ''—the
Lord from heaven ; and » if |lie first-f V^t he holy, the lump is
also holy/'* It is«mpossihle to make Christ in any sense
the "tirst-fruits" ofthelost.
But then this i^rfAs^ what ]VJkJ5irks calls the "common
statement," which is appended to liT:^ -for since hy man
came death, hy man <5ihe also the resurrection of the deacL;
for as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all he made
alive "
Now are all men "in GJiYist" to be thus quickened or
made alive by Him ? Let any one compare ScfTpture, and
see if there be a doubt.t Na^ ISh'. Constable has long ago
been reminding us that l^he very word used here for - made ,
aHve" is . expressly the word,^ used by the same apostle,
where- he confines it to the saints : " //' the Spirit of Him
that raised up Jesus from the dei^l dwell in you, He that
raised up Christ from the dead, shall ^\^o ^quicken your
mortal hodkt^ by {pt ratfer, because^/) His Spirit that
dwelleth in you." Thus although the wicked will surely rise,
the apostle will not call that "quickening" or ".life-giving,"
which is not the resurrection pflifc^^ And we are doubly
"^ told that " aU in Christ " are n6t all men universally.
Even where he says "in Adam all die," although that is'
true abstractedly of at hianblnd, the whole context at least
(if not the construction also) would seem to necessitate the
limiting it 'to those of whom the apostle has just been speak-
ing, '''now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the
fir'st-friiits of them that sleep ;* for since Ky man came death;"
and thus theyare dead, "byman came also ^he resurroc-
tion of the dead," and they shall live ; " for
€»■
as in Adam
^^■
* Rom. xi. 16.
*
1»" "' ■■
+ Rfim. viii. 1 : xii. 5; xvi. 7 ;
i Cor. i. 2,30;
XV. 18; 2Cor. i. 21; ,' H
V. 17 ; xii. 2 ; Gal. i. 22, etc.
.
• "'■ H
•
--'■ : .;■••*?■ ■ •■■ 1
, „,-■ ._.^-fl_.l_. "-;-- — - - — ------
- - - - -^ '--^ -r-- -
n'"- ■ -*~^---^^-^-''^^^
^ .
'PWl
■ '" ' • 4-
■:i
Hl-
;
iii
t t'l
:'■:■:'■:,:<:: ■ % />".;-^ •;■:■•■::
442 FACTS InD TUEOBIEa AS TO A JUTUBB OTATH. * v
thoy »n die, evea eo in' Chri,t ehaU they »n be- made .
"'xtL is not the least ground ^^^^^^^^ .
•f he lost share with the saved in what is the frnitwf atone
m™t or a^made alive in Christ as raised from the dead.
? ' :; W^t forth by His power to i^^gmen*-^ J-^g-
mnnt and not srace, claims their n,sarreet.on. It may dis-
Ty //^ v°lry ov;r death, bnt is, in nowise «A«r,. It .s
not a fHyi-resurrection but ai,«?3".«(-resurreotion.
Mr. Birks reads the lesson of that judgment^resnrreot.o»
" " In the first death the dissolution of the body, and its corrap-
In the "St "en ^j ^j^^ ^ „„so
"T'"";S^^fr when HW wandered or was driven away
CXpr enc M H^ who is tight and Love. And when
^om tne presents ^^.^ correspondence
the dead are ^-^^ ^^'^ 1^^^^^^ heU are cast into'thejake
TTl ^'^IT^IT^^^ can remain no longer under
of fire, the souls, even oi ^^ * ^^^^
the curse of utter vanity. Thej vill glo y ^^^
amidst the fires of penal judgment. ^« ^^"^^ '^^^^^^
pn«l for which every creature was made. If the dealings oi vrou
end tor wmcii CYC J „i, „«*«. 4„«tifv a charge of unnatural
with iinv creature were such as ta justiiy a cu»ig , . . .
rrueuTor excessive and needless severity, God could not po^.-
bly be riorified thereby, but rather the divine g ory wouM be ob^
senred deeply elouded, or blotted out and whoUy destroyed. To
ZuvoJthrough shame and punishment, compa«=d w>th the
bSs of The redeemed and holy, must be an infinite and nrrepara-
bSor But to glorify Him in any way, bowevef «,lemn and
^ouS;,l when contrast with the reign of that death, whieU is
pri^enemT and the enrse of eternal vanity, darkne^, and cor-
fn;ti:rz'^. -» *<> ^^^^t-VX^ " '^'
baps even in some respects, an infinite gam.
Thus in Mr. Birks' view, the judgment which comes ator
death, is really, and perhaps infinitely, better than the
derth which precedes it! The usual comparative estimate
'nhe two is here reversed. Death is «,mparativcly the
■ °,.r»e. jud gment the blessmg! The proof w i ll nee d to be
— "nrse, jwi fe — ... ^„..._ „„„„.„ hpliave th B. — What is
^nrse, judgment the Diessing. x..^ t-.— ■
convincing that will bring many to believe ^this.
il~ Birks' proof ? It is here— ■ ,
1^
■''f^.:
r
I'f
MB.' BIRKS* VIEW.
443
« '!nie dissolution of the body, aiid its eornjption, was only the ^
type, sign, and parable of the deeper cu*e resting op the spirit, »
whe;i it had wandered or was driven away frdm the presence of
Him who is Light and :^ve. And when the dead are raised by
the power^of qhrist, this corrgspgndence cannot wholly cease. "
That is, when the typejs gone, the thing typified must
be gone witb'it. But to what state then does " where their
worni dieth not " apply ? there is the very figure qf death ^
and corruption. It should apply, according to Mr. Birks, to
the intermedrate state alone. <lY"et I -think he wiU hardly
^ny that it applies" to the finalr-Gehenna beingnexpres^y
named." That is, the figures drawn from death are applied
expressly whete accojdhig to him they should not and could
not be. r
And' is the soiil of the W naore away from the presence -
of God in death than in hell ? Wha^.ie-the flame in which
the rich man is tormented ? What is the place of w^hich the
Psalmist says, " If I make Ihy bed in sheol, behold. Thou art
there " ? What is it which the Preacher annqimces wjien
X he says, " the spirit shall veturn to God who ga JS^^- ' ? ^^
distanpe frolS God si^fite locality, or moral conditPSS rather,?
If the latter be at least the essential part, will reswrectioii.
bring the lost soul in py mlWre back to ^od, as it should,^
if type and antitype are to cdS^spond synchronically f
Again, are those " no lopger , under tli|^r8e of„ u^^r .^
A^anity," who 4fe '' destroyed hody^auA soul in hell "•'P 'ho
longer under "darkness," to whom is reserved 'Hhe mist of
darkness " and the " blackness of darkness forever " ?
Or is " the dky of wrath and revelation of the righteous
judgment of God " therday in which the lighter judgment^
of personal offences shall replace the far heamer one which '
comes upon us through the offence of another ? .
To find, however, the root of Mr. Birks' vi^v we must turn
to his chapter on Atonement hi the same bo^k, where he is
answering the question, " what, apart from the atonement, is
the statft of mankmd befpre God V What is their legal
Rtandin<r, and the nature of the curse and sentence under
^ -v
n-*^.
3C1(
1-
^m'
■S'^
-^ >
eatU
1^1^' he fe«y>H, w^*^'.!j^-<t<^^^ '
||:^m the iodyl fll^alm there
^> ;jind whpt.wiU ig^ Thee thanks
tlp^s not' show tfeaf^ath is ascribod
it shows that ther^ 8uch.a thinir
^iitp^l^v At^i& surery that th(B soul^^ Death
iScs a^,:0 tlie contrary, named ;toget^\rhere body
^ areliJL^i^ctlyin vitfw, as we have seaiM Mr. Birks'
, Aath4 tlmV4 is a physical condiii<$n,p^ «'«?
M^. dm^^''^ cor^ifltlafe^, soul as loeW But, thiris incongrur
..^flttBind unju$tiiabl&J>ii^ is the separatio>t||f soul and
.^vbod^dissoliitian, fcej^^ departure. The death s«<i<€ is
'^^V-^tihi itat^ K)f/seimratiQni.^e>esult of ^e dying. A dead
.'. fK Wa^ niay b^ a^rpse i)r > spirit/ But as de»th° affects the
^ ^ i>^ %^^ organism in a ^a^ifr cannot the spiriti,iw^ can speak
^H !'; ^^^^ k ?i .<3jBaa l^ody and cahnot ?peak of a d^ad i^p^^ Thus Mr.
;^ y il^ltfeipksVrepi^esentation of death is not only withpjiit Scripture,
V '• VSbttt contrary to it^ And this destroys the '|fei^ibund^tion
jt^"^^^^^ But he goes on :— . ,
■ ' 'TheVords temporal and eternsil, often applied to de^th,
abolition
Ml
fi
\y
ii'i r
tend mth^r to mislead, than* to' explain the tru
, 'contrast. / »The first death i& itemporal, l&ecause i
|, fe q. ixvefled projgjge ; but in 'its,6\^n "nature
i '/edempMoii, i^ -aW be everlasting. N)
■ the crotifi^rc, n^iPPf nature of sin, nor tb
' ibsiiiy limit or bound. It is due to a migh
; id^N *hiit it^is swallowed up*in etewial vi
f^' As to victory over death, every Ghristia
Mr. riirks. Fbrthe rest he has- pr^luce
Pn the other hand I have sought to, show thatthefii-st death
is in its own .nature prd\isional and temporary. . In Speaking
of.antaihilation Mr. Bjrks has truly and^rctbly said;— '■.
m Christ's
'acuities ^f
if God,* assign
of redemption
^agree with
%;ripture.
""^he' gifts and culling of God ar^'wit
then I a conscious l)eing, not dvpondftttf
!
epentanCe." "If.
ily organs, and
(!-
^
1^1
^. !■
m
ilk. BIRKS* VIEW.
445
fitted in ifeelf to endure forever, has been given, and sl^uld
tiftt'rwiiijds be witlidrawn, this would seem to reverse u gi-eat law
of God's uit)raV'U<>vernini'ut ; "—
And >v« niay extend this argument further. For man
was made- no mere spirit, but a living soul, which implies, as
we have seen, a bodily organism. Could the body finally
and forever ceas^ to be, and yet** God's gift be without
repentance ? That death came in through man's sin, while
of course true,' docis not more touch that, than it does the
annihilation question ; for it, too, would have come in
through sin. The argument plainly requires that what man
is by creation, he must continue to be ever, although a
temporary disciplin^ ofdeath would not be excluded.
• And with this siripture perfectly harmonizes It does
so in the fac t that 1 clea1;h reigns everywhere through one
offence: over those ^l^o l^ave not sinned ^fter the similitude
of Adam, and over tie youngest babe who has never sinned
at all. Did Qpdjf^rithis one offence condemn forever all
Adam's unborn posteVity ? Theology may say so ; but not
the word. Could tht penalty for Adam's sin upon alb his
descendants be worse \than that of their own, as Mr.-Birks
puts it? .
Scripture arg\ie8;.re|^iw<sction, not merely from the fact
of atoneiBjIllplj^slpJ^ of the person after
^eatlu,*'^s,as w^lji^^ ^i^ is the Lord's argument with
t^jiB mddiicees,^Tid confirmedi }^ o«e whq^ Isolds j>artially
their views to^da^;' .y '', ^.VL3'# '^w :■ ,.*^- \, ',:'.■ ^-:
And again, tlie judgment ftyrt^e deefls ^ne itf*the body,
waits as of necessity foi^ the "body- to Msfe again. ^ To say
that the resurrection of tpe Wicked r^lts from atonement,
is to'say that that judgment wbii^ rleqiui^s^it is "the , fr^lb-
of atonan^l^o ; .and^ that/l4i|r^n«[||Jhri8j|^lfe* ^J «^|J*»
God Wo WJi^MJi^havc judged men iqir t%2'*%Hk => * ^ /t
While ^^P^ would hayc suffeB«n^ more severely, as^
well as indlSirtinately, as thft result of Adam's sin, than
they now #ill for tlieii- owul-
i^^,
\n
.. -'X
il**>^
T
till
Yr.
'!■■,
Bifi ■
I:
}\\
11
15 »•'
446 FACTS AND THEOftIE$ AS TO AFUTURE STATE.
We shall now be able to see without much argument
the vitiating error in Mr. Birks' further statement:—
-This death, the sentence of the law, extends to the whole
man. both soul and body. To ^ee 'its Mature m respects t/ie soul,
we must reflect an its work with reference to tjie hodif. One w the
invisible sign and sacrament of the other. The body is then
parted from the soul, its life ; and being thus parted, becomes
the prey of inward corruptionr^So also death is the separation/
of the soul from God, the true source of life ; and ^U the confy
sion, chaof-, and moral corruption and dissolutionWlnch *olloya
that awful separation. Without, there is banishment from ^tiie
presence of God, and from all the light of His favor and blessiijg.
Within, there wiU follow the unrestrained working of moral /cor- ^
ruption, degrading, perverting, desecratiiig all the faculties/ and-
powers of the immortal spirit. Sin would thus become, jindcr
the name of deatli. a ' finished' evil, its own ever-growijfe tor^
mcnt, and the soul sink deeper and deeper in an ab^ oF hope-
loss misery." / •
It is evident at once that Mr. Birks does not derive. this
view from Scripture, but from his own hypotlifesis /that the
effects of death upon the body are typical of its effects upon
tlie soul. And in carrying this .thought out, he t^kes what
arc separately true and Biblical ideas— and which we are ac-
customed to speak of as death physici*], and deat^h spiritual,
—and joins them together in indissolublfe uiVion. But
surely Mr. Birks can scarcely have followed tlys ont to its
le<-itimate result. Can he mean, for instance, f^At there is
nonsuch thing as being " dead while living " V t%^ #iritual
death never takes place before corporeal V of t^ it does
necessarily when this does ? To the latter qUes^n^he may
perhaps easily answer that the saints are s^vecf from this
part of the penalty. But if so, why are thev/not saved from
the whole, if the penalty be oile? if it be^\it one and the
same death, how is it they die Ate all ?^ j ;
' If there are those now " dead " spiritually, while living,
do these die miain spiritually, when their bodies die ?
Or what is the difference between these two spiritual
deaths ?
111
TE.
argument
I tlio wliole
els the soul^
Oue is the
ody is tlien
id, becomes
} separation/
1 the confv
licli foUoya
it from tiie
ad blessing.
I moral /Cor-
culties/and '
!ome, under »;
[rowing tor-,- <
|»p of hope-
demve.this
318 /that tlic
3ffect8 upon
takes what
1 we are ac-
h sph'itual,
liion. But
8 out to its
syjt there Is
ikt §^iritual
t&t it does
t^n'lie ttiay
cTfroni this
; saved from
one and the
vhile living,
; die ?
«vo spiritual
Mtt. irniKs' VUiW.
447
I can scarcely persuade myself, while I ask these ques-
tions, (imperatively called fpr, as they seem, by Mr. Birks'
position)— that I am not doing him some unconscious in- ,
justice in imputing to him thoughts which involve consCr
quences so' strange, and which it would not be hanl taxarry
a good deal lurther. I sl^uld be happy could I conceive
the possibility of having mistaken his meanmg. His words ' ,
will at any rate speal^ for themselves. - ,
Mr. Birk8 having got so far really without Scripture, at
last makes an. appeal to it -.^^ — r--v- • -^^— -i „_ .^_
"On this view wo may see the force of the coritrpsted figure^
by which, the first and second death are pd|trayed. ' One is * th^
Uiko of fire,' solemn indeed and most! awful, yet bounded in its
range, shut in by firm land on everv side. The^ othi* is ' the
ileep,' 'the abyss,' 'the bottomless pit,' evil reigning,' ridtmg,
growing, deepening without limit and without end, in its fatal
descent, fai-tUer and farther from Uglit, happiness, and heaven.
By the sentence of the law, fulfiUod without atoncfient or redemp-
tion, mankind once fallen would be shut out fi-om God's presence,
und'sink, and silik; and sink forever in this abyss of hopeless and
endless ruin. There would have been, through ages without- end,
the awful reaUt^ of a aod-dishouoring, God-hating, God-bT
pheming,self-toriifenting,G?Od-abandoned universe. SuchdeatlH
the wages of sin, its.duo desdrt, and;the issue to which it naturally .
tends. It is the fatal harvest from the seeds of moral coiTuptton •
• harbored in the soid. ' Sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth
d6ath."' , . - u
All tl9^|t of the solitary \\'ord "abyss"! 'Mr. Birks
■ has too iiji^ly poetical an imagination to have always a
sober judgment. He does not even give us data on which a
judgment may be formed. " Abyss " means '^bottomless '^ :
so far isibar. , And it is a figure, Mr. BirkS /ays, by which
the first Ifeth is portrayed. Th|t*«^ not so clear: When
' the devils besijech the lord thrf^ |fe,wo\ild not command
them to go out into tlje " deep ''gihis ||jhe satfie word -
' abyss." It is the bottomless 1>1|||| ^jf^^^ill^^^^*' '
IvDlic locusts ^omc, and thei
lyon, " the€Rt»yer." It is
the inys- '
■*;v
i^W-
! t ft!''
M ^^^
,5T
•^
»P
^%.
'^
.l.r
44I %A^'aS0 TUKOUIKS ASm.A FUTUUK BTATli.
U<>'^l>caHt" ascends; anSln^riy tlval iif^hicti Satan is shut
/or the millenrjiurn. Thtfv'e are all llio occurrences in'
Jipture save one, in whicli the apostU^asks, " \Vho shall
(Scend into the dcep^ihat is, to bring up C|ri8t again
'^n tht^lead."* " f J ^.
NowHt' seems as if it must, be from the last passage that
Mr. Birks has derived his idea ; and yet it is one mpst inap-
propri^ for his purpose. Whatever else it were, certainly ^
^^tho abates could not be to ^le Mord y,'hiit he has pictuifcd.
fit ;t could not be in that sense, a* '^ al)y8S." JEherekhc
finds ijt nicture the death state of th<5 lost it is liafd to^iiK-
jSi^a<'ine. %ii?-dcvils have no death state. Satan' is not shut
^ up a*thoui?nd years in death. The "loourit^" are not a
symbol of, the dl^d; ijor Apollyon the king of the dead.
The beast, it is Wu|^^%iid to co^ne up out of th# abyss,
and before that,V " wis, ftnd is%t''— so that here the
' death 8tateij|fht«i|fc-figuri|l ; bilt ft could scarcely furnish
forth Mr. Biffs' picture. And here is the whole array of
Soripture'f ^^^ . * • j^
Jt can scar^«^eed to foj^w o"ut length a mere poetic
fancy, for SHph it is.; t shall J^^i»ut two tlpHigh^ : h that
in this way the senteMe d^P^Rey^Iaw (as he j^nceives it)
would involve a'" G>i^Mfi(gorw}f and God-sibandoned uni-
v^se "— Godv i^;ould We 4en tied bjc it to His own dis-
hohor ! the Governor ^tho Universe bound not to interfere
with the development of evil under -His own eyes !
' 2.;^ would again refer to the Lord's p arable of the rich
♦Luke vii. 31 i;ii^-7briTij7 1 iT^^ -^v'- ^ ' ''''* ^' '^ ' l^"""" ''■^'
+ He does in point i.f fact make tl»e L()r(l endure there, rather than
'^on the tree."^he '• extrmue of so.iKirati»n from His heavenly Father."
TMs is thoroughly unscriptilral. I^ displaces the cross, it evacuates
the Lord's crv. " It is fin i shed," » and nincis tl\e threefol.L witness of the
Erit the water, and the hlood. It is a view which 1ms aV)solntely,n..
.poi-t, save in a Jivnciful inKM-pro^rftion of such passa-os iu» Psa.
Ixxxviii. 4-7 ; Ixix.lo; xviii. 5-15; i^id .is a-ainst ti.p. j.lain sense ot
i bo'^ a('»iiin'> <'<ri(;acy t<^ the blood of the ci'oss
%
every passage which ascribes .r ^^ „, ..
Rorn..v.O, vi.6; T.al. iil. 18 ; Eph. i. 7 ; i^, 13-16 ; Col. 1. ?1, 22 ; n.
14; 1 Pet. ii. 24, etc.
.4
i
0-
^»
AT 13. »
atan is shut
urrcnces in'
VVho shall
Itirist again
massage tliat
3 most inaj)-
rc, «crtainly^
as picturfed'
-jThfirekhc
iiam to^inv-
is not shut
" are not a
of the dead,
r t*h# abyss,
nat here the
rcely furnish
olc array of
mere poetic
rhft : v. that
ajriKJeives it)
andoncd uni-
[lis own dis-
t to interfere
>res !
e of the rich
1, 'A\ Horn. X.7.
ere, rather than
avenly Father."
ss, it evacuates
L witness of tlie
,s al)solutely no
issasos iis Psft.
■, j>lain snijs'e of
otl of the ci'oss ;
»
ol. f. 21, 22 ; ii.
\
mi. iJiUKa':VYidBW.
440
man in hades. licro, if anywhbJjie,; wo should have the awful
abysH of Mr. Birks' imaginatioA^. Instoad of which we fin<l
a soul ill God^s hand, enduring Hi» wrath ; but certainly not
the "reigning, rioting, gi^jwving, <leepening evil," which, we
are told, is the character W the first death.
The whole view is (I am compelled to say) incongruoua i
and nnscriptural, reversing the proportions of death and
judgment, of the result of another's sin and of men's own. I
It is lacking iii moral harmony as in Scriptural cohesion. '4-
There are two more ai'guments we iuust brietly loolt a^t^
Mr. Birics' fifth proposition is, that at^— ^'"^ ,t ''"^ Jf"-..
^tho lt»ve of Chri.st has a length and breadth and depth and
ght, that passeth knowledge," its hiWnilti iteplh must be :dtani-
tefiwed Jprever in the guilty and coridt nmed, towards Avhom it may
be sl^Bj^ in the perpetuiU yearnings of a dee2> "nd true lilfompas-
sion. Vii8-,% thinkH, " may pi(?rce through their conscleiyce, and
enrade their whole being, even amid their still abi^imig con- /
iousnefw of deepest loss and eternal shame. . . The truth of./'
God seil'ms to give a most solemn assurance that the^enal ^eii-
tence shall never be reversed. The depth of a love f^^oasseth
knowledge gives an equal assurance that lli^ii ilirtrtuMpH not
be, however terrible and mournful, one of unmiti^llPrinisery,
hut such that even hero the glory of the divine goodness,' and
thosQ liMider mercies of God \vhich are over all His works, shall
be revested for evermore."
This, ne beKeves too, accords with God's title as Saviour
ot all men ; and though unbeliever.s are not saved from judg-
ment, the second death, and the fire that is not quenched,
they will be saved from temporal death and corriqition,
Irom the curse of hopeless vanity, from the '' abyss" — ■" will
they not be saved from that utter, unmingled, hopeless mis-
ery, in which no ray of comfort or relief of any kind breaks
in upon a dreary solitude of everlasting despair ? Will they
not be saved, in some strange and mysterious but real sensed
when their irremovable sorrow finds beneath it a still
lower depth^f divine compassion, and the sinful creature
in its most forlorn ei^ate, and in its utter shame, encounters
/:
9
460 PAC'lb AKD THEOIUES A8 TO A PUTURK blATK.
the amazing vislou of *tcu(ler, condescending and, infinite
love"? ^ • ^
. Of this Mr. Birka' last argument seems httle more than
a repetition. It i« that ajl men stand in relationship to God
under three distinct characters as Creator, Moral Governor
of the world, and Uedeemer.
*'Thi5 coutrust botwccu ,thi! obedient in ul disobedient, thu
:: fuithful and unbelieving, vi their volution to God us tlu- righteousi
Judge; cuuuot set aside their common relation to Him as the.
bountiful Creator of all men, and the God of grace towards all
who are sunk }fi guilt or misery.. . .' Siiiners, to whom the Sou
' of God was given, for whom He bore the cross, and died ufcursed/
over whom He wept tears of pity, and towards whom there have
been patient yearnings of God's iniinite compassiou, and of His
" diviue loug-sufferiug, not williaig that any should perish^ bUt
that tdl should come to repeutiince, can surely never cease, eveu
under the strokes of judgment, and in their depth of utter shame,
to be encircled evermore by the infinite compassions of that holy
and perfect Being, whose Very name and nature is Love."
To such arguments the answer has already been given,
inasmuch as they are based upon the vie Wr previously ad-
vanced, that the strokes of judgment will not only effec-
tively piit an end to active opposition, but remove the
enmity of the heart itself, and ./u/ce— to use an expression
which sufficiently refutes the view that it expresses,— a will-
ing subjection to God. Grant once the heart so changed,
who couia refuse the thought of the infinite pity and love
of God coming in with abundant and ready help J The
difficulty in this case would not be to go as far as Mr. Birks
-in this, but how not to go much father. Just as all that
have known God's grace have experienced in their c^wn
■ case, whatever the natural impotence for good, it CQwld hot
" be an insurmountable obstacle to recovery were the will
once with that divine will which has all competence in
itHplf. But if of "some on earth it could W said, as having
in the face of light ^ Unowjledge rtyected Christ, that it
was '' lmp<>s><ihf>' toMwi^w tifem again unto repentance,"
^ * how much more must that be said ot those whom even th^
T^ll^i^ •'•*■■'
■E.
id, infinite
nore than
i|> to God
Governor
dient, thy
I' riglitc'ousi
£im ua Ihe .
owiirda uU
m tho Sou
1 uf cursed,
there have
Liud of His
)erish^ Uut
ieiwe, "oveu
Ijter shtime,
i that holy
/e."
een given,
iously ad-
jnly eifec-
move the
expression
i8j— a will-
5 changed,
r and love
elpJ The
]Vj[r. Birks
as all that
their o,wn
CQjald not
e the will
petcnce in
, as having
rist, that it
jvontanoe,"
n ON on th<^
THE EtUICAL QUESTION.
451
infinite gooihiesH of God has to give up to "eternai judg-
ment"! It iH not, God lorbid, that Ilis compassions fad'
They are necessarily hehl back l)y the obduracy of the evil.
That "amajr-ing vision of ti'ii.Ivr, condescending, and infinite
love" of which Mr. liirks speaks, e„uld not be beheld by~
those for whom nothing less thanthtr ever-enduring strokes
of judgment will suffice. We dissent from his yicAv, not
.^jecauso we think less of the mercy of tht' RodeemeT,* but
betaiise we are assured that if it could at any time" through-
out the ages of eternity win the heart to God, Tu) arbitrary
limit of probaUon'passed could avail to shut out from it a
mercy more effective than he pleads for. i^l because
we are assured that what' is impossible, for mercy to effect
is not more possible to be the work of judgra^iit.
We are now to look at the ethical question.'^' ,
*■-.:
CHAPTER JtLII.
C'AL QUESTION.
It is the judgment of'tTiany that the ethical question
should precede the exegetical, which seems as much as to
say, that wo mhst first decide what Scripture omjht to say,'
before we attempt to ascertain, w^hat it doex. We should
certainly treat no other writings 'after such afa.shion; and
the claim of these to bd divine does not aftOct their claim to
be intelligible also. If God' has sjioUen; He is as well abl^
to make nim.<ielf understood as another, and is as ready too
to assume the responsibility of His utterances. If it be
God, We nerd not fear lest His word shcjidd be immoral, or
that it will not approve itself to the consciences of men, His
creatures, ,Tudg.> Jlim too they will, no doubt • but He
will be justified in His sayings, and clear when He is judged.
/
'. *r I . ■ ■ ; . , ■
45^ ^tACTS ANDTUEOiHESAStOAFUTURESTATfi , ,
Theri « little doubt that tbe attempt to decide on moral
grounds what'Seripturo >/*M«f bave Hai«l upon the ^lyect
before us) has destroyed with many all eertaiuty ot ^vbAt it
does^Hay. Almost everywhere anion- umvs-'rsalitt writers
' of every grade tbe doubtiulness of its testimony is a thing
cionsidered beyond dispute by reasonable men. AVe may .
' affirm positively what conscience or the '' moral reason " says.
We may not affirnl^ positively what God's word- has said.
Stran«ely enough it is thought preSttmption to pronounce as
' . to the latter, none in the former case. Yetlt i«'l>«jf /'^^^^
supposed God could not make Himself intelligibir if He
pleased ; and none can deny He has spoken «n the Subject, it^
Scripture be His .word. Is it to be sup^osed^He meant to give
no definite statement? But why should He have kept: b^cK ,
.what the "moral reason'' by itself can prortounce upon .
■Perchance because He would not interfere witli the province
\of reason in a matter aa to which it is so abundantly com-
petent to decide ! I8.it ttifen so competent? Whythenare
ie all in sucji a fog to-day, except, indeed,' Scripture, itself
Uresponsible for the fog, and have thrown thc^^moral sense
intb confusion. And this is a conclusion some weuld seem
to have arrivetf at. • '. . »
i'But even so, it can scarcely be aperfoetly safe and rc^lia-
ble .mide,if liable to this 4)erturbati6n ; especially as we
cannot logically assume that Scripture is- the onj^ possible
'perturbing- cause. Conresse.lly for centuries the moral sense
has %epted the truth of eternal punishmeht for many, and
witMlie addition (Canon Farrar's mo^l , sen^e says, the
. ^e>.;«i/ addition) of ajmrgatory tor n|a«k^^all.^ In.the
majority of oases within the limits of au-I§|^#m, it lias ,
not yet been able to f\-ec itself froni wt^fite |)oen fi^^ at
least as a yoke which many, wouhj fi||Wve shaken .off.
; Nay, having shak<en it ol^W memorably ^<^ French r^-
lution, it has bowed its neck again and ISfcqiJMJ 'sub^tjt
Outside of Christendom iirtSppg the millions of Jslam^ it bafil
Accepted a creed wherein Grocl is blasphejnously rfcpresented
as assigning men their place in heaven or hell with titter
"■■.■ ^ ■■'■■. ' ■ ■■ • ^ - •■ ' ' ■• ■■■'•;^.■-■;■■
w
<s
■ 4 ■' ;-.
./ft
v..-:--
1 '• :.■
■ .■ ■ t •
#
THE KTUICAL QITESTIOIT.
463
&
and equal mdifforence.* Ainon<^ Brahmans ani,^ Buddhisms
alike it accepts the loss of personal identity ^^^the ahu^orption
into Brahma, or the attainmoiit. of Nirvana, as the goal aBd
highest aim of man. While in Mr. ^Frederic Harrison and ^^
.'the Positivists it has come nearly i-omid to this again, man's *
only worthy future being maintained to bo a future of *^ pos- "
thumous activity":! a possibly eternaUinfluence. upon ifldefi- c
nite generatioiis. of ephemera, or at least until the gradual
cooling of the sun lirings them to the end so very generally
contemplated.
The moral sqiise can hanlly then be considered a satisfaef'
tory guide. Nor indee<l do those who follow its guidance
dare to speak of tlie attainment of any certainty thereby.
Thus Principal Tulioch commenting on Canon Farrar's
volumejj while admitting that men </o 'fdraVe.to penetrate
'trehind the veil,' and to lay hold on something'definite on
whiph to rest theit hopc| or fears," asserts that at the same '
time^ 'all'sober minds' will feel how really impenetrable the
veil IS, and that no light of real Biowlec^e can be carried be-
yond that sphere of. time and space which now conditions
all ou^/i)owers of knowing." " Probability is all that we
can^tain to," add» P,rof Jellett, another critic on ^le'same
♦ side. While Mr. "V\^/ll. Greg propounds it as On6 of his
<' EuJgmas of Life,'' that while all the good, which he owns
may be in a man's religion, lies in the certainty it co^nmuni^
f^ ^ajtes, a G|^tainty that*alone "sends him to the battle-field,
€?j sustains him at the- stake, or enables him to bear up
• * Mr,"Palgrave gives us as characteristic of Mohammedanism, a tra- :
aitioTi, " a repetition of whicli," he 'says, " I have endured times out of 'f
. niimber from admiring and a[)i)roving Wahhabe*s i;i i^ejed/i-that whSi '
God '• resolved to create the human race, he took into hiS hand a mass ''
earth, the same whence, all mankind were to be fornj^d, and jn which
f - IJiejB after a manner; pre-existed ; and hgiying then divided the clod into
'- two equal portions, he threw thi' one ha|f into hell, saying, ' These to ^
" eternal fire, and I care not ': and projected the other half into heaven,
^, adding, ';<flnd these lo Paradise, and I care not'" (A "fear's Journey
through Central and Eastern Arabia).
. "f Sec " A Modern"^yni[tosiHm " in tlu* "Ninteenth Century."
w
1.
\
'11
.J«l
:v
.fif'
i'
I.
ff -
1.464 FACTfi A^D THEORIES AS TO AFUTITRB STATE.
through the Unii,' and weary martynlom of life,"— yet "it is
'pVQciHely tills certainty (to which all religions pretend, and
.which is essential to the inHuenee of theui all) which never-
theless fJioui/Zifffil^aAid sincere minds kmny to be the one
element of Jil'sehood, the one untf-ue dogma common to
them all"* . - ' '^ -:\ ,
Tims tho moral reason is not constructive, but destructive
only- and destructive of (alas) the very power which ^ould
^sustaiji a man through life, or at tite:' stake if need ^be.
Strangely enough, the thoughtful and sincere aJ-e they who
must pay ^^^c penalty of renouncing what Mr. Greg, c^lls
"this strengthening and ennobling grace." That is one of
4lie " Enigmas of Litb," as be understands life : an enigma
ono niin-ht have thought essentially atheistic, but which is
on|r- "Agnostic," appertaining, that is, to a phllosophv
which .without^Iiinturing to say, There is no God, simply
affirms tliatf^ctmnot make Ilimself known lo IIis crea-
tures^t— tha^they know enough about Ilim to know that t
The certainty of vmcertainty as to nil it most imports to .
-^kbaw is wliat the pamftil toil of centuries of i^searchi^iis^
.' at last achieved. ' l J§
God is the " Unknowable." But if He is, how then cai#P.
we k-now that? .Does- not .that imply some knowledge ai-'
lea^tV Can reason reU assured that that is an ultimate
fact'? Is it impossible lie could communicate some know-'
ledo-e of Hin\s€lf y some certainty as to a future lU'e ^^ven >
lial science decreed that IliB Bliall be dumb, or helpless, or
indliferent, or what? Is the science perchance not too dear,
that makes all science valueless V, Jt would seem as if men^
must think so; as if these scientific altitudes .yould ' be ,too
cold and barren for human dwelli\ig-places. ^Certainly if
reason m;i be satisfied with that which takes all meaning
* .^ - -#.. --- - - \- MiL-\- ' - " ^r'.
*"Eni?mnsofLife,"i).21-J. , / ;v ^**1s» .,
" - t "And flnallv, we philosophers; awrt mei\ of" science know, with a
conviclionat least as positive as X\x4 ot any of.t'hese believers ihal
thev are all wrong-, t'hal- no such Jliota have ever been deliverejl ai,<l
' that nosiiQh knowledge about the Uiiknowable can ever be reached
■ ■:<-
•■' :t ■ ^' >■
=-^
?%
E. /
yet " it is
tend, and
ich never-
I the one
mmon to
estructivG
ich \Vould
noed l>c.
they who
h-eg~ calls
i is one of
in enigma
: wliich is
philosophy
od, sijnply
His crca-
cnow ihatt
imports to
iseanih
w. then cai^.
>wledge at" '
m nlthnate
ionic knou-'
! ly'e even':*
helpless, or
ot too dear,
n as if men,*
:)ukVbe.too
Certainly if
ill meaning •
know, Willi a
believers, lliat
(lelivpiPil, aiid
r Itp readied "
' .7
. THJi ETUICAL QUESTIQX. 46l>
out of humaiji life and histoi^ ; if the moral sense can satisfy
itself AVith what levels a man witU the boasts that perit^h;
no thoughtful man can value ;*eitlier's guidance, tio aintera
> man caii feel such Itfe as other than alio. .
'And what '^fthout 'shi i Is there s-uch a thing "? Is it true
that " out of the heart of man proceed evil thoughts^
murders, adulteries', fdrnications, thefts, false' witness, blas-
phemies" V What says the moral sense again :^ Are, these .
things inconvejiieiices merely, or do tjiey ''delile the man" 'i
Afe tliQy results of wrong diet, political blunders, accident,
o^'aro they innrfte in every child of man ":' If tlie latter, and
if evil, is man as God made him, or is the Christian doctrine
of the fall perchance a verity? One or other must be.
If truth, if purity, if; virtue be any jBore than a mere name,
what is the world, and what are we ? If -we' ourselves are
exceptions, M?/t<ii?«i /t<'fN^ «/•«(>/</• /if^/^/t^^/"-^ ^ I f jGro d made
such a world. He wer^not®od Kitfer therp is no 'God or
- we are fallen 'creatures. ? ^
Allow rq.e once there is such a thingjfe ijp|and the shadow
is'^^one from off the face of God. _|fc j:nay .rest on man, and
on- nature, but faith in Gmlfs'pobib'Ui Qiiice more.. Death
and judgment are reaUtix3^^|i5it.i&t)jil lives, and God isj^ood.
"The very laws 9f iiaturelStear**f|Iira wilfcies^^as the exprossion
of a nature opposed to ^evil, ' vigitiiig transgression with
penalty. The shadow is4;he fr^wn of God ; and if upon "
evil, then because He is .opposed to evil. Granted there
."^may be difficulties and pcr])lexities, the general* boarii?^ of
•the facts is evident; and the huriian laws without Avli|eh
vnien could not liye, are but the copy s^d outcome of. the
nine. „ ., '
But grant onee again that man is a sinner; gr&nt that
he has a will thtit perverts hik* judgment, luSts that seduce
Ills intellect ; grai^fc ^ttiftt ^in iiiUulged dulls thi| conscience
.^•}ind' depraves still tuHher the heart (and these' are lessons
;,""of every day experience) ; grant that an otfendei"' is not ajj
>un-
rational
, t ■■: '• . ■/ i .' 1 o . . — „— _.-^ — „.._. ... . —
.j ; -'h)^^ judge- in his own cause ;^;artd yoii haye ab
*;«''^' darit, over-alnindant reason for idistriWtiHst the mere ratio
■^
■-.J'
m
■
>.«
m
Kki ■
(*
rr';
f-.
t ■-(■ ' ■
f
I"*!,
1'- f '
'■*PJ
}''
. ♦ ,
» 'a
r 'i\
r
h -*'.
8 -;
J- V
t^
II
i^
456 FACTS AND THEORtEa AS TO. A FUTUKE STATE. '
vv eBtimate of man's possible future. That he has a conscience
^ capable of being arouse! by God's word, and of responding
to His appeal, is of course true, that God challenges
man's understanding and his moral sense, d,nd makes tlietii
His witnesses is also true. He will be justified in His say^
ihgs, and clear when He is judged. But that those who
have never learnt to measure themselves in His presence
should arraign His justice because His estimate of sin is
different from' others, is tlae height of irrationality,, as jt. is
of pride. '
Yet we are told that "every day sees an increase in the
number of those who will not cpnsent to receive a doctrine
on external evidence only, withovit examination of its moraj.
character. Many would give to the moral faculty the absor
lute right to reject as untrue any doctrhm ajjpeanuf/ to U
— 4mmoral, whatever amount of (apparent) Jscripturjal evlilence
may be adduced in its favor.'* This principle leads to a
different issue in diffetent people ; some giving up the doc-
trine only, while they retain the ►Siiripture : some giV^mg up
the Scripture on account of the doctrine. Thus Dr. JJ*llow*|
in behailf of Unitarianism applies the principle; . %
* ' If we are to continue to claim flic uamo of Christi^^ns, we must^
continue to believe that the testimony of tlio records of our faith
is not contradictory of the cvidi^ucc of tbe moral reason. # ifc^,
were proved such, we should be compelled to abandon Cliristiau-
ity, so far as it claims to be founded ou tlio^cw Testament. We
believe the general testimony of the New Testament to be in full
accord with the testimony of man's moral nature, in ^-t^ard to\
the issues of tm divine government, /if is ?W to he dmiett that
pictorial phrases, \parables, tmHspncidl texts, are to be found there,"
which, taken by themselves, seem to favor not only the doctrine:
of endless punishment in the i)di)nlar sense, hnti jusf (Hi jdfvinly/
the existence of a material hell, and a personal devil. But as the
literal force of these stjitements obliges ns to iiecept th6 Cflincl^
sion th.it this earth is the smt of tfhe final (?) jtidgmeiit, and that
Christ is coming in person to judge th<^ n«Jtt;ions, we must leave it
to those who aro willing to accept the r(sponMil>iMty of maiutain-
*, Prof. Jellett upOn ruiMii Farrar,
rSi-
i
. ./^i' - . . 'iSW-vI
■ •is^
- ■^
' L ^ TUK EnuCAL QUESTION^ " 4^7
comingof Christ and thp aorfii • ? ^^'^ personal
wll. a,1„w .... a-atlSetS ' A r^^"a'
., lous taste will require tliese latter al<^ t„ i m ^ "
- Scripture i»,h„» Ipted ,„ the ll^^vettbtX- 1
an,l no one is offenaed. Each on,. ...IT ! '""^'¥™ n""-!. .
■ -U imagining it i. another ."iri^w"'" *'? ^'*"'
«ua<lea to worship his ow„ image ^l^^t^LT ^ "If;
as well as sQinfc ^^ 11 I . ° ^^'■^^f^unfjulsiuners,^'\
evcTy onT ap"o "s fi ' "•^'^IP'r--- aeeommodated, ^i
' '- i ^"'^ W^Qves of a divmo government ^»^,^i,?^ t
K.L,iipLuic, as ao the ad /ocatos nf " «^.^«,t*- i •
betrav Tir-r^ ti • conditional immortality »
g uiu|Hoot.+ -It IS thus he argues :—
wMeh hult'M 1 r.? ^"'^'^^^^"^ I--«- To thi. world/
' love. So it i. :: • ,' 1 ^''"^"^!;^^1^-^. ^*; *- -- i^s faith apd
»>oliev(.rw:.utkinJof r ivi' V-' f . '«»««^0"ai^ tells the un-
i<> oo..vert ^:^.^:'^t:;^ the"Ch..stian is. in order
answer of the henlkVii' f o ! ^ ^''"'^ ""^ '^^^^^^' "^^t't^io '
---— -4i!iil^_^" t.^i- im-ss^^es should be,'Wepannot
\
\-
f-
o
y-
ih
nn
|J»1 !
1
458! l^ACTS AXD TUEOUIES AS TO A FUTtrilE STATE.
analwill not, btliJvo in a God of whoia you affirm stioll out-
r:igti|)ns \vronfr.' .... ^Vo usk tlu! hilwiiiu hourfc foF its verdict.
Wo Hiiy that jinl^'i'd by luiinan jiidpfiueiit, ajid that the judgmoiit
of Ixiliovt'iH and uubolievors alik.', the iMiui.slnn(B>t|t}i wLi(jh tlit) tlir-
cry of Angustiuo supposes that Ciod will iufU'ct'ls infuite/i/ iofy
gtoab, aud wo are thereforo.to reject it as untrue, iWcimst wholly
Uiiworthy/not merely of a ;^tL'rciful Father, .but a' just <^p.''
° X^vv \V(i arc goinuf to look at/-thc doctrine, not cf Augus-
tmo iut of Scrii)turo, and to see liow la r |tKipj> roves itself
to the conscience of men. That it does bid nullt, irhrre th<
emi^vifjiictj i-i ollm\ is true, as I have already said. The ex-
tracts that follow in Mr. Constable's book I ain nu way con-
ceded to justify ; yet even they tell in myotars a very
jilifterent story to what they p^em to dd in his; They tell
mo J)ow little this vaunto'd moral sense— how little this poor
heart of man has really to say in the matter. From the
lioma^ists whp accept an<l approve the liormrsiu^' l^ina-
'■H
mt
"*
m
■Tmonti lor Father iF'urniss. to the Protestant hearei-s of
J^nathait EdwardJ^ or of Mr. Spurgeon, haw many con-
demned a.s incredible the tbings portrayed to them? You
would expect' Jrom the statejnents of tliose wlio laud the
moral sdnse so highly, that their auditors wouhl have risen
up with on ' over- powering outlmrst of indignation and have
driven tliein from the pulpit, instead of saying Amew and
4;lrctdating their boQ'ksP^y hundreds dr by thousands. Pos-
'ssibJv the "intelligent an# educated Hindoo merchants ami
magistrates " of whop •"D'r. Leask has told us.* hTid the ad-
" valitage )n t'bei'se r-espects oC their Ghristiau bretlirei:. But
if it requires iiitelllgence and eaucation of a certain order to
; deteij^t these errors, jjerhaps aftef all the virtue is in the
/ mildness of the BrahlTiamsm under wliich they had grown
' up rather ,]tlviri the nijpral sense which eonld^give in the que
?; case a^leci^ioii so jiisf fin the other «o unliapi>y. 1 y
^ ; ; We«hajJl*^«to know, 'hbw(jv:er^ that where the gospel hias?r
^ ' ■ :mad<»^«ii(:K 1^ permamSst conqticst^ tteyaoe- ^
,. trmS of eferahlr^uni^^^^ iVas l)#ein heM j^ul jrat fortli^ •
-■"■•'■ „ '■» ",i'' -■ ■ r.--™»- o „ - ■>•• " • -, ,; ■■", *'■■.'■ . j* ■ „ ■/■ ■'...-
. ■" ■■„ " *.'■ ■':■.,■ (.■.■„ -l
iV>,
I
V THE ETHICAL QUESTION. 459
Nay in Christendom itself it must, according to Mr. Con-
stable, have conquered the wh^le ground, and that in the
teeth of the moral sense, where this had certainly no self
interest to seduce it from th«» so much milder truth which
had first possession of the field. IIow strange a rcfl^otioit
that what the heathen have moral sense to reject, Christen-
dom should have almost universally accepte<l I iJut the gos-
pel can scarcely be shown to have ^von its way by the
aid of annihilation doctrine, or its history will have to be
rewritten. ,
^If Soript,rre be the word of aod,_if ovon the consciences
of men not the worst in life have given" a true verdict -
manisafillen being; and'his estimates of sin and its de-
sert are alike farilty. Viewed in this way by the lic^ht of
reason only, we might well predict that the divine estimate
of either would far transcend our own. Cottsequcmlythat
that judgment of it which <i;yl transcend our own, and was
opposed therefore (in the way Mr. Constable and others-
speak) to the moral sense, woM he.prchlsehj the juchjnmit
most rational to receive as GocTs. Herd reaW and sense
are in apparent opposition, an ©ppositioij whicl the word of
God accounts for, if it does notiremovje. How false then
must be the assertion that the gospel [has. wonVs way by
winning men's admiration of God inl the c^^ar^er of a
Judge ! Do the judgments which nov\ come on the world ^
from the Governor of it always, approvL themselve^ to men
similarly as free from undue severity? No, the gospel has
won Its own way by heinrj gospel: by exhibiting God as a
Saviour, not a Judge ; by proffering a Uy of escape, not a
mild sentence; and by the ransom g ven proclaiming the
value put upon men's souls by Him vho made them, and
which grve^ real satisfaction to the awkkened conscience by '
putting the righteousness" of God, in tie matter of salvation .^.1
upon tl)e samft *ide with ?Iis It^ve. f *'' '
'Bm tbat ransom proclaim^ no :iL in its transcendant '
greatness the divine Estimate of »in a^s Equally beyond our
-own, „ .>\ cv ,.H ,t the e.stimaU" ol^aiV ericmy, or of one indiffer.
-^^
:.()■
I
ill
•i
lllil
:i
I
Kf
'M
460 FACTS AND THEaUlES AS TO A FUTlf RE STATE.
ent, but of Him who at His own cost has provided the pro-
pitiation. Who that believes -on the one (!aa refuse liis
credence to the other also, when all that he 1ms to object is
but the testimony of a conscience dulle«l ^nd enfeebled by
the very sin which it is called to jtidge, .1 heart " deceitful
above all things " as well as " desperately wicked "?"
"We do not believe then that God appoa s to man's heart,
in th6 way Mr. Constable avers, to dec de whether His
judgment be such as he can accept. Ho appeals to it by a
love which would save him from it v altogether, and presents
His word, attested in every possible way a.^ His, to enlighten
and purify his conscience, not be judged by it.
Not one of those who lay this stress upbn the jthlgment
of the moral sense believe in any practical way in the lall,or
in sin as defiling the conscience and enfeebling the intellect.
One can hardly imagine that they receive \|^hat is the truth
nevertheless, that the Light of the world, when come into it,
shone upon a dafkness which " comprehended it not," and
that the cross was man's verdict as to IChrist Himself.
And yet here was not even judgment at .'ill, but " God in
Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing
their trespasses unto them '■* In this form,lindco(l (to use
Mr. Constable's language), " God's char.icter and conduct
were placed before it, t<> vjjji its faith and love." The suc-
cess was not what he would apparently imagine. "The
carnal mind *' was ^' enmity to God." . And still it is so.
By no mere moral appeal coftld that enmity %o ch.inged to
love. Man mufit he born nrfain. I do not s^v Mr. Consta-
ble does not believe this, but then it vitiates his entire
argument. »
God has taken ca^,. therefofi?, to make His tippeal toman
in another way than Mr. Constable suggests.; Instead of
putting before him as a philosopher a picture*, of rectitude
with which ht would be charmed, or expecting |a criminal to-'
fall in love with his sentence, He has treated him as a sinful
but a miserable being, a creature fallen and lost. He puts
* 2 Cor. V. 19.
4-
M..
TE.
jcl the pro-
refuse Ilia
ol)ject is
eebled by
" deceitful
1 "?'
in's heart,
other His
to it by a
<1 prescntR
^enlipflilen
jthlgment
the tall, or
e intellect.
; the truth
me into it,
not," and
b nimself.
t"God in
imputhig
ed (to use
id conduct
The 8UC-
le. " The
11 it is so.
hanged to
Ir. Consta-
his entire
)eal toman
Instead of
f rectitude
oriminal to-^
as a sinful
He puts
THE ETUICAJr. QUESTION.
401
before this prodigal in a far-ofT country the bread in His
father's house— He appeals to the self-love xjf an essentially
selfish being. Ho calls to Himself the thirsty, the weary
the heavy-laden, the lost ; and the disinterestedness of a love
which has come so far to seek, and gives so freely, without
any gain but what Jove alone could count such, is all needed
evidence of the truth of the message to the soul that thus
finds itself searched out and besought.* • /
, Beside this God's word has its abundant witnet^, so much
the more evident because by no means of a mere fhoral kind.
Thus prophecy invokes the facts of history, a^d even the
current fevents before one's eyes; while in t'he/present day
the^tonesof %yptand the bricks of Assyria are cry in rr out
n e^rs however unwilling. Thus not only conscien'ce is
::ppealed to; and where it is, it is ^ot put' into the critic's
chair, but into the felon's dock ;-nAo judge, but to hear
judgment. If man be a. fallen, dep^llfed creature, it must
needs be so. If he be n^t, his exis^nce, his condition, and
his end, are alike an insoluble, inipenetfablo mystery.
Yet it is quite true that to.a conscience quickened and
^nlightened by the word, God's.w^s approve themselves.
Vhe light brought in manifests itself as suoli by revealing to
the opened eye the beauty and the (iJeformily of things liot
before apparent. It is conscious knowlecjge: "one thing
j.ve know ; whereas we were blind, no^^we see." Still the
horizon is limited, and if the ti(ie lighffi?,.^ shines, the dark- "
ness is yet passimj only; and not passed.t lie that "sees
farthest sees most the limit. He that judges himself most
truly will own most iully God's judgments to be a" great
<leep. It is not creduhty to do|jU||ft the most clear-sighted
wisdom. Reason and faith ar^KiU war. The app'arent
discords are.1)iU, the evolution <7i||fe'e perfect harmony.-
In this spirit then we shrill seeif'to^imine the objections
t > the Scripture <locti^ine. «#f futiHe *
now on every sidcbeing ui|ged. The"
■pComp. John vii, 37-41.
t So should W road X John iij 8 : ;/ 6Horla TCaffaj^srqa.
ment, objections
;h of the doctrine
I;
h^ll
#
n^
_Wj_^
.*/
'f
Da.
if
yr>J
^ u
[
462
FACTS ANl) 111I.OUIL6 X» TO A Jf'UllL'ttjB STATE.
remains, established from Scnptiiro itself, apart from all
question of our skill in meeting the objoolions. ^
' (1.) And first, briefly as to one point, which, though it be
not a primary one perhaps, or actually a part pf the doctrine
of eternal punishment itself, is still naturally enough connect-
ed with it in men's minds, and ten<l8 to give it additional
harshni^ss,— I mean the coiiiparalj\e fp^ncsk of the saved.
The Lords words affirih, as to His i)eoplc', that they are
comparatively a "little flock,' although, when gathered
finally together, they may be also "a midtitiide which no
man can P"«ib^2 The gate is strait, and the way narrow
that ^^^^l^\m^m^y an^l ^•'•^v there be that find it. Here
^^**° ^^ ^SnjK^K^^'^ therelbre u> have triumplied, and
Christ^ wd^^Wiave failed : as Dr. Littledalc puts it,*
citing the arguiKt of Messrs. Jukes anrl White;— " if the
•popular theology be true, then Christ lias been completely
defeated by Satan in the contest for the souls of men, since
incomparably the larger spoils of battle rest with the latter ;
and the incarnation has not affected the ultimate nature and
destinies of uiankind in general."
But this last is an uncomfo||able* argument in the hands
of any save an out and out Universalist, such as, Dr; L. hardly
claims to be. For it. is awkward to have to tjfink it satis-
factory for God only not to be defeated. /// fso )nany cascsy
and tha6) Hie would be content to share! with Satan, supposing
on]y//« got '-the larger spoils"! Dr. L. blames Ca^on
Fa'rrar for having only " distantly glanced at [these] two
cogent pleas" ; but in truth he cannot Ihim.self have looked
at them very closely, or else the defect is in his own percep-
tion. If Satan " triumphs " when a soul is lost, how futile ,
to contend as to whether he triumphs somewhat less or
more ! In either cas| God is not God. Dr. Littledalc docs
not believe with tha wise man of old, that *• if thou scorncsl,
thou alone (shall bear it.t*' He -will make God also 'bear
it,Mor^hejfehame of" eternal judgment " would be His !
* In his Ciitique upon Canon Farrar in 'the Contempomn/ licoiew, >
t Prov. ixl 12. , »
from all
jgh it be
doctrine
conncct-
dditional
ic saved,
tliey are
gathered
kviiich no
' narrow
t. Here
led, and
puts it,*
-"if the
mpletely
en, since
o latter ;
ture and
ic hands
J. hardly
it satis-
fy cascSf
pposing
Ca^on
se] two
! looked
pcrcep-
V futile
less or
lie docs
eorncst,
3 'bear
lis!"
:oieio, <
TUE ETniC'Af
;'^^-
463
it militates
juent poHHi-
Ih this
f man's, would
.Yet he rightly objects to ITni
a^ainHt the existence of free-will,
hility of a volition of evil throtf
volition of evil thou God's shame or^nl!
it in ten million men be any more His shame or Ills defeat
than even in one V Does Hcripture represent men perishing
through Satan's power or orafl, apart from this "volition "?
If not, how is it Satans triumph V^ And as far as he has any
part in man's ruin, will Jie not have catise to own that ap-
parent victory has been <lefe£vt ':' his sm;cess, according to
the sufeand immutal)le law of divine government, his degra-
dation :—" dust the seii,ent'smeat"? Is it not always so
that Bucc<«ss in evil is the dej^radation of the evil-doer? If
Dr. Littledale \\^J1 think upon it, he may yet discover in
this the secret of that ajiparenL changt; in the rich man in
hades, which Mr. Cox and Canon Farrar -would take as
moral bettering Imm purgatorial llame. He who in life
would have been^e temj)ter of his five brethren, in death
would have them warned so asAiot to come into that placp
of torment. . •
Man's damnation is from himself " Ye would not," is
the comi)lai^t in son-ow of tlio One who came to save.
Will Dr. Littledale taunt llim with defeat'? The legion
did not cast Ilim out of Gadara, but the men for whom He
had broken Satan's poAver ret use<l deliverance; Did Satan
defeat Him there V If it be- man's eonir^ry^ will Sj^af is his
ruin, what purpose of God dm-s that deieat ? ■ Dia He pur-
pose tQ.save all, ^>//6vj/' man's Will? That Hb would have
all men to be saved w the vindication of His heart ; there Is
no declamtion of a purpose to save all j>e/;/brcf^, no deieat
of His purpose if it is not done. "^
. But— - ,. ,' . ■ /j;.-;; '. ''•-■
(2.) It is objected to us the shortness of probation if
limited to the present life, and that manj have in fact none
at all. Canon Farrar has many a vivid illustration of the
injustice, as ho consirlrMN it, of this; but I prefer to quote
the calmer statements of others, not less forcible :—
■M,
■i
k..
■I
': ,.'^ ■.■••■.■.-■'■■.•-■.;,■■-. '■^:-. ;■..,..• .-..;: ■■ .-v.: , ., .^jj ^■^ ;.y -■:■■■■■■■. /rV ■-.•■■:■• ^v. -.:-<-!
■■ . .•.'•• ■■■.■■. - ■ • .- ■ V " ' ■ ■ ■. ■ ■ : ■■ ■ ■ -J. _A ' '■ ■' '■■ . ' ■ ■• ■■ '-' wm- ■ • " ' ■• ;■'"
13
AsMolatlen for Information and lma«o Mana«omont
^ 1 too Wayne Avenu6. Suite noo
Silver Spring. Maryland 209tO
301/587-8202
>,
.1
I
Centimeter
1. 2*345 67 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 mm
i..||j.m|M|i|..|.lu|.|t^|.ljl|.|.l|.|ilm^^^
Inches
2 3 4
12.5
I.I
1.0 [!:■- *
H^ Himm 1 2.2
1.8
L25 111.41 lllllt.6
I
Ti
r..
v:
<p
/:
yiS" /I
* • rf^^^V
.V
MflNUFPCTURED TO RUM STRNDflRDS
BY RPPLIED IMRG^. INC.
^'^
.^
¥ •
464 FACTS AND TUKOttlKS AS TO A FUTUIIK STATK. -
"Ah yet I am compelloil to bcliovo," sivys Cumm Plumpti-o,*
"tliiit wlioro thero Iuih boon ^no iulcqimto pr^liiition, or imiio id
jiU, tluTo must b(! SOUK! oxtousiou of tlu; i)os.sibility of «lt'"t'l<2i>-
mout or clmngo boyoigil- tlio liuiits of tliiH prf.scnt life. TiiKo tlu'
ci»e of unbiiptizud cUiidn-u.t SlmU wv. t-loso tlu' giitos of Punulisf
iigaiu.st them, apd satisfy ourselves with the tHrixsimti tinmnatiti,
whieh gained U}V. Augustine the repute of tht) (liinis jtdtfr infitii-
tuni ? And iKwe are forced in such a case to admit the law of
progress, is it not legitimate to infer that it extends beyond
them to those whose state Is more or leas analogous ? " Ho adds
further on, " The theory I am now defending givt>b a significanoe
to the final judgment of which the popular belief, in gri'at menj«-
ure, ^prives it. Prdtestants and Catholics alik(>, for the most
' part, think of that judgment as passed, irrevocably jmssed, at tlu^
moment of death. The soul knows fts et<.'rnal doom then, i)ass(>s
to heaven or hell or ptirgatory, has no real scrutiny to expect
wherf the Judge shall sit upon the throne ; while, on this view,
the righteous award will then be bestowed on each according to
the tenor of his life during the whul'tt period of his existence, and
not only during tke short years or mouths or days of his earthly
being. This gives, I venture to think, not a less, but a more,
worthy conception of that to ^hich we look forward as the great
completion of God's dealings with our race."
Dr. Bellows, on behalf of Unitarianism, goes yet further ; J
he says:-
" What we have hitherto objected to in theTireed of orthodoxy,
on the subject of eternal punishment, was the alleged finality of
human fate, as determined by the state of the soul at the
moment of death. ♦. . This life has been considered to be mainly
a state of probation, and the only state. Unitarians reject both
ideas. With them life is not, here or anywhere, mainly a state
of probation, but a state of educatipn and discipline ; and still
more, a state of heAngfor its own sake. /-We can conceive no state
of human existence, that is, of finiti^spiritual existence, which
shall b^ diflferent in these respects from the present. . . ^e can-
not, with our reverence for the freedom of the will and the free
* Cantemporary Mevicic. f
f It should in fairness be stated that Dr. P. is arguing with a Roman
Catholic.
. \ N. Amcr. Review. .
■#
.'.■„■ 'flJi: KTHlCAh (illKHTlOK. .405
piny .)f .s|urihMl laws, bo iiiin.nfr ii.o.^, wh„\hiuk moml ovil, with
Its MU.T, nn-s aiKl its lUMmltirs, will 1m, fon-ihly torminatod by a
Imt of divMH. b..,.:'vr.!, :...,, ut :y.y fntniv iluf... Wo objoct t.. tho
oM ortho.l..x vi. XV of tho finality of hunmu probation at death, as
. Liekmg i,r..i>Julity, as .lisro{ranliupf our prosout oxperienco of
Ooa sprov.-.nnont un«l lli(. «-oustitution of man'sspirit. Moreover
whiloit soonis awfully threatoning to those who are inclined to
oviI and uro lil Ay to bo lost, it sc^oms relaxing of moral' and
spiritual obligations toward tlioso who expect to bo saved. It is
. tt dootrino too eruol for tho w.,rst, too flattering for the best."
With ^Yhicl^Dr. LittlcHlalo fully agrees. He objects* to
the popular view <.f "this life being a state of probation,
a solitary chance, failure in which involves destruction,
just as with us gun-burrel!* which cannot pass the test in
the proof-house arc invariably condemned, broken up, and
cast into the fire,— but only to be forged anew."
"Thoro is no warrant in Soripturo (ho sjiys) for this current
opiniop. which in tnith nbcossitatos a d*.'nial of God's foreknow-
ledg. .,. not boing ablo to trust His own work, nor to predict how
It wiU turn out till Ho has t< stod it. Ho does indeed try and
prove, but It IS in tho way of .v/«cr//i^^ and purgation, not of
inquiry. ' Whon Ho hath (rin/ moj|^iiall, coihc. forth as gold '
(Job xxiii. 10). ♦ Behold, I will mm them and tr^ them' (Jer
IX. -7). Onoo grasp tho notion tlyit we have only one Ufa given
us to bvo, and that dtmth isun more episode in it, so that this
world IS but a lower class in God's school, and another stage of
education an our uubrokon personality and life beyond the grave
awaits us in the intormodiato state, whethor'tlmt stage be down-
ward or upwards, according as we have used our opportunities
hero, and tho whole schomo of redemption shows clearer."
4.nd even President Porter suggestst that—
••Then, when the future life begins, every man will see Christ
as He IS, and tho sight of Him may of itself bring ajinalitj/ to his
character and destiny, as it discovers each man fully to liimself.
They thAt pierced Hini shall mourn, but not if when thef see
Him, they mourn that they piirced Him. The next life may
be another probation, in that, by it« first revelations, it shaU
ni^cverything_cloar which w;is darjc, and bring out in vivid
* In the, (hnteinp. Her. ^f Igihe K Amer. liev.
)■
t
■/•■\
M
, ti
«■ f
M
i^!
'i
■
m
SttU'i
460 FACTS ASU 'rniiOUlES AS TJ A FUTURE 8TATR.
" Uneltlmt moral and npiritual tniib which the soul shaU accept
with synamthiziug joy. or vejoct with Hiuful V^'^^'^'^'^\l^'^
asitaLptsor r.-j-vts, nh^dl ku.m itBpwa character and ite just
award. . . . The opeiiing Hceut.s o( th^slicxt Ufe m..y be at once
the soul's w^cmid prol^ation, and its liual ^dgment."
All this is anti-scriptural merely, and If unsound, then of
necessity dan-erous to the last degree. To teach men that
they may put otT into the future that xvhich Wist be decide<l
here and now is nothing less, than enticin<,\them lo sell-
destruetion. I have no desire to retain the uWl '' prolja-
tion '• • but tliat Scripture insists upon it that salVation is a
possibility'otily for those who find it in this life,\ehave
already seen. The denial of it is reckless ignpranca^^r un-
belief It destrojrs the whole meaning off death as de^th,
the solemnity of the appeal to man founded upon the brevit
of his life here; that the Son of Man hath power on cart/,
"~ Id forgive sins, and that nbw is JJ^cccpted time, and now
* the day of salvation ; ^that " h/^vjWovcth his life shall lose
it, and he that hateth his lif^e /M^MvcoW^? shall keep It unto
life eternal."* It denies th(J^fact that already m shades is
there a '' great gult fixed," dividing the evil and the good,
and thai it is when Mnjuil (or die) they ak) received into
.y.r/«srmr/ habitations.t It . is contradicted b\the affirma-
tion— the very, opposite of Canon Plumptre's idcX— that tlie
sentence in the day of judgment will be for deeds done " in
tWfe body," and not at all- for conduct in the intermediate
state : Finally, that the spirits of the unsaved departed are
. «' spirits in prison,^' and with whom (if His dealings be the
\ same with all, and we may argue from the case of those
before the flood) God's Spirit will no more strive.^ ^^
With regard to Canon Plumptre's *'unbaptized inlants,
I suppqse as far as inadequate probatioi* or want of develop-
ment is concerned, they are scarcely worse off than those
baptized. And while with all such the taint of a vitiated
nature needs to be remo ved, those who know how absolutely
. ♦ Matt. ix. 6 ;\cor. vi. 2 ; John xii. 25. ' ^ . ^
t Luke xvi. 0. \t 2 Cor. v. 10. (^ 1 Pet. iii, 19 ; Gen. vi. 3.
TUE KTIIIUAL (JUISTION.
407
any ciiis will
we are debtors to IJivinc gra«c for this Janycai. ,
have no d.fficlty in thi, respect. That Gotl oannotVo
«how mercy, where no human wiil can yot bt sunpoli^
affirm Ti ' .. ,7 V"^ "'■'''''' '"""t prove who would
fr . in ,T r , ' " '''^"' ''" "'"""y ''"■•>"''S«'1 l-or deed,
■ he! V . •';;'■; ""' ^■•"•'■■"■""' fi"»"y for a nature which
.'heyh. e w„l,„,,t any act of their own will. Of this the
Ijord g,ve«„.fldl .assurance: "i„ heaven their indcs do
And ,t ,s^„ ,t the will of your Father which is in heaven
lh.at.«nc of il,..„, little ones,«h„uId perish "• °'
prot->,io„*'r '•''"'■■'»''■'« o'-joctions to the whole theory of
probation, I .„pp„«. „„ „„„,,„„,,, J'
xenso he a.»:<„„,,s,„, if i,, were Gods proving what wal a
maucrof, ..certainty to Uintsclf .apart frL theV^of W^
t hould be „,canm«tcnt for ^tim to allow m.an after all to go
^rough the ,r,.l, because H^Xorcees the issue, is nollt
hetm? "" ^''»[<"='y '»'i«ve in the Edenic trial for
the ^me reason ; nor that Moses' account of the wilderness
can be ihe true one, that " the Lord thy God led Thee tTel
forty yeWm the wilderness to humble thee and to prov^
thee, Iq hhin w/uu ./,«.. ,-.. ,/.!... ........ , ,. ""''O prove
.k. . A '" "umuic tnec and to nrr
keen hi, ..A / • «"'«"«'• »o« wou
n!?l , '•°"X"""''««'» <"• """t This he.wiirnatari«
m only God reusing to act, upon His foreknowledge or "
^In the rame way thV^law has been the probation of man'-
B^tlh'^ T"T'° P™\y-" «« -J^ Moses' wo"dT;
dven^ tK " "^^'^Xtl-ove'dict has been longTnt:
fhT. I ' 'f "■""■ "ShtWw, no, not one; there fs no^
that doeth good, no, not onc.\ And •■ we kno^ ttA T!
th^gs^oevertb^ Uwsaith, ^ »„ Z^Z t'ZZ
xvjii. io, n, 14.
t Deut, vlii.
Ih
II
1
^Exod.
XX. 20.
^.
468 rACTSANDTHKORIESASTOAFUTUilKSTATE.
the la^v^ that every mouth rmiy be stoppca. and alUhe wori^^
hpf omc cruilty before God.' * ,
dcmnation i» not merely a IMcce of past history; it .8 of
^rscnt and universal force V,y n-^s„n of our .ompl.te 3sscn.
UaUdentity: "as in water tace answerclh to face so the
he r ofVfan to n,an." But in another respeet also. .n,l
sU more solemnly, is probation pa.»«l, inasmuch as when
.-Jle was in the world, and tke world wa. made by Im
the world knew Him t.ot. He came unto H,s own, and m
own received Him not ; " so that those who*<? rece.vcn.n,,
3 who do) a«, manifested by the very fact to be "^m
.iTt of blood, nor of trie will of .he flesh, „or oj the ».« «/
man, but ofGod."t I _. ,,.„ u.^e Judgment 9f the
Thus the' cross of Christ was inc juu nre^ v
world " ;i and man is convicted, not only of having faded
To Ittain hgal righteousness, L'-.'^'^fJ-ing refused tl. One
who came to save him from the law's penalty a so. Thi^ .8
why I.cannot contend for the term " probation," as applying
to God's present dealings with men ; whi e j-et .t .s true
that God will not finally feat men as ;n the lump con-
demned, but each man for his own personal rejec ion oi
Himself: his reprobation of Go.l will be necessarily /.« o.™
""'xhe «me'r*v.ire4for this.«nd the circumstances I have
not calculated, noPaol presume to have wisdom for tK
calculation. If others have, they should P-l"-;."- -««_.
ments. They v^ho believe that God has given Hi hon fo.
men can rest in the conclusion that not only will He be
"dear when He is judged," but that His long-suffering
mercy, and His will that none shonl J pensh will be abund-
antly revealed in the fast-hastening day of manifestation.
This they will not venture to anticipate; nor can they be^
Ueve that the world would be one whit ''«"«' /"/T^^f jf
the secrets of that government were made fully known.
• Rom.iii.10,12,19. tJ"''" '• "^1'-
♦ John xii; 81.
PACTS AND TtEOniES AS TO A FUTURE STATE. 400
Tho existence of evil is the one real and only aiffic.ilty ; but
It exists : and (Jod has answered the qnostion as to Himself
/aised hy it, not by a logical explanation of- tho difficulty,
^ which It may perhaps be doubted if we Rhoul(\ have ability
to understand, but by unveiling Himself in Christ. I sec in
the cross His holiness, I see Ills goodness, I see His love;
and, if the darkness be only passing and not passe<l, I can
walk ami<l it withmtt stumbling with a Father's hand close
clasping mine. The darkness that remains is but the neces-
sary school for faith ; but a iaith which has the surest grotmd
under its feet. « We kno>y " but " in part '• ; still we himo.
The imperfection wilf pass, but the truth now known will
abide forever. •
(3.) For the continuance of evil God cannot be held re-
sponsible, save by an argument which throws upon Him
equally tho responsibility of its present exiiitence. It is easy
to assume that God could aviU it out of existence at any
moment if He i^leased, but then we must needs assume that
lUjoilled it into existence. Mr. Birks has wcirfi^own how •
much of the darkness which involves the rsubj^M proceeds
from crude thoughts of omnipotence in this way. That He
could annihilate, on the principle men are now zealously ad-
vocating, the sinful being is, of course, as a matter of power
over His creatures, to be allowed. But the necessary limit
of even Almighty power is determined by the circle of the
divine perfections. That infinite Wisdom could do so we
may not assume, except by assuming our own to be infinite.
Nay, even reason may argue some things apparently against
it. For His gifts and calling w^ild scarcely be without
repentance, did Ho destroy a being naturally deachless which
Himself had given ; dnd such is at least man's spirit. Mr.
Constable has abtmdant cause to argue that the only true
basis for annihilation is materialism. But such a mechan-
ical destruction of evil might well seem to be its triumph in
another form,— a coifession of his being defeated by it in
the creature thus destroyed. If men turn round and ask
why at least create the being that He knew would fall, the
'if'!
■If.
"iV
■iX.
I m
I
J!
470 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTUIIE STATE.
practical answer is, He has created. " Who art thou, O
• ^ man, who repliest against God ? "
This line of argument Scripture itself suggests to bo the
true one. The conflict with evil is ever represented in it as ,.
a real thing, and a necessary, not to be dispensed with by
the mere fiat even of Omnipotence : and that because Om-
nipotence in God means necessarily Omnipotent Wisdom,*
as it does Omnipotent Lqvc. TKUs He " willeth not the
V */t death of a sinner," yet they die. Who will sajTcilo wills
. (' their sins ? and yet they sin. And when we arc told of some
that " it is IMPOSSIBLE to renew them again imto repent-
; ^ ance,"t if we are to take such words in their full and appar-
ent sense, must we not believe that Omnipotence had in their
case found its limit? or can we say God would not still
have renewed them, if He could ? In the face of His own
repeated protestations, can we believe ihat through His
pleasure sinners, however much sinners, could not be re-
newed? ^ffl^'
If we touch mysteries on all sides here (and so we do), all
the more must we keep to the simple, plain assurances which
are the silver thread guiding us through the apparently, and
to us really, inextricable labyrinth. God is God, because
God is good : and to this His word holds us fast.
On the other hand it does not represent Him as baffled by
' r the evil, and having to undo His own handiwork, as if man's
will were thus triumphant above His. The reality of the
conflict with evil gives the only basis for the reality of vic-
tory over it ; and that victory is assured. "The Lord hath
' made all things for Himself; yea, even the wicked for the
day of evil ; "J not their wickedness surely, but tlftmselves.
Praise -Him therefore they shall, as "all His works "^0-.
The "vessels of wrath " and "to dishonor,"|| are still ''ves-
* It seems to me that herein Mr. Birks' argument as to the limitation
of Omnipotence in measure fails, that he does not insist eriough that the
limit is onjfy that imposed by the Divine Perfections.
t Hel>. vi. 4-6. :t P^ov. xvi. 4, ^ Psa. cxlv. 10.
i Rom. ix. 2i i ;i Tim. ii. 20. ;.,
«
TUB KTHR'AT, QrFSTION. 471
BcVaiHlhavo their use. Who nhall nay that "to show
(.0,1 M wrath, au.l make His power known," is not nucha
necessity in divine government us in any other ''
The eternity of sin is the real basis oftho eternity of.mn-
iBhment. If n. this life God ha« with any spent all available
resources in vain for their deliverance, so that He should
Himself have to say - it is impossible to renew them," what
less than "eternal fire " can be the award of those of whom
He has had to say, " he that is unjust, let him be unjust still ■
and he that is filthy, let him-bo filthy still " ? Mr. Gre.r tells-
uh:* - No subtlety of logics, no weight of authority, will in-
duco rightly e-.nsntule,l minds, which allow themselves to
reason at all, to admit that the sins or failings of time can
ment the retribution of eternity,-ihat finite natures m;.
by any gudt of which they are capable, draw upon thera-
solves torments infinite either in e^se^^or duration." But
a though we must allow that that il^fe way the doctrine
ot eternal punishment has been often sought to be justified,
it IS not the scriptural ground of it. Nay, it is one which
has obscured the subject it was meant to clear /for it repre-
sents God in judgment as merely at the best exacting the
lull extent of penalty, even supposing it proved that that
were the extent. ■
Mr. Constable represents the view I am advocating as one
JpV?" ''' 'i^' f "g««tinia„ theorists " are taking new ground.
Ihat IS of httle moment, that it should be new to them, if
only It be a return to Scripture. At the same time I cannot
accept 1 rof. Mansel as the exponent of it, if Mr. Constable
gives justly his exposition.! Scripture gives no hint of
^ sins throughout eternity increasing in number, in magni-
tude, and m guilt I Condemnation and punishment throuffh-
out eternity gathering force and falling more terribly upon
Mr "7*^^f «"«*--«''! We may agree perfectly with
Mr C. that "Scripture, from first to last, says not one word
of the sms of hell." And with Mr. Girdlestone, as he quotes
him, that "as_the_saved will be raised above the possibility
* Enigmas of Lifo, p. 271. f Nat. and Dur. orFxn:Vnr^T^
,* 't\
w
I
I
I
>.'•
rt
472 FACTS ASI) TIIEOUlKrt AS TO A PUTUKE STATE.
of siiiiiinj,'; h<» tlu> loHt will Iw «unk below it." But while
sin ill act will hr than roHtruincMl by puniHhment, Fie that is
mijuHt will not bo U-hm ut»ju«t,mt>r lie that iti filthy less filthy.
Ucstruiiit is not rt't'onnutloti. Tlio cturnal sUte \h one fixed
absolutely and bounded on all sidcB, as Mr. Birke BOggests
with prol)ablo truth a " lake of fire ** may intimate.
Wo do not accept then the teaching that the punishment
of hell is inrticted for the sins of hell. On the other hand
wo cannot concede feliat the measure of eternal judgment
being the measure of the sins of this life, as it Burely is, mili-
tates in the least against the doctrine that the eternity ot
pmiishment is bajiod upon this eternity of a sinful state.
Mr. Constable seems never to have considered indeed this
view of it. IIo must distinguisli between sin and a sinlul
i^taLe. The everlasting fire is correlative to the undymg
worm. And hero, if we consider a little, there is no oppo-
sition between the eternity of the punishment being linked
with the abiding of the sinful condition, and the measure
of the sufi'ering being apportioned to the actually committjd^
sms.
For the works and the words according to which men
will be judged are of course the manifestation of the sinner
himself. And such is the actual phrase used m Scripture.
" We shall all appear before the judgment seat of Christ "*
is more literally " we shall all be manifested:' Our ATorks
will bring out our characters,— will exhibit us. If it were
not so, such a judgment would be necessarily partial. Inas-
muchnhen as men's works exhibit their character, and, tha*. ^
a character which abides forever, they are judged accordin«;
to their works, and yet with " eternal judgment."
' (4.) Thus the punishment is not indiscriminate, becausd
in each case eternal. " Few stripes," as compared with
i' many," may have (and will have) their counterpart in the
wrath inflicted, and yet that wrath "abide" on each who
has chosen it for his future portion. Mr. Gregt urges
* 2 Cor. V, 10. t K'>ia«"a» «»f J^'f"-- I'- -^'*-
\
while
lat is
ilthy.
axod
;ge8t8
kmcnt
hand
pnent
, mili-
ity ot
state.
1 thiH
sintul
dying
oppo-
finked
easure
nitted
1 men
sinner
ipture.
irist "♦
Works
t wero
Inas-
d. tha*."^
ordin«;
ecausci
I with
in the
h who
urges
TUK KTIIIC'AL QUBHTlON.
•17a
strongly the ohjection indeed of any such " hroad, bold lino
of demarcation, "as this infers,
"BoponUing, through nil futuro ngeH, and hy houn.lIosH (UHtancoH,
th<»H« whoso rocoHuro of niu or virtiui whilo on furth wiw wnircely
diMtinguiHlmhlo by the finest and most drlioato monil clfctromett>r.
On one side is oudloss happin.'HM, tUo sight of Oo<l. . . f„r thoso
wliom one frailty morf, ono lubbnl wcnikn.jss, ono hair's broiulth
further transgression, woidd have justly condemned to dwell for-
ever • with i\w devil and his angels, ' an outcast from hope, chained
to his iniquity forever, alono with the irreparable 1 Hn the other
Hide is helj, the scene of torture, of weeping and gnashing of
teeth ; of the ceasoKjss flame and the undying worm ; where • ho
that is filthy must bo filthy still ' ; torment, not for a period, but
FOREVER : for Him for whom ono effort uioro, ono tmnce of guilt
tho less, might have turned tho trembling balance, and opened
the gates of an eternal paradise ! Human feeling and human
reason CANNOT believe this, though they may admit it with lip
assent ; and tho Catholic church accordingly, here as elsewhere
steps in to I||^J*t.them with tho via vmW, which is needed,"
It is curi'^ and instructive to see with what comparative
favor tho infidel lookfl upon Popery as compared with Protes-
tantism. The two are united in this at any rate, that they alike
• set aside the word of God. Opposition to this is what is every-
where working in the nnrencwed heart of man. It is more
noticeable even, because purgatory is no snch via media as
Mr. Greg believes it. It decides nothing as to the line be-
tween the lost' and saved, to which alone his own lnn<nia-e
can apply. ItTherely rejects the full value of the blood of
Christ to cleanse from sin, and the power of tho Spirit to
renew and fit for heaven, apart fro,n purgatorial surterinff.
This partial infidelity Mr. Greg naturally accepts as a step
in the right direction. But purgatory settles nothing as to
eternity. " .
Mr. Greg's o^vn statement does not by any means present
more truly the Bible doctrine. He would represent the
- /lay of judgment as ranging men in their gradations of sin
_^ or of hotess, and then breaking the line asunder at a cer-
tain pomt, and sending one part to hell, the other to heaven
■i'V
V
m
:M
-i
I:;
■'■> M
"tt>.
471 FAtTS .VNU TUfc^UlIW AS TO A FUTUKE aTATK.
It in the oU\ luathon mythology, often, in«h»c<l, attcmptc«l to
be Chrii»tiaiiiy.oil, Whereby a man'n future h>t would ^mj do-
cidcti according jim hm bad deeds «»r hiH j(ood Hliuuld ovor-
balaiue the «»lher. Stjripturo dots not allow thai iji thin
way a single dinner oouhl be naved. Instead of any going
to heaven in this way, all would bo alike lost and con,
deinned. Tlie law as tlu* rule of judgment pronounces,
'• there is none ri;4hteous, no, not one," whieh Ohristianity
doeM not set u^ide, but natVirms. Hill is the award, not of
a certain overplus of sin, but of the rejection of Ilim in whom
alone is help. Heaven is the fruit, not of a little more than
semi-righteousness, but of Another's atoning work availing
for the eonlessPiliy unrighteous. .Mr. (Jreg's picturo.ia not
oven the earrcature of ('hristianity : it is its fundamental
opposite. • . L
(5.) Mi^. Greg again objeots to a doctrine which reprcRents
the sufferings of a future world — \
•* lut pt'nul.^not purKiUoriiil,- -retributive, not n'formatory. It i^
not cjwy (ho think«) to eonci'ivu any olijfct to bo tmswcred, iiny
part in the great plan of rroviib'uco to bo fulfilled, by the inflic-
tion of torm«;nt8, whethar temporary or pcriKitual, which uro
neither tostno for the purifi<!»rtion of thostMvlio endure them, nor
needed for th«j wurniug of thorn' who Iwhold them, siiure. tlie in-
habitants of earth ^o u«>t He(5 them, and the trauslutrd denizens
of heaven d(» not require them. . TUry are simply aimle8.s and
retrospective. // /«< *rto; that, in ff/f^fh/nrftfion nf thj' jthiln.^npher,
thetf are. iXEvrr.vHLE ; tlmt future sutTeriii}.? is the natnnU offttpring
alftd neces.sury oonsecpience of present siu : but this is u<>t the view
of thb doctrine wo aro con.siJeriug, nor is the character of the
sufferings it depicts such as would logically flow out of the sins
for which they are supposed to bo a chastisemi^nt. "
Again Mr. Greg praises the comparative wisdom of the
" Catholic " invention of purgatory, and adds :— •
•• Cut to believe, as Pr«testailt« are required to do, that all those
fiercer torments will bo inflicted Avhiai no conceivable purpose
is to 1m» answered by their infliction, when the suffering, so far as
human imagination can fathom the case, is simply gratuitous, is
aSJjuretUy a for harder strain upon our faith,— a strain, tqp, which
ifHk
\
THE EXniCAL QUE8TI0W.
476
in liarclo«t on t\tcm> whow, feelings nro the niont J.umun. nnd wh«w
..oiio,,« of tl.o |>ritjr Hro w.,rtl.ioHt ; o.i tl.oH<.. llmt i«, who havo^
uhmi hilhy imMnd C'lirinfH wnitttninitH ,iml vi.mH. "•
Tfu^so thou at IcjiMt nro they v/ho«c " notictiH of the Deity
•re worthiest ; " and yet it has often hoeii remarked, and it-
l« true that Home of the most Holemn denunoi#«m* of eter-
nal jiid^nnept to he founds in the whole IJihle are in the ,
.liHcourneH of our Lord HimRelf. Mr. Ore- will perhai»8
hehevc. this incou8i«t4.noy ; for ho h himself ineonHiHtent
cnoujrh to suppose that the' worthiest notions of the Deity
have eonie down to us from One, who on his showinir must
Jmve hcen after all an in.postor. B.ltj beside thisrin the
omiception of tlie philosopher eve„,~a wisdon, l>y which all
(Jther wisdom may j,q fairly judged,-future wiflerinir is in-
ov.fable as the natural offspring and nerx^ssary consequence
of present sin. This we may believe, therefore, the action
of those natural laws to philosophers so dear. But natural
aws are blind ai«J aimless things. We must not believe in
there bemg wisdom in them it seems, or purpose ;• for wis-
dom implies one who has it, an<l purpose a Controller, and
these thoughts in thi« connection are foreign to a true phi-
losophy Laws,-self-acting laws,~perchance self-made also
-have decreed future suffering for present sin. That saves
us thmking about purpose. T/ie sentence of law maybe
/M a,s n different thhu, from the jml^pnct of a judge.
We can accept the inevitablo, just as that.
In point of fact, however, Mr. Greg tells us, " it is not
impd^s.ble to imagine a future world of retribution in such
form and coloring as shall be easy and . natural to realise, as
shall be not ou\j jmsible to believe, but impossdd, to disbe-
lieve. Apd he represents that - if the s^ul be destiired for
an existence after death, then (unless a miracle be worked
to prevent it) that existence must be one of retribution to
the smful, and purgatorial suffering to tl^e frail and feeble
soul."
He believes tWn in thcj )robabilitv of retrilnUicm as di^
* EnigiHas of Life, pp. 272, 27^.
^if
■•':l'
^
^
476 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
r
tiDct from purificatory sutfering. He does not wait to ask
whether there are to be any to behold it -for whose warning
it maybe needed. He does not inquire whether " gratui-
tous " or not. lie speaks of " retribution,' /. t'.," repayment,
rccomj)ense."' Perhaps ho does not believe that " retribu-
tion " coulTl ever be " gratuitous," so that he need not con-
sider it. Perhaps he U rhjld.
But then that is also the Scripture view. The judgment
of sin is, of course, recompense, retribution. Is there, or is
thefe not, implied in this, righteousness in exercise? If
God be a Moral Governor of His creatures, can He at His
option dispense with this punitive exercise of righteousness ?
Can He blot out penalties out of His statute book, and yet
leave intact the laws which the penalties accompany ? Hot
certainly, if Scripture be true ; or where would be the mean-
ing of its doctrine of sacrifice ? " As Moses lifted up the
serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be
lifted up." "It became Him for whom are all things, and by
whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to
make the Captain of their salvation perfect through suftfer
ing.''* If retribution be not needful, if the mere benevo-
lence of God could have dispensed with it, Christ plainly
need not have died at all.
This to Mr. Greg anay be nothing; yet he sees and can
assure us of tlie necessity of retribution from the nature of
things. And who gave things their nature ? Is it not at
least evident that the God of nature and of revelation are
thus" far one ? , Apart from all purpose it may serve, can sin
cvist-and God ignore it ? Can He be indifferent ? Can He
let it goon and not exhibit Himself -in opposition to it?
not show His anger? And that is essentially the fire of
hell.:,- - ^' ■ - . - ;.■ --- ■
God is ^'willing to show His wrath^ and make His power
known." There is, an<l must be, therefore, governmental
necessity. In the only world of which we have experience
retribution is a manifest law of His government. On the
* Jolin iii. If ; Ileb. il. 10. ~ '~~~~~~~'
^2*i
THE ETHICAL QUESTION.
47r
inductive principle what other can we conclude to be the
universal law 't And even with regard to those who suffer
fron» it, why should it not bo,— nay, will it not be,— as Mr.
Birks lias rightly argued (although he has gone to unscrip-
tural lengths in carrying out the principle), ^nercy in meas-
ure even to them, that judgment-» recompensed ?
(6.) Last of thej^bjections I shall notice that relating to
the tortures of Iwjifc being corporeal. "Instead of the
'majestic pains' adapted to man's complete nature, and
capable of such impressive delineation, the torments assigned
by ordinary Christianity to the future life are peculiarly and
exclusively those appropriate to this; they are all bodily;
yet the body is laid dowij at death"; and "the doc^e
of thp resurrection of the body has been shown by Bush in '
his * Anastasis ' to be neither tenable nor scriptural." So
says Mr. Greg once more.* But the {bought of the bodily
sufferings of the lost has been one of great perplexity to
many who fully believe in the doctrine of resurrection ; a
perplexity which has been transformed into incredulity by
the pictures that have been drawnof them by vivid and sensa-
tional oratory. But, as Mr. Birks has well remarked in his
paper on Canon Farrar's book,
" the vehement dislike of any element of sensible pain in future
punishment, when the doctrine itself is received, and also that of
the resurrection both of the just and unjust, has no warrant either
of Seni)turo or reason. To behove that in the life to come some
^i-iU suffer intense mental acguish and agony, through former sin,
and tp they wiU so suffer in the body after they have been
raise(^from the dead, and still to conceive that a.painless and unsuf-
fering body will be the clothing or vessel of a spirit enduring
nitensest anguish and mental torment, is an opinion as plainly
uurea^nable as it is opposed to the natural meaning of the sacred
text. . . With regard to frightful pictures of future inisery. Uke
those of Tertullian in the preface, of Henry Smith, and Jeremy
Taylor. I would remind the- Canon of his own picture in thesd
sermons of the horrors of delirium tremens to the unhappy. drunk- /
ard. If one drunka rd more can be reclaimed by such dark color-A
* Enigmas of Life, pp. 268, 269^ ~~^ ^ /
!i
■' if
Jl'
478 FACTS AXD THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATf!.
ing, tltero may bo a full warrant for tho prcaclior. But tho
prinoiplo in both eases is tho Bamo. I fear that in botli the indnl-
gonco iu<lra\ving i)icturo.s of intense liorrur i.s more, likely to revolt
some and deiuhai tlio feelings of othei-sthan elTectnally to veelaini.
The Scriptures at least give us no pattern of feuch ' gliastly ' modes
of impressing their warnings deeper on the conseit^nees o^ men.
Their warnings, those of Christ Himself, are the more impressive
because tho words are few and simple, severe in their calm gran-
deur of eahiest'4;aution : outer darkness, weeping, moniliing, and
gnashing of teeth." " .
As Scripture iscvidently, however, what has furnislied the
basis of these descriptions, it will be well to ask just what
it conveys. Are these expressions, '' undying worm," " un-
quenchable fire," literal or symbolic; and what proof have
we, if we have any, as to this ?
In the first plac6 the apostle's language before qubtcd,
that "now we see through a glass in .an enigma," seems
clearly to indicate their symbolic character. The descrip-
tions of heaven which are given us, few have any diftieulty
in admitting to be symbolic. We have none that seem of
any other kind. And this argues forcibly that the same
thing should hold as to the pictures of hell.
Further, if the valley of Ilmnom be taken (as must surely
be done), as lurnishi^ the images Avhereby the Gehenna
of the future is pictured to us, — " worm" and " fire," which
were literal in the first, are manifestly symbols as applied to
the second, and scarceW (heir own symbols.
Again, if Satan be cast into the lake of fire to be tor-
mented tliere, it would seem that the fire must be other
than natural which sljould torment hhn. And the same
must be said as to the Hch man in hades. '
Finally, taken as figiros, those expressions have a signi-
ficance and power whi^h fail altogether when taken literally.
The undying worm h^s indeeil been commonly held to be
the typo of remorse of conscience, and this as bred of cor-
ruption it would very naturally represent. But then the
fire unquenchable would almost of necessity be figurative
also, and stand for the wrntli of llirn who is a " consuming
te*!^
-.••B5^p»5^
THE EIUICAL QUESTIOif.
479
fire. With this would agree the title given to Gehenna of
^the secon. death," as being complete spirjtudl separation,
tinally by d.vine judgment, from God the source of life-
and th.s again wouM give full and terrible typical significance
to that millennial judgment with which Isaiah closes, where
the 8„iy 13 ^^..^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ g^^ ^^^ "carcases "-the dead.
1 his explains also why the fire can torment a spirit, and.whv
, a corporeal being may exist in it unconsumed; or wh4 the
<lestruction " brought about by it need be no material del
struction. Everything, in short, in this way is consistent and
harmonious as much upon the literal hypothesis seems
difficult and contradictory. /
This does not indeed do away with the thought of cor-
porea sutfering, but it leaves the manner of it unrevealed ^
aiM] allows room for the difference of few and many stripes'
'';^''V iV'V^'^''^''''^'^'^^^ which the conception
of material fire for all seems at least to obscure
But this is not ail the picture of the future woe which the
with the , gilt oi heaven, is again clearly a spiritual concep-
tion. Weeping and gnashing ,of teeth," is a different
thought from that of active and rebellious evil, which so
many connect with the idea of hell. The anguish of seemg ^
Abraham andlsaac and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the
kingdom ot Cxod, wliile being themseli^^ thrust out, is also
spoken of.^
These are the descriptions given to ijs m the Scripture of
eternal judgment Separation from G(^d and good, the sense
of Ills wrath and the infliction of it, /emorse of conscience,
hopelessnpss : these are the main elements in that solemn
hereafter II Mr. Greg will pondeAhem, he will find the
picture he ^^ drawn anticipated id its essential features
Nay, there can be ^ttle doubt but/ that Scripture has in
fact, unconsciously to himself, furnished him, with what'ap-
pears to him, the product of hia natural thoughts. But I
i^edjmrsjie^is noJV^her.^ ^^^^^^
' * Luke xiii. 28. "" r~" "
480 FACTS AND THEOttlBS AS TO A FUTUttB STATE.
(to use hie own woi-ds) " everything which clouded the per-
ceptions, which dulled the vision, which drugged the con-
science, while on earth, will be cleared off like a mornjng
mist. We shall see all things as they reaUy are^ — ojur-
selves and our sins among the number." Yes, but too laite,
forever too late, for those who have refused to face now ^e
reality of what we are, and what things are, aS Seen by t^e
light in mercy now held out to us. " The long-»Uff6ring of
the Lord is salvation." God warns, that He may not" strike.
Meanwhile man may^arraign His judgments and refuse His
mercy. They cannot avert the one. They cannot, when
once it is passed, recall the 9ther.
CHAPTER XLHI.
I^ST WORDS WlTg ANNIHILATI0NIST8. .
The end of my examination is then reached. It remains
to say a few words as to the general tendency and connections
of the doctrines we have been reviewing. Many, who by no
means hold them, are yet blind to the evil they involve.
And in this way uiey gain toleration at the hands of num-
bers; who learn to look on at their steadily increasing accept-
ance with an indifference which produces lamentable results.
Quietly the leaven works. And Mr. Blain can say, with
perfect truth, "a large number in the different churches be-
lieve the doctrine, who say but little about it, except to its
open advocates." N'ordoes the profession of a very large
amount of truth hinder its reception, as humerous instances
bear painful witness.
I wish to point out, therefore, very briefly, some things
that are connected with it, and some fruits which grow upon
this root of evil. The tree is known by* its fruit, and thQ
fruit ip here abundant m^ evident enough.
\
481
iA8T WORDS With ANNIHILATIOKISlg '
ut'lr P"'!:7'.'''"'l"«'-I *all confine myself to the Joo-
th2; " ""■ ""'"" '"" "'"' ^-^ "P «ho restomion
In the first place, the undermining of Scripture is very
ey dent „, many. We must distinguish somewhat, and g!ve
due credit to the fact that a more respectable class of wrS
in th,s respect have come to the front of late, especially in
England Yet even among these the tendency is to li^
mTIi; n" "■"'"*<"• "^'"^ *•>« tone of scepticism is „n-
m.8takable. We are told that no Vindioation of eternal
punishment can be made. "voraii
w,. "i'w 'i' "P "l^ P^P"""' °P™™' <" disguise and conceal it as
we may, ,t must ever appear to all nlional creatures the ver^
e^nce of oily injustice, and cruelty. Can we beul that he
dc«=t..ue .s taught m the " precious Bible, book divine • 9 And i!
t so ? Must our sense of justice and goodness in Him, in wto^
hand,, ,ve .u-e, float on a tempestuous and shoreless oceai f^rTv^^
J.O he effort to lock up reason and common sense muchkllr
icelmgs, both of samts and IhoufflH/ul sinners must burst the
bolto, and emerge into light and reUef."*
If this were a solitary statement, or of one writer, I should
not quote ,t, but similar language is used by man;. Quito
m accordance with it, Mr. Hudson gives ns a volume of &„
hundred and sixty-eight pages upon the subject, the " Serin-
tural Argument" occupying si^ty-seven. This single chapter
he naerwards enlarges into a smaller volumo,t "designed "
he says "to meet the convenience of those who rely for their
r/cir-"""'"'""'^ '-^^-' interpreUnlf
Mr. Edw. White is still more frank in telling ns his esti-
ma e of the word of God. In his "Life in drL " (p 39^
amid much similar language, he uses this :_ '*^' ''
"I cannot conceal my conviction that the path of dutrvandof
wisdom m dealing with such documents as the K<^pds dr^,^,
thlspn^ticalconclusion ^-lmeyog^rto J^^^L^Z^
* Blaiiis Reviow of lieecher, p.
p. 33.
[\
t " Christ <Jur Life.'
■ ill
IT
I'M
.— ', ■ '.'■'■
482 *'tX<ytS AND tHEOllIES AS TO A PUtURB StAtti.
Christ's doctrine, by excess or defect conspicuq^^ly disagreeing
with ihe /acts, or witli the plain sense of His teaching as recorded
by the same or other historians, resolutely to re/ use to allow such
exceptional misreports or omissions to inter/ere with the truth which
has been learned by a wider survey o/ the evidence."
With many who are not as open as this the secret under-
current is yet manifest. Jt suggests to Mr. Blain that " the
book of Revelation can settle no doctrine," and whether thia
one text " looks strong enough to vanish (? vanquish) the two
hundred and ten opposing ones." It suggests to the authors
of" The Bible vs. Tradition," that, of this Bible, such a passage
" may have been amended by some officious copyist." It
makes Mr. Dobney deride the seeking to " the hieroglyphs
of the isle of Patmos." It reasons in Mr. Constable that if
tl«e parable of Luke xvi. " coithl be truly shown to teach
[non-extinction] views, the only effect would be that of es
tablishing a contradiction between one part of Scripture and
another, of of affording reason to think that this parable of
Lazarus, despite the authoritg of manuscripts, formed no
part of the original gospel of St. Luke." Thus the authority
of the* word is undermined,— that word which asserts for
itself that " all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and
is profitable for doctrine.''* To seek to get the sacred text
as perfect as possible, free from the real mistakes of copyists,
is another thing ; but to invent conjectural criticisms of this
kind is but the poor, vain refuge of unbelief, too timid openly
to avow itself as such. Mr. Hastings' own words, used as to
.one class of these, the deniers of the resurrection of the
wicked, apply but too well to very many mote : "these pas-
sages still standy after all the attempts to evade them, to
convert them into mere figures of speech, or to retranslate
them in [such] a mannw that they shall flatly contradict
their originals ! "*
This last mode of evacuating Scripture is with the lowest
class of annihilationists (who are not the least popular) the
one perhaps the most frequently adopted. " The Bible
* Relribution, p. 74;
LAST WORDS WITH ANlfflHILATIOlf ISTS. 483
*'!• Tradition " is crammed with new translations, specimens
of which have been already given. But at the other end of
the scale, Morris' " What is Man ?" a book of the most ex-
travagant pretentiousness, is perhaps as full. Ellis aW Read
when Greek and Hebrew fail, bring in Syriac to their aid'
yet do not know the difference between the singular and
plural of a Greek participle, or between the verb de^ai
(dexai) and the adjective Se^^d (d^x^a). Thus the minds of
the simple are thrown off their balance, anS doubts insinu-
ated even as to the honesty of the common translation, cal-
culated to destroy all faith in that which alone, to ordinary
^ readers, represents the authoritative word of God.*
(2.) But there is another thing most evident and most dis-
astrous in results. Mr. Hudson admits and laments the
prevalence of materialism among the upholders of the views
he^advocatesr and he notices -one consequeflce, that the
difeculty which results from thus conceiving of the wicked
exacted, has led many to deny that the 'resurrection of
the unjust ' signifies their being made alive." This view is
spreading among them. That, at the worst, « feath is an
eternal sleep" and there is no day of recompense or retri-
bution. What that leads to is plain enough. -
Mr. Hudson disclaims this materialism. Mr. Constable
wirr-KT. "^^''ir'^"' ^««^rt« its legitimate connection
with amnhilation. For if the cardmal terms of the contro-
ZsTbTf ^^' ^^,T''^"*^y ^^^^••ted) Hfe and death, then it
must be for annihilation a point of first necessity that death
should be extinction. If the first death be no"^ that, why
should he secopd death be ? And moreover the wori. for
destruction in both Greek and Hebrew are themselves in
m !^ ^' r " '^^'' " "^^^ t'-anslators dmgnedly covered up the truth »
(Death not Life, p. 64): One of his subsections is headed "ihecTtho
hcs more honest in their translation than the Protestants » Th
writer observes (p. 104). " The 19th century has rl^ttld brl^n, T"
^ use stpam and lightning, and it will yet l^2L^Tl\oT,^:::
urative language of the Bible aright " •"
.\ {
I
. 'S
484 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A PUTOBE STATE,
most cases used for death, and cjui scarcely be pressed as
meaning more than this. xMr. Constable has rightly, there-
fore, urged that in consistency this meaning of death must
be maintained. »
(3.) But this, as we have seen, cuts yet more deepjy : and
Mr. C.'s logical mind carries it out further than many.
Christ truly died. Nay, if He was one person before death,
death could not make Him two; and this one person lay in
Joseph's tomb. We must not think of any person else-
where In paradise, for instance,— says Mr. Constable. But
if that be true^ what about the divhic nature V Did that
become impersonal, or did it lie in Joseph's tomb ^ It is a
noticeable fact, how much annihilationisni links itself with
the denial of Christ's Deity. With this also the Deity of
the Holy Ghost comes into question.* If there be no spirit
of man, is there any Spirit of God •» The passage already
noticed in 1 Cor. ii. 11, links the two doctrines close enough
together to make any tampering with the one bode ominously
the downfall of the other. Ilcnde far and wide this view is
also spreading. The 19th century may '' regulate brains''
(alas, what about hearts ?), but not the Holy Ghost. It is a
mesmeric influence, or something akin to electricity, if not
rather even electricity itself.
(4.) There is another thing which naturally connects with
.these, but is found much more widely. Sin is softened
down in all cases. You must not ask man to believe in a
greater penalty attaching to it than his natural conscience.
* Mr. Edw. White, himself an annihilationist, shows forcibly that the
materialistic argument may be carried on to atheism : " If man has no
reason to believe that he posesses a ' spirit ' in hunself, he has no rea-
son for concluding that the mind revealed in nature inheres in an Eternal
* Spirit'. . . . Ifthought is a function of matter, it is right to conclude
either, pantheistically, that there is some governing thought which is a
function of the matter of the universe, or, atheistically, that there is no
mind in nature, notwithstanding appearances. Mr. Constable will re-
sist the conclusion. But Prof. Clifford, a more consistent materialist,
stoutly affirms ii {FortniyUly Review, No. 139, 1875)." (Life in Christ,
p. 206, note).
I
LAST WORDS WITH ANNIHILATI0NI8TS. 485
<\n\\ as that may be, . approves. "The doctrine of eternal
an^utsh," Mr. Hasting, argues, « how can it be reeeived by
the uMcvu^^r^ May we not ask that of a good dea^
more? This Christ crucified-these « things of the Spirit
ot God -how can the "natural man" receive them^
LThim''"R " '"''^ '^'""'^'^ "*^^^ ''' ^««^''«^"-«
them alT' ^'''"'^ reasoning wo should alike discard
Necessarily then the judgment of sin is lowered You'
are to accommodate the penalty to the conscience of the im-
penitent. The harder the conscience, the less you can press
upo"^rt penalty at Hll. Itmay be doubted if they will aLpt
Zl r rV. "'^' '"'^''' '' '' P^«'^'^'«^3^ -^^'^ that
they w,ll not The argument is nor without" danger there-
tore to the theory it supports. And if '• man has no pre-
cmmence above a beast," even in the highest thing he has,
as Mr. Constable puts it, what is a beast's conscience ? and
wnat IS the measure of a beast's responsibliit3^^? what be-
comes of the fall V Serious questions these, if we are to
have anything left of Christianity beside the name.V The
actual fact is, .that this reasoning is being followed o\at to
Its legitimate result. As we have already seen, the resur-
rection oU^e wicked is being denied by many. A beast's
end IS thua^ simply and wholly a man's end. And that
means, there is absolutely no divine judgment at all. The
wages ofsm is death; ^. .., simply what a beast suffers. Or
If It be the suffering in view of death, then death alone is
not IS wages, and the most hardened suffers least. \
All have not landed there yet : in many ears « after d^att.
the ,udgment » bWrs still ; but they have started on t^
Z^Wl' " l-r^' ^"'^'^'P t*^p;iots. Another who
ijas had practical experience of the working of these views \
Z1^2l ^'^ "^^-«^^^ - <^estroyi4 responsibii;^
wa fearful ,- and, in people of grosser habits, rejection of all
truth, and immorality. The tree was bad, h J a bad sap
and so was cut down, and there was ^n end of it," " And
one of the chief teachers in the United States declares in hi^
f
f
486
FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
book, that the deep diHtrefld of conscience and terror about
Bin committed was a base, servile fear and wrong. To one
who had found he had lost the atonement, and the sense of
responsibility out of his mind, and who asked him what he
made of responsibility, he replied, it was impossible to re-
concile it with his system, but he saw it in Scripture, and so
did not deny it.'"*
(5.) The writer just quoted has added elsewhere as to the
effect upon atonement : " If sin means eternal exclusion
from God's presence, it is dreadful enmity against God now,
exclusion from God then. If death is the only wages of
sin, Christ had no more to suffer for me. «Nay, if I am a
Christian, He had nothing to suffer, if I die before the Lord
comes, i have paid the wag^s myself If it be only some
temporary punishment I had incurred, He Jiad only that to
bear. * My God,, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me ? '
has lost its force. It is in vain to say. He gives us life.
He can, in itself, quicken without dying. IP He died, He.
died for my sins, and bore them. If death [sim'ply] be the
wages of sin, millions of saints have paid them. ^ And if a
partial punishment be all I had to bear, it is all Christ had to
bear. The sense of sin I have, and its desert, is not being
forsaken of God, shuf put from Him when I know what it
is, but a temporary punishment, a quantum of offence, which
is all I have'to think of, and all Christ had to bear, if any-
thing."t / ^ ,
Let me say that, perhaps, none rise higher than this, viz.,
the substitutional sacrifice of life for life, the death of the cross
no more than a martyr's death, to which the Deity of the
Sufferer gave all its value| — the mass go lower far, as, for
f* The Eternity Qf Piinishraent and the Immortal if jr of the Soul, pp.
13o, 139. .
t Ibid., p. 128.
i " AndMt^is a truth niver to b» forgotten, that the infinite value
which pertains to the one sacrifice of Jesus, arises, not from any inherent
dignity vo% value in man, as the subjecfof redemption, nor from the
nature or extent of the penalty due to sinners, but ... fron/llis own
V
■ .■^■l
LAST WOBDS WITU AlfN«U^I,OBI8T8. 48T
"not the point- buTL wh! ^ W -'^ '''"''"'^^ '^*<^
N'r.rv,^,^ • • ' 'n What that vicanousness involved
of p:™^r„r ir 1"^"° •"''■' "' '^'^o ^^^
for«.kcn me ? " That ' Vfhf ' 7 .°^' f*"' "^^ '^°»
what the .acriflcelvolved No^afL T J'*' '"
trust and joy. It ,.,», the blood of One who had th,,i h.
laden with o„r burden of iniquities, and bo^e^our 1.
Cotht int'th ■""' T'^^t'* "'^ ''«'"^'' ''-o -^W be
Drooght into the sanctuary by the high-priest for .i„ >-
Even so Jesus suffered, the Holv One in th. ! , f
of wrath and distance from a hoj^od ""^ ™" » /"^"^
we have tin Kl„„,l r . ' V ^« «'« MO^
we have no blood of atonement, no eiBcacious sacrifice at all
Thus anmh,Iat.on strikes at the vitals of Christi^t' ^
wh le mstead of resolving the problem of the exi^^f
* Heb. xiU - ^ .
i.'il
gfc*
^
fM
.'^
488 FACTS AND mRORIKR AS TO A nTTlTRR^TATB..
nity, given of God but rosumod by Him, a* if dofeiited in tho MT^St
object for which life was given. By that very /act if. is thife'^. AA
triumph of evil rather than its defeat. ^ >!i^ ^^
'• <
rv
CHAPTER XLTV.
LAST WORDS WITH RE8T0RATI0NI8T8.
Much of what h||n&ecn Haid as to the doctrine of condi-
tional immortality is trwe of the other forrh of tho denial of
eternal punishment. Especially tho qnarrel with Scripture
is even more plain, and its authority as a consequence more
directly attacked. There are those, as in the former case,
who must be admitted as exceptions, whose arguments, how-
ever illogical, seek at least to preserve its authority. Yet
even Mr. Jukes maintains, as we have seen, that " taken in
the letter, text clashes with text npo aJ l fo kiisujaject." Ai^d
Mr. Cox quotes with<%probation, fro jdniBi|Bedal ^^^Wfjp^
already referred' to, his averment " tJBHHP^^"»icient siress
has been laid on the cardinal fact * that the Scriptures of the
!N"ew Testament contain two parallel and often seemingly
T(piita^dictory BtatementsAs to the last things, one of which,
being jealously sifted by hostile criticisms^ DOES
theigppular theology, and another which more than
l^es a ful^fwltbration, and the final victory of good over
evflf.'" Still others speak thus of " irreconcilable antino-
mies " in Scripture. Canon Farrar more openly and boldly
alleges that the " isolated texts " which seem adverse to his
view may be "a concession to ignorancg " or "reflect the
ignorance of a dark age.^' Prof. Jellett urges, "Even. if it
be conceded- that according to the most probable interpreta-
tion of the texts which are supposed to contain the doctrine
of endless punishment, they do contain this dDctrine, it may
still be-fisked— i>o^s this (Ueide the qnfiMimi f There is no
''^Km
•#■
Ifc-
S
LAST WQ|tl)S WITH UKSTOIlATIONIbTB. ^gQ
infallibility attached to the proccwi of interpretation 771-
rcasomyhy ,.hich the hu,phatim of .Scripfnre itself u
<^certameri is not inf^Mihle. Probability i4 all wo cart attai|
The«o tcstimonioH might bo indefinitely multipliod. They^
demonstrate not more the tcndcncicH of ^iversali«m to a
denial of tho authority of the word, than they do the fact
of that word .bemg almoHt confessedly tv^Xunt it. Thev
would not ne^d to depreciate a testimony which was in their-
, own favor. The counsel for a case does not brow-beat his
own witnesses.
(2.) The doctrjne of-universalism, m whatever form, tends
- of necessity, though in another way from ann'ihtlationism, to
make light of sm. It represents it as a thinj? capable of
being reached and done away by a ccurse of salutary, disci-
pimo, and that in cases where all the riches of God's love
and grace have been expended in vain. Sin is thi«made the
creature of circumstances, by a Wise or.lering of which it
^ may be extinguished, and God as the Governor o^His crea-
tures becomes responsible for its continuance. It w^ His
dishonor if evil coVitinrfe, and He must at least «|iare the
blame of^it with man. He is responsible to save. Man is
perhaps as much sinned against as sinning. His life here is*
no proper probation. " What could have been done to my '
vineyard, that I Have not done in it?" admits of a plain
aniwer.- -Man's igrforance, his feebleness, hismanifold temp-
tations, welknigh balance his account with his Maker; and
sm, as a matter of human responsibility or of divine judg
ment, become* evidently diminished to an indefinite extend
That full-blown universalism should be associated with
loose morals is not, therefore,'to be wondered at. Dr Rlgg '
affirms: "The same universalists who ^peak great words
about the universal fatherhood of God not seldom also hold '
the doctrines of free love. It has been my lot to meet with
some of these . . . who, in extraordinary rhapsodies, mixed •
up all these things, and whose practice corresponded to their
prmciples." But the practical result of the belief is not to
f
'A
1
%.
i
N
T
' ^ :■' , .r
;l( ■■?!
/ ,1
1 ','■•'
(-/
:.■-.■:.:,„.,
:$}'
XI.
490 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FUTURE STATE.
' be measured by the mere open adherents. There are masses
"^ who readily take the license without caring to adhere at all.
The theory, if true, renders adherence to it or to anything
else of very little importance in the eyes of many who would
accept the consequences very gladly. And it need not be
doubted that the circle of influence which such views exert
reaches very far beyond the number of its professed advo-
cates. Just here, ind^d, its ripest fruits will be found ;
nlan'swill set free from . the restraint of divine authority,
openly lawless, and completely reprobate.
But those who cannot go the whole length of uni versalism,
as, for instance, Canon Farrar, but who either attach no limit
to probation, or at' least prolong it beyond the present life,
cannot be acquitted" of ministering to the same unhappy end.
The meaning of a ** day of salvation " now, proclaimed is
lost, or at least-the point of it. If it be said that only now .
. is preached complete escape from the need of purifying fire,
that to the mass of men is a very different thing, of almost
mfinitely less, urgency; while souls praying, striving, ago-
nizing to draw nearer to the light, may be quite unable at any
rate (as they teach) to escape that. How many will think
it worth while to pray arid strive and agonize to so little
purpose ? Hqw many will :rather wait with closed ears to
every warning for the fire that is at anylrate to do its work,
and which is but the aepnian fire of God's love ! For such
souls, Canon Farrar, and such as he, spite of his protest,
must be content to be responsible; and if the "eternal
hope " they would fain persuade themselves of, be (as it
surely is) a mere delusion, then are they responsible for the
damnation of those ^o listen to and approve their teach-
ings.
(3.) And^ where is atonement ? where the value of Christ's
"blood-shedding ? It is weH known that universalism in its
complete development denies atonement altogether ; and to
this denial all forms of it, however modified, necessarily tend.
Mr. Jukes has no gospel ; Dr. Farrar none. The " poor in
spirit," the strivers after the light go down helpless to
■K'
■^^,-,
I^SI WORDS WITH BESIOBATIONISIS.
401
»onian fire, because, if there be an eye to pity, tliere is no
for the worm and fire of Gehenna speak of that. They are
; »ved by their own suffering, not by Christ's ; and there w 1
would Jl^L'TilT'''^ '^*' *" Setnearer to the lighf
would no doubt gladly have washed their robes, but either
^nSy-rlTdJ'f "-' -''■ ^"^ '-' --^'"r^^Z
blJLVof^Z*"™"^f'^" ''"''''■"''''''''''''<> """"t the
Is - 1°^ ! 1 «'"«/e™»i>>eth no more sacrifice for
sf / V ^^t'o" " the fruit of this sacrifice and
tnZt "^tholT""™ "' "'^^"°-' «"" H» opposT;. ts
oontra»t,-those who go into it must find ( f salvation at
» -I T^ .,!"""" '•^'"""*'''»<"™ sm-oflering; and
although under the law a spotless and unblemished offering
was needed,^.e has discovered that in the antitype GoT^lf
not reqmre that. Nor is vicarionsness to beTsis^^dTn
A smner sufiering for his own sins is purified sufliclX by
s thT-X S "' r M- ''"^'^'- "«'■•' -" ^ -such Sing
is .Ir^mtntdl''*"''"''' "^ "^' "P"t ^'~f
th.?"'' ^ f°^ I' J"'*'*"* '" ^"'"S' »»3 «e'tai„ to do all
judgment .s thus the denUl of the very " word of theT
g.nnmg of Christ,"J and is essentially anulrfstial ThM
some may be mvolved in it who are very far from meanW
this ,s no doubt quite true, but the doctrine is SatanTtk^o
destroy the truth of Christ; and wherever it is fX d tel
oped neffectuany does so. Witness the constat J^ttion
> I
;^",
'^;-
/
^92 FACTS AND THEORIES AS TO A FtlTURE STATE.
wUh unitarianism in the body that has adopted the name
" UniversalistJ as its distinctive title.
Here let us close : it is useless to proceed further.
Beloved reader, vicarious sacrifice is God's only means of
blessing as surely as Scripture is true and " cannot be
broken." The faith of a siived man is a faith ^thich can
say with the apostle: " Himself bare our sins in His own
body on the tree." " The Lord hath laid upon Him^^e
iniquity of us all." Jesus is now risen from the d[e^dtv^^<l
in testimony of the full acceptance of that work accol|fMf ed
is gone into the presence and glory of God. The sinsi^then
that were laid upon Him are gone. Whose are ihey i*
Are they yours ? Beloved, they arc those of all, who in the
consciousness of sin and helplessness, " have put their trust
in Him" for their eternal salvation. Their peace is made.
Their sins, borne by 9im, are gone. And the coming of
Jesus will put them, without question or challenge, into the
blessedness of His Father s house, which He went to prepare
as their abiding home. It is yours to choose, reader, whether
you will have your " part '' in the lake of fire with the
devil and his angels, or with the " blessed and holy " of the
first resurrection in the only really " Eternal City."
It may suit you, alas, tlo soften down the terrors of the
day of wrath, but what if you should find God just in in-
flicting severer punishment than now your conscieiice, pr
your want of it, can allow as righteous V O, ponder .tho.se
words of the very One who came to save ! "Everlasting
fire," "undying worm," are after all realities. They abide,
the solemii figures of judgment to come. On the other
hand, God's grace invites you — whoso comes to Christ,
He will in no wise cast out.
Reader, if you be one of His redeemed, trifle not with
that which undernynes the reality of His blessed work, and
with that the reality of sin, and of its judgment.
" A little leayen leaveneth the whole lump."
■.■ .' THE END.' • " "■■ '""■'"■
Dqui.
INDEX OF texts;
Gen.i.aa
U- ~
iii 15
v.u
vi. 3.........
17
Wi. «
ix <i ,,
xviii
xxii. 18
x.vxii
xxxv. IS .....
xxxvii a-) ....
„ Mi. .IS.
Kxod. xix. r>
:i»
xs. •.•(>
xx\!i. .-I.'
xxxiii. ;)J
xvxiv (I. r...,
, , . ^
Li-v.ii n
liv..
xxiv. 17,18....
Niiiii. xvi. ■,>„>...
30, 3a...
„ / xxvii. KJ
I><fi". iv. 4i>
viii. :»....,,.,
vxv. :>. 3 :...,
xxvtii. (;i-G.3.
/ XXX 1 ;{
. xx.\«. ^i. ....
•lo^li. ii. 11
••ii(l;,'oy viii. :i ....
I !^am. xxviii... .
y hum xii. ij
' xxir. 1(1
I Iviiii,"^ viii l\i...
X.Ty
xviL ^>i.... ..
~ KiiiiT!* vi. 17
1 «'lin)n. xii; 'Ai .'.
'■i t'liroii. i. St. 10..
•'"•> ,
i. t>
iii l:i-17
X. lit
xi. at
xii 10
xiv 7
10
. V
\ix 'M.......
xxiii Kt......
x.xiv. 1-3.4...
.40, 47,
. 1!)4,
ii
•••••«
%.•••••
PAOE
54, .r,
5;J, 57
...4>'sJ
...1.37
...4m
.. 51
51. ra
..431
... +1
.. m)
...3»8
.. 44
.. 75
..140
.. 4a
..:m
.4()7
aas
'■Hit
— 4aa
aa8
... .itii
317-317
74
...51, H5
• ■ 147
>••••• rv)
......233
> • •• . .4(17
.....4;i-)
1K'.J
.....IH't
14tj
07
...*■>:, 70
. lah. lay
14«
— rA
iSH)
4.'>
7.5
lait
m
r;0
.i3i-i:j.-.
. .. ;itH»
.i:k, i:;o
41
IMI
lil
. .. i:;s
.. ... ai
.., . 4<!5
.....a:i7
v;;:::
• • f • ■ « <
Job xxvii. 3........
xxxif. 8........
xxxiii. 4........
18-30,....
aa.. ./....
aa-aa
xxxiv. 14 J ..,
ai-afr....
.xxxvi. 8-14....,
xxxvii /..
xxxviii. 7 1
PsaliiiH.
vi. 5 . 1...
vii. »....!..
i\ ;
xviii 44,45..
xxviii 5 i....
XXX. 5... I
x.xxvi. 9 i
xxxvii <.i II.
ao. ..,
3H ....
xxxlx. 13....
xlix .......
14
Iii. 5
Iviii. ..,'......
Ixii. la
Ixix. as
Ixxxiii;
Ixxxvi^ 13...
xc. 8, y, la. , . .
ci
ciii. U
civ. a.%-30
30
ay
T>
<vi •■«
^CXV. Iji
cxxxii. 13, 14.
cx.vxix. 7 ....
/ 8....
c.vli. 7
txriii. a ...
«-.\(iv. 4 — ...
10
•»
.V . . . • . • •
3,4....
■>•
cx,'iv.
c.Vlvi.
I'rov
/
U. aa . .
ix. 12...
18...
^i.3i...
PAOK
... 40,47
• ■ > • • a . Ino
• ••••• l>7
• • 4t
ti:i:>
< • ■ • • • ■ oC
1.37
....41, 47
a35
aas
a+»
;«io-
..iaa, 134
..... 14a
.....ai3
>•••••■ iJ4« J
..304
. . 188, 189
4a;i
41
a;w
-188
..188
m
140
...188, I'.tO
a+j
4a:i
...188, ai3
> > - a • • • . Xi44
14(i
-m
a44
• 4a3
114
> a • •• a , •>!
41,51
'.>i.
aia
14a
■ • • ■ • a ..O I
41
. . . Mti, 4J3
14«
t.iii
141
470
...137,141
141
.......134
an
...... 4t;a
• ••.... ]4ti
a;]8
• M.T.' lists „f ,,as>r;|.,'.-- not otiurwi... nf.ri^-a to .m- not
,'ivcii ill this index.
^:.
494
IKDEX O* TEllS.
PAUE
Prov.xiv. 29 70
xvi.4 470
kx. 27. 63
XXX. 8 64
Kccles ],S4
I 13- ■-. m
ii. 1. » •. 49
iii. 18 ..^.. 49
19-31
, 10 188
xl. 5 50,139
xii.7 47,75,140
13,14 140
I$aiahi.28 188
li...... ....„ 244
Xi. 1, 3...'. ................. .245, 281
xxiv. 21-23. 111.296,304
. — . . ZXvl« !!■••••■••••«••••*•••*«••••• .«41
15-19..... i...3ft3
xxvii. tf ....238
13 .....390
M ■ XXX. 33 J. ..310
P xxxiv. 9, 10 ....335
xxxviii. 10 ....145
> 18, 19 : 130, 142
xlil. 5 47
xllx.9 424
liii. 10, U 82
13 422
Ivii. 1, 2 .148,188
16 47,53,278,424
Ixv. 17 242
Ixvi. 16 188
22 242
.23, 24.. ;...... 2.51, 310, 313, 479
Jer. Ix. 7.. 465
xii 3 188
xvii 27..... 312
xlviii. 47 391
xlix 391
Ezek.iii. 18 ....'. 187
xiii. 22 ; 187
xvi. 55, 61 391
xviii. 4 130,187
27 80. 230
30. .360
IX. 49 160
xxxiL 27 147
•xxxiii. 8 a ........187
xxxvil. 1-14 .....;J91, .392
• xlvii. 1-12 250
Diiniel iv 86
10 64
14 213
viL8 331
11 3;J1,832
, ix 26 189
xii. 2 392,436
/'lIoHvaviy ...;.. 424
T2 ...893
Xiii. 9-14 891
xiv. 4 , 424
-. ' " Arnosix.2... 146 i
.Micahiv. 1-4 235 I
V H 383-383 I
vii. 18-20 .,423
Nah. i. 15 211
PAGK
I Hab. 1. .5 i..200
' Zeph. i. 2, 3 , 212
Zccli. xii 1 48, 52
I 10-xiii. 1 ,.-&'.»
' Mai iv. 1-3... .....:.. 245
Matt. Iii. 10.... 213
12 277
vii 19 ,. 218
I ix. 6 406
X. 15 292,
28 56, 61, 62, 97, 209-211, .307
29 194
39 307, 308
Xi. 21-24* 371
22.... .292
xil* 3«* •••••••••*«• •••.•.•• • 376-370.
41 371
49,60 .3H4
xiii. 10, 11 102
• 24-30 ......Ill
33 101
xvi. 18 ......145
Md~i«4 • ■••••••••■•■•••••••■ ixiy I i
xviii. 10, 11,14 .467
xix.29 177
^ A»*** 1*J» • • •■■•••••••••••••••«••• B 1^1 ti
^i ¥• tX/ • • aim ••••■•■•jaa**aaaa> ••■■ iCi if
»i 1 ~nv • ••»mm0*mtta*mm»mm 0«>i>~~0Ut7
Markii 32 197
iii. 29 .378
iv. 13 161
vi. 11 ...292
\iii. 12 69
ix. 10 285
4:J^ 310,478
30.
.11
XV. 46 26
Lukei. as... ..;.... ...263
46,47 68
70 , • 262
vii. 81 , 447
ix. 25 77
28-36....... .......122, 123
56 425
60.. .....205
JLII* lU^Av aaaaaaaaaaaftaaaaaaaaaaaa i iS
2:1 201
47,48 i.425
xiii. 28 «.479
XV. 4 161
xvi 101-111
9 ..294,466
26 ...380
xix. 27 279
XX. 18, 279
27-38 ...217-220
34-36 ..285,365
37.38 106,137
xxiii. 43 115,148,294
xxiv. 36-39 .'.,'.'.".*.'.'.'.*.'.'.'.'.*.'ll2
39 22
Jolini. 4 176
10-13 ...../.. ..468
29 » 404
li. 19-22 ....28
8 ..,, 85
mbEX OF TEXiS.'
495
John lli. 13 .... **'*°«
14,
35.
1-M
•476, 491
Iv. 24.
V. 11, 12 ,
!iJ4. ...
^-29.
27.....
Vi. 37-39.
53,54.
Vli. 17 ,
......403
..'...KG
..... 37
• ; ... 170
.176,200
Com. xiv; 17,
FAUI
28.
xvi. 25.
1 Cor. 11. 6.
. 43
.28.3
!•••■■•■
.222
439 .
405 1
.176, 179 I
.159 ,'
10.
11.
12.
14
.269, 874
202
261
39
HI. 18-15.
JlWi^'** ' -»4,301
17.
32
X. 18...
xil. 25
31
262
27
vl. 2.
13.
46, 62, 66 66
>...... 4># • 40
' . . .• •* . 81
318
•••• 201
•62,466
SI tii'"" 301,468
vHi. 13.
X. 11
299
.202
.864
xi.29;" 248, J;61
^iy.l-ii. ^-^^
394, 4a5
29
SO.
277
xlii. 12...
283
.30.
xvi. 11.
xvii. 3
xi.v 42
.Actsii. 27..
42, 230
XV.
.... 217
■ 160, 4^8
..301
.301
30-23,
287
^28:v.v.*:.v "••'^''tki
34.
iii.21.
"•■-■■,7-
<P. 14.>
. i2r
23.
24
24-28.
26
401
.128
.242
.266
62, 3<J8
75, 115
Ids, 197
XV. 18....
xvii. 25..
28..,
xxiLi.8,9.
XXV. 10 ^_ ••'*''
Rom. i. 22 2.3
200
...262
... 41
.41,42
■5, 114
29-31.
36...
42-50.
43....
44
.103,202
.....420
92
.168-165
22
5q"" 65, 73
li. 5-16.
38
.223
8^.v.v.';;.v ^'^'i?*
"Mr' ••••;'"":.::::-^
iv.5 •••. -...224,468
V. .5. '
xvi 22.
486
196 2 Cor. 1. 8
2:»
43
230
lU,
6 _ • 22,23
Iv. 11.
V. 1
10».
156
.228
.166
.201
6,8.
1 J..JJ
i9.:v. ■•-• ^^^•'wo
vi. 22
)4
10.
19.
vi. 1.
..94. 106
..-.21,24, 96
.292, 466, 472
899, 428
\n.
r.'. '.'.'.' '^ l^f 213 }
9.
22
xiL 2
.429
■ 466
.150
xiii. 14 ,
4 • 21, 100
151, 160
25V.'.V. *i «al. ii.20
vm. 6.
6-8,
11....
19-23.
23,
20,27
ix.3 ,
.1*1,895,
23
19
32
42
.288
43
5, .399
.4.36
■ 39
4' '< ■» .239,383
_ f ••• 437,470
10..
^- J*;;;-;; 44i
^^ ••'••••."•.■239;383V^5
xlv fl 402
13.
ia.«.-.v;:::;;;;;:;;- "'..^
.2:»
.407
.42
32
16.
iv. 6.
V 17, 22-25,
Eph. i. 3
*!•••••••«
....448
. . • . 81
in ^♦•....151, 402
U 398,402
21 266
iv 10 264
30.*!!!!'. ®^
vi. H 12 ' ' ••• 48
Phil. 1. 21-24 • V,V*»
22.7:...'."!' "^' ^'^
n 1, - tvn ii. 10 11"^^™'- 21
^-*^ .. 425 i C ol. 1. 13.'. : ...•.•. :• ^,4p
m
INDEX OP TEXTS.
'i
<^
, EAOK
Col. i. 18. 1!»
19,20 , 399, 425
80 ^ 40!i
Ui.8 178,224
4 ...i 28fl
10...... 227
1 ThtfBS. Iv. 15-17 166, 286, 289
V.8 ..i..^. 202
23....-.^.. 25, 29-84
■♦ThcHrt. 1. 7-9 5J79
9.. ...202,352
il* 7, 8 »....«•••• ■ •• • .281
12 ... 81
ITim. i. 17......... 164.260
11. I-0» •••••••••••••••••■••••••• p^WX
8-7. 895
14 ... 81
Iv. 10..... 402
V.6 205
Vl* Aa^****! •••••• ••••« •••»• ••••■ »*SUi
9.... «ie.. 202
16..... .Vr: Ift3, 168
■J Tim. 1.9 269.274
- 10....... 125,202,400
16,18 420
ii 20 470
iii.8 ....201
16, 17.; 169
V. 12. ............................ M>i
Titiis 1. 2 ..:..177, 269, 274
il. Il,a2...
\ iii.5.......
^hiluInon 15...
Ilcb. i. 8
U. 5-8
8,9
10...
Iv. 7','ii.".*.
vi. 1 ,
4-6'....
viii. 4
1x8
21-24....
26-28...
X. 1..
27-29
xi. 13-16...
xit 9......
23 ...»••
xiH».3....
.429
269
........ 243
...-. 429
.........476
..,..202,899
381
491
.; 470
!•■• ••••■■41 X
126
399
221,225
250
>•••■••■• •4«'l
.128
W
.46,75, 116
21
»•••••••••
« .....262,268.348
11 . ^... ........................ 4rTj
Jamed i. 9, l^............u.^. 125
ii. 26....... 64
. iii. 15 74
iv. 14 12.5,200
1 Pet. iii. 18-20. .45, 75, IH, 295, 373-5, 466
iv. 6 -t^, .i .375,376
17, 18- ...•........-....*. .*o4, ol8
SPeterL 14.... , 21,24, ft3
15 23, 95
•^9. •.*">8
12. •—aOi
FAQB
2Peter II, 17 , -264
iii. 18 242
18 204
IJohnl. 7 280
ii.2 404
8 461
lu.l..... ,179
2 120, 121
8«*->a«*«****'**>*'-^******** •'■v4
14, 15..: ...176
lv.6 > i...l5r
18. V 858
V.12 205^
13 , Ill
16 217
JudeT 385
18. 204
19 42, 74
25.... 262
Kcv.iS 123
6*9..... 75
T 240
I, ■■•■■•• •■••■•••••••••■•■••• *rM^J
18.; 2»i.-.
|i. 25-27 241
ill. Q.'^ajv*** •-••••■•• >•• •>••»■•«• •■'fcIO
21. .:j... . ..*...... •.- 242
Iv. 9, Wy 2U.i
V. 18... 4044 430
14 : 26;^
VllI* •»• ••••■••• •••••••••••••••••'" •^''l
IX • if * ••*■••••••••••••••••""••• 41 *
» 11 303,447
X. 6. •••••••••••• •■■••••••••••••••**■"
XI* !•. ••••••••••"*••• •••••••••• •'•H^l
15. .•••••■••••*>>>*«*B* «>•••••«• t^t)!
Xili* 11 «••••••■••••••."••••••■•• • «J*5''
Id* ••••■•«■•••*'************ ^'^
xlv. 6, 7 ••••• 30'^
9^11.....:.. 850-355
XV. 1 ...'..• •^•''3
X vi . J#.»-....--^. •••••••••••••••* :€M
xviii 8 •••••• ••■••••••••.•• •••••• ■H"
11 3.;u
12. •............♦•..■••■•■' ' .•"'•J*
xviii. 8 3;i9
xix., XX.... ....... ?»1, 282, 319-3-1!)
xix.3 r. ;^40
19-XX.3 ■' Ill, VOS
20.. 3;il, 340, a-ll
XX •..•.•• ra
1,8 448
■ , 2 ;;oi.
4-6..... 286. 299
9, 10 303,320.478
11-15 285. :^24
13 145,298
14... 192
Xxi.1-5 242
4,5 ,..401,480
£i .■■••••••••••••••••■••••"• ■ ^i*^
XXil. I* ^•••••••••••^•••••* • •^•Jv? OiH*
5 ais
19 ..-. 347
FAOS
....'264
....-M2
....264
....280
....404
....461
120, 121
!!!!lT«
i . . . 157
....85«
....205^
....111
....217
....38.'>
....204
.42, 74
....2('>2
123
75
.,..240
,....2»i.".
241
21.S
....242
2(5:1
404*, 43()
263
2<il
447
303, 447
270
;....447
, . . . .267
3:53
45
3()2
.850-355
s.'-.s
......353
448
;i-ii
.. . .83-'
330
319-34!)
MO
111. ',-05
340, y-ii
..... 79
'.'.'.'. .;;oi.
286. 2ttg
320.478
.285. :^!M
.145,296
192
242
401,480
250
2.50, 396
4*)'
»15
• ••,•■ 't^y^
347
m
I ■' ■
/
y
/
/
-/
. ' '
IZI- -.'-.. . . .^ . .
" \ '■
.*
' . .: ■
■".■"■"■■,--
...
; ,. *
'■•
-; ; . ■ 4.
■*■.'■
':'■-■'. ■'
^ ■ -
>
^ ■■-■■.■
*t . ..." 1.
* ♦
■%
*
:' "■■;i^ ■ ■
1
(
- "^
•
'•"■»' "'
: V tf
•
•
:#
•
,
'
' ■
>
•
* »
*
• 1 /'
•
.
' . . ' •-•
■
It
•
-
■ ^
•
•
,
#
."■"-^
»
I
f
1
4
■;#'
i
" ■ ■ ■
■ r
e -•
#
^
■-;■.'-•'■ I ■■
•'
'■■i V
^ 1
■■■■1
■■■■■■■■■
r
m ' .
1
^
1
1
1
^1
I
^^^B
1
1
B
1
1
f
r:
^
J
^
■
L
=:'
.■ ..'■.■■ '" ' ■'■ . '
-> ■
* J
1
■
V
...
1
\
1^
■ » ■
—.■
1
i
i
1
F
\
' •" .■
■• ■
«
■M
. i
-"■jB
(
(
1
1
f
*■,
1
^■^V
1
6
■ #■
^^^^^
A
*'
» -
■■■''^^^- ' '^
■ (.1
« .
- 4'
ffiv
■ , . . ._
"
-
•^*
3
-1
t
„
.
-
- .; •
\
■ ,4
-•..'-
«
- -. .-.
,..^_.:_
,,: --»* ■
i
■ ■"
\;.^^,
■■■*-':
- '■■'
:'':3,.
■l.i ■
• ■. ■ .■ ■*. .
b:
V ""."■■. ■
■■ ■"■'*' ■■ ' ■■'■■-■
■>
. 1
' ;^ ' ■
%
s>
I ' r/
'k
^'
p